Connecting theories of cascading disasters and disaster diplomacy

Abstract

Disaster diplomacy examines how and why disaster-related activities (disaster risk reduction and post-disaster actions) do and do not influence peace and conflict processes, especially whether or not a causal chain can be established between dealing with disaster risk or a disaster and outcomes in peace or conflict. Cascading disasters might provide a useful theoretical framing for mapping out causal pathways for disaster diplomacy. In conceptually exploring the intersection between disaster diplomacy and cascading disasters, this paper concludes that both disaster diplomacy and cascading disasters have limitations because they try to develop focused causal chains which, when examined with respect to the root causes of disasters, are actually multiple, complex, intertwined causal chains. This situation does not obviate analysis or understanding of disaster diplomacy and cascading disasters. It emphasises the need to adopt and retain social perspectives from the root of disaster studies. This paper presents a conceptual exploration of disaster diplomacy intersecting with cascading disasters to advance the theory of both fields. Cascading disasters refer to progressions of disaster-related impacts which are said to produce multiple cause-effect chains. Disaster diplomacy examines how and why disaster-related activities (disaster risk reduction and post-disaster actions) do and do not influence peace and conflict processes. The keys for both cascading disasters and disaster diplomacy are (i) whether or not a causal chain can be established between the beginning of a disaster or a disaster-related activity and (ii) the resulting consequences. For cascading disasters, this causal chain leads to the ultimate disaster impacts witnessed. For disaster diplomacy, the causal chain is from dealing with disaster risk or a disaster towards outcomes in peace or conflict. Given the parallels between disaster diplomacy and cascading disasters, the latter might provide a useful theoretical framing for mapping out the former's causal pathways.The next section examines and critiques the theory of cascading disasters followed by the third section providing similar material for disaster diplomacy. Both sets of critiques have parallels, indicating the importance of examining cascading disasters and disaster diplomacy together. These points are consolidated in the fourth section which indicates how disaster diplomacy, disaster risk reduction, and disasters are a series of interconnected cascades and thus intersect well with cascading disasters theory. The conclusions summarise this paper's contributions. Theory and critiques of cascading disasters Defining cascadesRecent discussion within disaster risk reduction has been exploring and developing the notion of "cascading disasters" or "cascading effects" (Pescaroli and Alexander, 2015). The definition provided by Pescaroli and Alexander (2015, p. 65) is:

Understanding and mitigating cascading crises in the global interconnected system

“…A different analysis is proposed by Kelman (2018), who explores the possible conceptual interactions between cascading disasters and disaster diplomacy in order to understand possible theoretical synergies between these two emerging fields. Differently from cascading disasters, disaster diplomacy examines how and why disaster-related activities influence the prospects for peace or conflict.…”

“…Differently from cascading disasters, disaster diplomacy examines how and why disaster-related activities influence the prospects for peace or conflict. The paper suggests the idea that cascading disasters could help to map the causal pathways of disaster diplomacy while highlighting the need to make use of social perspectives from the literature (Kelman 2018).…”

The CHASMS conceptual model of cascading disasters and social vulnerability: The COVID-19 case example

“…Cascades are also affected by their context and pre-existing vulnerability could mitigate or fuel the progression of cascades [ 16 ]. Unlike the primary event which emerges out of natural systems, secondary crises are causally related to the primary disaster and are often more directly linked with human activities including built environment, structures, institutions, and emergency management activities [ 17 ]. Studies of cascading disasters have increasingly focused on the vulnerability of critical infrastructure as a major trigger of cascading effects [ 15 , 18 ].…”

Local floods induce large-scale abrupt failures of road networks

“…Recently, the spatiotemporal properties of floods have attracted researchers’ attention 8 and encouraged the study of the impact of floods on critical infrastructure systems 9–18 . On the one hand, risk analyses have focused on methodologies of the road network absorption capacity 9 , hazard impact framework 19 , level of service remaining, and cascading effects within critical infrastructure systems 10,11 . These analyses help clarify the propagation of flood risk among infrastructure systems at different spatial scales 12 .…”