Remaking the world in our own image: vulnerability, resilience and adaptation as historical discourses

Bankoff, Greg

doi:10.1111/disa.12312

Cited by 60 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The frequency of disasters (EM-DAT) related to natural events is presented in Figure 2a. Although disasters related to the functioning of natural processes can hardly be considered as fully natural at the present time, because in most cases they are influenced to a greater or lesser extent by human factors (e.g., Bankoff, 2019), the distinction made by EM-DAT between "natural" and "technological" disasters, is useful for the present analysis. Not all disasters are included in this database.…”

Section: Evolution Of Disasters Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second indicator is the frequency of geomorphic events which cause disasters. The frequency of disasters related to natural processes depends on the frequency of intense (high-energy/area affected) natural events and on human factors related to exposure and vulnerability (Bankoff, 2019), all of which change with time. Thus, disaster frequency could provide some information on the frequency of violent geomorphic episodes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anthropocene Geomorphic Change. Climate or Human Activities?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analysis of the evolution of sedimentation rates and disasters caused by surface geologic processes during the last century, at a global scale, is presented. Results show that erosion/sedimentation processes and frequency of such disasters increased substantially, especially after midtwentieth century, coinciding with the period of intense change known as the "Great Acceleration." Increases for this type of disasters are significantly greater than for other disasters related to natural processes, and about 1 order of magnitude in little more than half a century. This implies an important "global geomorphic change." Comparisons and correlations between changes observed in those processes and potential natural (rainfall) and human (degree of land surface transformation) drivers showed a strong relationship with the latter, and not so clear with the former. This suggests that the intensification of surface geologic processes is most likely due to a greater extent to a land transformation/geomorphic processes coupling than a climate/geomorphic processes one.Plain Language Summary It is usually assumed that geologic processes change extremely slowly, and this is in general the case when considered within a human time frame. However, geologic activity affecting land surface appears to be changing very rapidly. Data gathered in very different parts of the world show that since the end of the nineteenth century, very especially after midtwentieth century, sediment is accumulating more and more rapidly in very different sedimentation environments. This indicates that erosion (and soil loss) is becoming more intense in all sorts of environments and under very varied climate conditions. Also, the frequency of disasters caused by floods and landslides is increasing in a similar manner. Over tenfold increases seem to have taken place in less than a century. Of course, population growth implies greater exposure and therefore higher probability of disasters, but the magnitude of the increase observed can hardly be explained by this. Results point to an intensification of processes due to the interaction between water and land surface (geomorphic processes), as well as related (not so "natural") hazards. It appears to be one of characteristics of the so called Anthropocene (the age of humans). An analysis of the variations experienced by rainfall and by indicators of the intensity of human activities suggests that this expression of global change (global geomorphic change) is very likely caused mainly by land surface modification, rather than by climate change. If this were confirmed, it would have important implications. It would probably be better to focus mitigation of both undesirable effects not only on climate change (surely necessary) but mainly on land use management and practices. Whereas results on the former require international, global action, in the latter case results could be obtained through national or local policies.

show abstract

Section: Evolution Of Disasters Frequencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropocene Geomorphic Change. Climate or Human Activities?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, there remains a considerable amount of deliberation about whether or not each term is more applicable to society or ecology, and this is not to mention contestations avowing that the divide between "society" and "ecology" is a false one (Adger, 2000;Cote & Nightingale, 2012). Additionally, there is shrewd evidence illustrating how vulnerability and resilience, as well as the discourses surrounding disaster risk reduction and management, have been used as pretexts to sanction neocolonial developmentalism and condone exploitative neoliberal policies (Bankoff, 2018;Escobar, 2011).…”

Section: Vulnerability and Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Development justice, a proposal: Reckoning with disaster, catastrophe, and climate change in the Caribbean

Gahman

Thongs

2020

Trans Inst British Geog

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes that "development justice" be taken up as an analytical concept and praxis-driven framework for research on disasters, resilience, and climate change. The piece begins with a synopsis of the historical-structural factors exacerbating risk in the Caribbean before reviewing the concepts of vulnerability, resilience, and development justice. Next, drawing from empirical data and via a development justice lens, we highlight how the logics, practices, and debts of colonial underdevelopment, racial capitalism, and neoliberal extraction continue to erode resilience across the region. We end by recommending that future adaptation and mitigation strategies related to disasters, catastrophes, and climate change be more attentive to structural and slow violence, as well as the historical trajectories of imperialism, racial capitalism, and hetero patriarchal norms. In sum, the piece constitutes an evidence-based assertion that development justice perspectives alongside theories of non-metaphorical decolonisation be used by scholars, activists, scientists, and states alike who are committed to mediating climate change and preventing/reducing the damage caused by disasters.

show abstract

“…In the 1990s, the mode of interventionism shifted, and resilience offered a more positive spin, highlighting capacities and promising to address life's increasing complexity in doi:10.1111/disa.12367 Disasters, 2020, 44(1): 125−151. © 2019 The Author Disasters © 2019 Overseas Development Institute a globalised world (Pugh, 2014;Bankoff, 2019). Its proponents view resilience as an umbrella concept, filling the vacated shoes of sustainable development, while critics regard it as a dangerous turn towards short-term disaster recovery, one that leaves both historical and political roots of vulnerability untouched (Cannon and Müller-Mahn, 2010;Davidson, 2010;Sudmeier-Rieux, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Resilience is perceived as having supplanted the concept of vulnerability, which covers both susceptibility and exposure to harm (Adger, 2006). As a political discourse, vulnerability was prominent during the cold war, when the non-Western world was framed as vulnerable and in need of intervention (Bankoff, 2019). In the 1990s, the mode of interventionism shifted, and resilience offered a more positive spin, highlighting capacities and promising to address life's increasing complexity in doi:10.1111/disa.12367 Disasters, 2020, 44(1): 125−151.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dual discourse of urban resilience: robust city and self‐organised neighbourhoods

Meriläinen

2019

Disasters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resilience has become a dominant disaster governance discourse. It has been criticised for insufficiently addressing systemic vulnerabilities while urging the vulnerable to self-organise. The urban resilience discourse involves a particular disconnect: it evokes 'robustness' and unaffectedness at the city scale on the one hand, and self-organisation of disaster-affected people and neighbourhoods on the other. This paper explains and illustrates the dual discourse through a case study on the reconstruction of informal and low-income settlements in the aftermath of the fire in Valparaíso, Chile, in 2014, focusing on the communication contents of two non-governmental organisations (NGOs). These NGOs deployed the discourse differently, yet both called for affected neighbourhoods to build a more robust city through self-organisation, and both suggested their work as the missing link between self-organisation and robustness. A danger in deploying the dual discourse is that it requires people who live in informal and low-income settlements to earn their right to the robust city through 'better' self-organisation based on fragmented visions.

show abstract

Remaking the world in our own image: vulnerability, resilience and adaptation as historical discourses

Cited by 60 publications

References 49 publications

Anthropocene Geomorphic Change. Climate or Human Activities?

Anthropocene Geomorphic Change. Climate or Human Activities?

Development justice, a proposal: Reckoning with disaster, catastrophe, and climate change in the Caribbean

The dual discourse of urban resilience: robust city and self‐organised neighbourhoods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About