The Emergence of Transdisciplinary Research and Disaster Science

Abstract

<jats:p> This article intends to bring attention to the emerging specialty of disaster science (DS), as well as to introduce a newly created system of computer simulation to facilitate transdisciplinary integration that would allow for the interphase of computer simulation platforms developed by scientists in the different professions engaged in the study of disasters. The next section discusses the origins of DS and the characteristics of the scientists using the concept, then reviews of some of the DS interpretations, then presents systematicity, a new philosophy of science perspective that allows for the methodical comparison of the various disciplinary specialties interested in the study of disasters, and that can facilitate the creation of a transdisciplinary style of research. The article concludes with the description of the computer simulation program Simple Real-Time Infrastructure, which is designed to facilitate transdisciplinary collaboration. </jats:p>

Disaster Research “Methics”: Ethical and Methodological Considerations of Researching Disaster-Affected Populations

“…One of the many challenges in achieving a justice approach to postdisaster fieldwork (Louis-Charles et al, 2020), or in expanding our ethics frame of concern (Browne & Peek, 2014), or in shifting to methics where methods and ethics are equal considerations (Van Brown, 2019) is the multidisciplinary nature of disaster studies. As both Peek et al (2020) and Aguirre and El-Tawil (2020) demonstrate, disaster studies span numerous disciplines and thousands of researchers. We have a great deal of people lacking a unified code of ethics, and this crystallizes the need for a paradigm shift.…”

Untitled

“…Mengembangkan pengetahuan transdisipliner membutuhkan lintas beberapa disiplin, melibatkan sumber atau praktik ilmiah dan non-ilmiah, dan menggunakan alat metodologis yang mendorong pembelajaran dari berbagai disiplin ilmu tersebut, menghasilkan pemahaman holistik tentang fenomena global Pada bagian ini, kami menyarankan proses transdisipliner yang bertujuan meminimalkan trade-off, dan memaksimalkan sinergi dan saling melengkapi antara upaya pengurangan risiko bencana dan dampak perubahan ikklim (Bendito & Barrios, 2016) Kurangnya pengetahuan transdisipliner untuk mendukung rencana pemulihan untuk menghadapi peristiwa bencana kehilangan peluang besar untuk mengurangi kerentanan terhadap bahaya dan meningkatkan kapasitas adaptasi dalam jangka Panjang (Aguirre & El-Tawil, 2020) Adanya banyak sekali literatur mengenai transdisipliner. Namun selalu diperlukan pengayaan untuk memahami dan membandingankan dengan pendekatan multi dan interdisipliner.…”

Introduction

“…The continuation, recurrence, and protractedness of crises have spurred more investments in developing frameworks and methods, including advanced data integration, prediction, and simulation. One example is the work done in the new transdisciplinary Research Institute for Disaster Science, established in Sendai, Japan, in the wake of the 2011 combined earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster (Aguirre and El-Tawil, 2020). There have been notable recent quantitative innovations such as computational and data mining methods (Nind, Meckin, and Coverdale, 2021: 6), promising major advances in prediction and modelling.…”

“…However, ethical considerations have not always been well integrated with methodological advances, since quantitative approaches tend to focus on efficiency, not ethics. The uncertainties, challenge, and incompleteness brought by critical and ethical reflection tend to be seen as inefficient (Aguirre andEl-Tawil, 2020: 1164). Qualitative digital methods may be seen as 'aggravating' from a positivist naturalistic perspective, creating methodological qualms and 'disarray' (Aguirre andEl-Tawil, 2020: 1170).…”

“…The uncertainties, challenge, and incompleteness brought by critical and ethical reflection tend to be seen as inefficient (Aguirre andEl-Tawil, 2020: 1164). Qualitative digital methods may be seen as 'aggravating' from a positivist naturalistic perspective, creating methodological qualms and 'disarray' (Aguirre andEl-Tawil, 2020: 1170). Approaches that rely on technical treatment of data may overlook the fact that the 'data' concern people whose exposure, vulnerability, and coping capacity should be paramount.…”