Progress, traditions and future directions in research on disasters involving slow-onset hazards

Abstract

Purpose The importance of onset speed has been stressed by disaster researchers and inter-governmental bodies for some time, but its meaning and knowledge frontier has not been explored in depth. The purpose of this paper is to contextualise disasters involving slow-onset hazards within the broader literature on disasters, assess the current state of knowledge and identify themes in the literature. Design/methodology/approach This paper employs a semi-structured review design with the purpose of identifying both scholarship engaging directly with the term and less obvious but related literatures. Findings The majority of publications that mention slow-onset hazards and their adverse impacts do so only by means of delimitation. The paper finds that there is a great need for empirical and theoretical work on onset and manifestation speed and to test the degree to which existing theories and frameworks of disaster management are also relevant for the study of slow-onset hazard impacts. Research limitations/implications The review identifies several gaps in existing research disasters involving slow-onset hazards and proposes research on community, political, policy and practical challenges, including answering the question of how to secure proactive response to emerging slow-onset hazard impacts. Practical implications In theory, hazards with a gradual and creeping onset are easier to manage and proactively respond to than that of sudden and unexpected ones. Not only do slow-onset hazards provide more lead time, but also a larger potential for proactive response, which in turn provides ample time to take early action to cushion their impacts. Yet, warnings often go unheard and response is put on hold until impacts become unnecessarily costly to reverse. More research on onset speed and gradual manifestation patterns should therefore be carried out. Originality/value Gradually occurring hazards have remained largely absent from the core literature on disasters, including most definitions of the term. This paper represents an initial effort to assess the state-of-the-art on the concept and the phenomenon of disasters involving slow-onset hazards.

I Do it My Way: Understanding Policy Variation in Pandemic Response Across Europe

“…The cognitive ability of policy-makers to process data on the nature and evolution of crises however remains an open question in existing literature on crisis management (Wilensky, 1967;Turner, 1978;Kam, 1988). In particular, some authors argue that this ability is particularly low in the case of rapidly-evolving crises-such as a pandemic- (Kehinde, 2014;Staupe-Delgado, 2019). Recent research focusing on the declaration of the state of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic nuances such statement by showing that the level contamination in a country influences the likelihood of a government declaring the state of emergency (Bjørnskov and Voigt, 2020).…”

Disasters without Borders: The Coronavirus Pandemic, Global Climate Change and the Ascendancy of Gradual Onset Disasters

“…The Fiske and Marino study is both a critique of the rapid occurring disaster paradigm and an analysis of climate change as a slowly occurring disaster. Recent papers by Staupe-Delgado [19], Hsu [20] and Fiske and Marino [21] that address the concept of disasters have questioned the validity of a definition that limits disaster to rapidly occurring events. All three of these studies argue for a conceptual reconsideration of the temporal aspect of disasters and advocate greater academic and public policy attention to slowly occurring disasters.…”

Inherent resilience, major marine environmental change and revitalisation of coastal communities in Soma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan

“…years), and where the community may need to respond or 'bounce forwards' multiple times as new risks and stresses unfold. Given the potential for climate change to lead to more of such 'slow onset' or 'slow burning' hazards as well as extreme events (Staupe-Delgado, 2019) and calls for more attention to how disaster risk reduction research can deal with climate change (Kelman, 2015), this is a notable gap in the literature. Moreover, whilst inherent resilience characteristics are assumed to be in place pre-disaster if they are to support recovery (Cutter, Ash and Emrich, 2014;Cradock-Henry, Fountain and Buelow, 2018), one may question how effective social memories and inherent resilience practices developed in the past can be if the physical and social environment has suffered profound, overwhelming and potentially permanent change (after Laska, 2012).…”