Barriers and Possibilities for Interdisciplinary Disaster Science Research: Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Abstract

The strength and speed of modeling software has increased drastically in recent years. As it does so, researchers across a variety of fields work to determine how most effectively to utilize this strength and speed. Many of them have turned to interdisciplinarity as a means of creating more representative models. This is the case for disaster research as this area of interest involves many intricately interdependent systems. In working on interdisciplinary projects, past research has noted several barriers to complete integration, including differences in language and methodology, institutional structures not conducive to interdisciplinary collaboration, and nuanced tension between disciplines. Many solutions to these issues have been presented: facilitated conversation, increased institutional support, and several others. However, one area of difficulty for which comprehensive solutions have not yet been realized is data integration. This is indeed a challenge that lays at the heart of meaningful interdisciplinarity. The data are frequently telling an intricately interwoven story, and the more these data can be analyzed in a cohesive manner the more likely it is that researchers will be able to harness their predictive power to reduce disasters. In order to understand what efforts have been made at data integration, 29 papers are systematically reviewed in order to extract the nature of previous attempts, reasons for integration, challenges, shortcomings, and recommendations for future work. The papers analyzed most commonly referenced the different syntax and data types as a challenge of integration. Regarding shortcomings of integration efforts, the most common concern was that of model parameterization bias and substantial uncertainties. As a recommendation for future work, the papers most commonly suggested more standardization of data and methods across collaborating disciplines and from one project to the next in order to avoid these shortcoming and challenges.

Interdisciplinarity in practice: Reflections from early-career researchers developing a risk-informed decision support environment for Tomorrow's cities

“…There are no formal recipes on how to undertake interdisciplinary disaster and risk research, but this paper argues that a focus on subjects and boundary objects provides entry points to actionize strategies within the sphere of influence of researchers and the teams of which they are part. This differs from macro-level factors (e.g., funding, reward system, publication rules, organisational norms), which are beyond the immediate scope of individual researchers and might take longer to modify [23]. Drawing on feminist scholarship and science and technology studies (STS), the following subsections elaborate on the notions of subject (2.1) and boundary objects (2.2), respectively, to then propose an analytical framework to understand the emergence of interdisciplinary subjects and knowledge (2.3).…”

“…Interdisciplinarity is often defined as integration across 'academic research fields', 'areas of science' or 'research domains' [35]. Boundary objects, often conceived as static and separate entities, are pinpointed by some as a way of enhancing integration [22,23]. However, disaster and risk research has rarely questioned what integration means and how it unfolds as a process of change.…”

“…They have the capacity to mediate values, norms and aims among these communities and enable cooperation by emerging mutual understanding [12,20,21]. Boundary objects such as agent-based models and scenario development are not new in discussions on interdisciplinarity in disaster and risk research [22,23], but this paper takes a more critical stance and proposes new entry points to their conceptualisation. Specifically, it does so by (1) unpacking the relationships between boundary objects and subjects, and (2) focusing on the dynamic process of producing and managing boundary objects while mediating the production of interdisciplinary knowledge.…”

Weighing structural damage and social susceptibility: A decision‐making tool to perform longitudinal studies of geographically large hazard events

“…However, it was only with this latter 2011 outbreak that researchers suggested more emphasis be placed on the social impacts of resulting structural damage (Prevatt et al., 2012). Prior to this, engineering‐focused investigations into outbreaks exhibited the level of disciplinary isolation characteristic of the time with very little if any social contextualization of structural damage (Johnston & van de Lindt, 2022). As documented in the U.S. NIST Technical Investigation of the May 22, 2011, tornado in Joplin, Missouri, disasters “provide unfortunate but important opportunities to learn from the performance of structures, emergency communications, and human behavior during catastrophic events” (Kuligowski et al., 2013).…”

Invited perspectives: Views of 350 natural hazard community members on key challenges in natural hazards research and the Sustainable Development Goals

“…This paper uses a broad classification of science, including natural sciences, engineering and technology, medical and health sciences, agricultural sciences, social sciences, and humanities (OECD, 2007). We also view research related to natural hazards and the reduction and management of related risks as inherently interdisciplinary (Peek and Guikema, 2021;Johnston and van de Lindt, 2022). Science is seen as key to policy-making for disaster risk reduction (Aitsi-Selmi et al, 2016a) and an imperative to meet the need for disaster risk reduction (DRR) (Shi et al, 2020).…”