Dismantling power asymmetries in disaster and emergency management research: Another argument for the application of critical theory

Abstract

Recently there has been a renewed call for research that seeks to understand the experiences of historically marginalized groups as a means of addressing inequities in governmental treatment and service provision. Although this call has been issued across all of the social sciences, its manifestation in the realm of disaster and emergency management has been limited based on the discipline's lack of use of critical methods within research designs. We argue that this is not necessarily a byproduct of a lack of interest in the experiences of minority populations or addressing inequity, but due a lack of understanding on how to use critical theory as a framework for research design in emergency and disaster management. As such, this conceptual paper offers insight into the need and value of critical theory as a means of structuring research. To aid the practices of other researchers, we offer two potential methods among many, critical ethnography and storytelling, as options for approaching critical research in emergency and disaster management.

Defining social equity in emergency management: A critical first step in the nexus

“…Organizations that attempt to calculate social equity use social vulnerability data that does not account for the underlying systemic issues impacting how response, recovery, and mitigation programs operate (i.e., redlining, urban renewal, etc.) (Jerolleman, 2019; Leach & Rivera, 2021; Tate & Emrich, 2021). However, as discussed, the lack of a definition for social equity continues to undermine many of these “measures” of social equity used by federal agencies.…”

“…Within emergency management, this range in the conceptualization of social equity has also been problematic. Although one might argue that emergency management agencies (i.e., Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA]) are socially equitable based on their reported emphasis on fairness and a “whole community” approach (FEMA, 2011), many continue to view FEMA and its supplemental counterparts as needing programmatic and structural change as a means of practicing and achieving social equity (Ensuring Equity, 2021; Gooden et al, 2009; Jerolleman, 2019; Leach & Rivera, 2021). Moreover, the Stafford Act, which establishes the legal and procedural support of individuals and household assistance and many other emergency management programs and activities, and its implementation has consistently been subject to various claims that question its equity (Olonilua, 2022; Perls, 2020; Rivera, 2016a; Salkowe, 2014).…”

A systematic review of 20 years of crisis and disaster research: Trends and progress

“…For the future direction of Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, we call for research that offers theoretical explanations and mechanisms of underlying risk, crisis, and disaster management processes. There is also a significant need for methodological advancement to detail, for instance, what it takes to engage in good fieldwork, or papers that translate (new) methods to the particularities of crisis and disaster research (see, e.g., Rivera & Leach, 2021). Of course, we will always welcome rich explorative accounts of iconic events that offer new insights.…”

Drivers of disaster planning among African-American households

“…Critical disaster theory and the environmental justice movement situate the disparate impacts of disasters on historically marginalized communities in terms of power, capitalism, imperialism and the long-lasting structural effects of those forces (Hagen, 2021;Leach and Rivera, 2021;Meril€ ainen et al, 2020;Ezell and Chase, 2022). Emergency management and disaster preparedness scholars and practitioners tend to promote ideas and policies to increase awareness, preparedness or resilience.…”