Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Oliver Smith PDF

    Uploaded by

    Israel Ortiz
    8 views9 pages

    Original Title

    Oliver-Smith.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    8 views9 pages

    Oliver Smith PDF

    Uploaded by

    Israel Ortiz

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 9
    et a ieee te fagey Eat 3 4 Ol versity Sea Suzanna Wo mars “WHAT IS A DISASTER?” ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON A PERSISTENT QUESTION ANTHONY OLIVER-SMITH University of Florida irropuction DISASTERS HAVE BEEN STUKIED FROM A SOCIAL SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE FOR ‘oughly seven decades. During this span multiple concepral and thematic foes emerged fom avait of ergs, each contributing in different ways the overal development of he field. Ranging fom Prince’ (1920 eaaly stay ‘of «munitions explosion in Halifax harbor to studies of populations exper tecing wartime bombardment vo the social impacts of natural hazards and ‘myriad of operational definitions used in emergency assistance and recon "trcton, thee hasbeen lie consensus onthe definition of dase In some titles, the lack of contenas has caused concern regarding the intllecteal healt ofthe id (Quarani 1985, 1995) However, the intellects vitaliy of i of research does noe necesar- ly depend on 3 concsprua or definitional consensus In anthropology or example, Kroeber and Klutho after surveying the erature, found 164 Aiferent definitions of eukure, the disciplines core concept (1952) Since Kroeber and Kluckhohi’s ime, debate om the concept of eultute has raged cover such central elements a8 the material or ideological bases of eutare, ppropriate methodologies for cultural reearch, and the nomotbedc versus the ideographic nature of the study of culture. Those debates generated tarkedly diferent approaches co rescarch topics and methodologies ‘Although anthropolognes probably ascribe to fewer definitions of culture today, total consensus onthe concept has hardly been reached, Sil lick of ‘complete concep unifwmity or consensus has not resuled in nelleral ‘stagnation Indeed, such debates the substance ofboth sient and human istic endeavor in general. The contnsing discourse surrounding the ds Plies coee concept has hardly n my ie, Been dams these oF the fil, nor has it undermined the disciplines esearch enerprise. While there ate those who would disagree with me, Lae the curren foment ih anthropology asa sign of health an vitality. The intense sel examination that anthropology frequently becomes invaled in revitalize and simulates new theoretical methodological, and research questions. Despite the fact that the lack of conse about eter culture or disaster ‘snot a particular source of concern to me, do not wish o dismiss the ques tion "Wha isa disaster? a insignificant, The defintional debate reesei disasters sigiiane because i prompts an exploration of pas and emerging dimensions of disaster in an increasinaly hazardous presen, a evidenced in the appearance ofnew forms of hazatd and apy changing hunan-envicon ment relations and conditions. Deiiional consennus maybe les portant than string dacusionsn hich conflicts may not be ttl teslve, But important issues wll be clarified, new perspective and problem areas devel ‘ped, and, most importantly, new potentials for practice explored. In ees, ‘mall definitions are noe neces snows tld they can be ope. ationalized through appropriate inellestal and methodological procedures to advance ordedy and systematic research (Rocha 1995: 5) nts cape, ied to review some a the inherent dificult i defining disaster, well 1s the sues cental to defntional debates. Further, louie the contibtion of anthropology tothe caneepuaiation of disaster and argue for the deve opment ofa pital ecology of dsastex DISASTERS: VARIA ITY AND COMPLEXITY ‘Why has it ben so dificult ro eeac a consensus on the concept of disaster? ‘On the one hand disaster is ter tha ned fy libra in popula pr lance. Many events or process are colloquially referred to ay dhasters— everything from failed socal event toa regionwide hurricane, The varied popular and literary uses of he term embrace such wide array of pheno na, conceps, metaphors, and allusions that attempts at precision, clas and, peshaps most imporeanty,smplicey by scientific incest ae chal lenged. By the name token, popular usages and interpretations of the term also on ocasion reveal significant dimensions of dnasters hat escape the per ‘spective of the putlyabjcive stance (Kroll Smith 1998), Since disasters are characterized by external variability and ite com plexi he conceproal challenge presented by disaster i doubly problematic Exaeral variably efersto the wide range of “obyectie™ phenomena iat. tral and echnoogial domain that pnerate or tiger disasters and prodace very diferen kinds of physical impacts. Covering them all the word disaster iv used to characterize eversprocesses that range fom slow-onset processes such as droughts and tox exposures to rapid-onset phenomena such 25 ‘arthquakes and sucleae acide. External variably alo encompases the ‘est fom, for example, tornados, to impacts not perceived or experienced Dhysclly for perhaps manr year sin he cae of toxic exposes. External “anablity alone th alm defies analyst abilities to etal a se of com ‘mon definitional characteristics that can encompass the vat aeray of phe ‘nomena thar generate and occur in disasters ‘Wategenscin counsels us regarding the linguistic difficulty of absolute precision, particularly whin dealing with categories tha encompass widely Fagng phenomena. For sich eategoris or concepts, he suggests using the term “lamilyresemblaneas.” Following his discussion of the concept of spams, Isgent hae disasters form a fan chat what emerges Foe 3 Eonniderston oftheir wide array of phenomena is complicated network of Similarities, overlapping ad cras-croning sometimes overall simiartis, ometimes similarities of etal” |Weegenscin 1973: 324). Wittgenstein Cmploys the metaphor of spinning thread in which therein continuous ‘overlapping of fiber upon ber, but no one fiber tha rane tough the etre thread. The common fexute of the thread as well arto extend the ‘metaphoo—its strength, lis in te continuous overlapping of the filaments ‘through the whole strand, Furthermore, there o need ro establish defi tional criteria mis co mike such a et of family resemblances usable a @ ‘oncepe. This not to sar that howndaries cannot be draws, as they Fee [guently ae for specil purposes, but boundaries are noe necestary to make the concepe usable, exept or ha special purpose (Wingentein 1973: 33). ‘Mule, yet sila, definitions of disasters arise exacay according othe specific purposes oe goals af varous disaster endeavors. Researchers focusing fm behavior will deine distr diferent fom those exploring societl-en Tonment interactions. Organization ivolved in disaster management or feconstruction set operational definitions that allow thei participation in tents and process that cet the criteria, Thu he term dsutercousetutes {st of family resemblances ater than coneming 0a minimum tof de ‘nitions eters. The concep hs "ured edges” a Wingestls sas, but the inextctnes of definivon hardly makes unusable ‘Als central o the defivona debate she internal complexity of isas- ter Ins disaster a collectivity of intersecting processes and events—socal ‘nvionmental, cata, politcal, enone, physic ecnalgical—tea Spiring over varying lenghs of time are focused. Disasters are totalizing ‘rents As they unfold all inension of social structural formation andthe totality of ite elations with i environment may become involved, afeted, tnd foased. These dimensions express comitency and inconsistency, coher nce and contradiction, cooperation and conti, hegemony and resistance They evel the operation of physical, blokland social ystems and thet ieraction among popslations, groups, institutions and practices, and thet concommitant soctocltaral constrictions Like ew other phenomena the internal complexity of diane forces us to confront the man) and shifting faces of socially constructed realiyis). The complet s embodies inthe mulpliiy of perspectives a varied a the individuals and groups impacted ‘or participating inthe event and proces. The multiple forms, enacmenty, and consructons that a disaster may take aso cit up inepretations from many discipinaey approaches each with widely varying methodological tools and thereial and peace goals “The eateral or objective variably and internal ur subjective complexity of disasters are largely sponsible fr the contested nature ofthe concept. Ax Galle, writing some ten yeas after Wutgensten,asered, "ss thete are concepts which ae essentially contested, concepts the proper use of which inevitably involves endless disputes about their proper uses onthe part of ‘heir users” (1955: 169), Similarly concepts such ay “oF” or “democracy” ace disagreed on by fering partes as othe use and alot thee aplication to particule situations or context, with each faction maintaining the core ‘es fits interpretation with equally compelling aurea evidence submit then that disasters a contested concep, with “bleed edge more ast offal resemblances among a wie a7 of pyicl and social ‘rent and proceses rather than ast of bounded phenomena to be sity ‘etne, ELEMENTS OF A DEFINITIOWAL DEBATE The discussion regarding the definition of dsaser was mos intently engaged in by sociologist and geogeaphers, binning with torts by Fat 1964 Baker and Chapman 19621, and Barton (196). n surveying the iteraure of the previous thre decades, Quacantelli expressed conceen over the lack of Aefinional consensus in the fie (1985), noxing that dates had been 2 ‘ously defined in erms of 1 physical agents, 2) the physical impact of physica ‘gens, 3) an asesment of physical impacts, 4) the socal dsuption resing from an event with physical impacts, 5) he socal contraction of reality in perceived criss situations which mayor may not nslve physical impacts, 6) the politcal definition of certain ert stuatons, and 7) an imbalance in he demand

    You might also like