Critiquing and Joining Intersections of Disaster, Conflict, and Peace Research

Abstract

Disaster research, conflict research, and peace research have rich and deep histories, yet they do not always fully intersect or learn from each other, even when they investigate if and how disasters lead to conflict or peace. Scholarship has tended to focus on investigating causal linkages between disaster (including those associated with climate change) and conflict, and disaster diplomacy emerged as a thread of explanatory research that investigates how and why disaster-related activities do and do not influence peace and conflict. However, definitive conclusions on the disaster-conflict-peace nexus have evaded scientific consensus, in part due to conceptual, methodological, and interpretive differences among studies. This article highlights that this nexus would benefit from a more robust engagement with each field’s foundational research that explores beyond binary and crude distinctions. Examples are concepts of destructive and constructive conflict; direct, structural, and cultural violence, and their relationships to vulnerability; negative and positive peace; and the ideals and realities of peacebuilding and conflict transformation. This article demonstrates how integrated scholarship could open up and advance new lines of questioning, with implications for developing coherent research, policy, and practice. The article concludes by offering recommendations for how to better connect disaster, conflict, and peace research.

Becoming a global nurse: A thematic and interpretive analysis of bachelor's theses at the Swedish Red Cross University College

“…[68][69][70] This humanitarian catastrophe exposed multiple global problems such as the role of democracy and globalization, ethical and geo-political issues, and social ecology. 71,72 Consequently, the global workplace had developed into an emerging reality for health workers. 73 The combination of the three themes 'Integrating sustainability and advocacy with holistic nursing', 'The meaning of ethical principles' and 'Challenges in nursing actions for a complex future' condenses well the overall content of the overarching theme representing this period.…”

Terra incognita: the contribution of disaster risk reduction in unpacking the sustainability–peace nexus

“…Existing research typically defines the hazard event (primarily a high-impact, sudden-onset event) as an independent factor, and tends to focus on the post-disaster space as a site for violent or peaceful action. Less attention has been paid to the long-term processes of disaster risk and their relationship to dynamic conditions of conflict and peace (Peters and Kelman 2020 ).…”

“…Peters and Kelman ( 2020 ) argue that part of the limitation stems from the lack of cross-fertilization of disaster, conflict and peace studies, with more work to be done to fully grasp the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of conflict and peace, and violence and cooperation. With a deeper understanding of the various manifestations of violence (e.g., symbolic, cultural, structural, and direct violence types that play out at interpersonal to interstate scales) (Bourdieu 2001 ; Galtung 1969 ), and of peace (e.g., the cessation of hostilities through to social-political integration) (e.g., Galtung 1969 ; Ide 2019 ), it becomes apparent that any study of disaster risk must necessarily include consideration of conditions that do not conform to binary definitions of conflict or peace.…”

“…Peters and Kelman ( 2020 ) thus point to the need for research beyond binary distinctions of peace and conflict and to consider destructive and constructive conflict, positive and negative peace, and different forms of violence (direct, structural, cultural)—and directly investigate the relationship between disaster risk reduction and peacebuilding, conflict resolution, and prevention. For example, if a transdisciplinary approach could be achieved, what new light would be shed on our understanding of the co-location of disasters and conflict, and more specifically the causal pathways between the potential for disaster risk reduction actors and actions to alter relations and conditions for peace, and conversely, for peacebuilding activities to advance disaster risk reduction outcomes?…”

Beyond disaster vulnerabilities: An empirical investigation of the causal pathways linking conflict to disaster risks

“…For decades, scholars have worked to unpack the potential relationships between disasters and conflicts across diverse case studies and spatial scales. Despite a lack of decisive conclusions (Ide et al, 2020;Peters & Kelman, 2020), the idea that disasters principally incite or intensify conflicts has taken hold in policymaking and promoted top-down (Alexander, 2020) and securitized (Hartmann, 2010) approaches to managing disasters and climate change.…”