Unintended Consequences and Risk(y) Thinking: The Shaping of Consequences and Responsibilities in Relation to Environmental Disasters

Abstract

Unintended consequences have long been central for the social sciences. But, the development of risk analysis and the adoption of risk language have substantial implications for how to understand and evaluate unintended consequences. Claims can now be raised that unintended consequences should have been foreseen and other options chosen. This situation constitutes the starting point for this paper, which develops an understanding of unintended consequences, in particular, in relation to environmental disasters. It draws on Robert Merton’s classic work on unanticipated consequences, but refines and further develops it by fertilizing it with findings from risk sociology and framing theory. A particular case of a human-caused disaster, a severe wildfire, is analyzed to illustrate and expand the understanding of unintended consequences. The empirical material consists of a postal survey to everyone directly affected by the wildfire (N = 960 individuals). The empirical results of this analysis are then explained and used to improve the understanding of unintended consequences, by showing how the context and framing of the disaster heavily affected the evaluation of its consequences, including unintended ones.

Wildfires, responsibility and trust: public understanding of Sweden's largest wildfire

“…Forest fire disasters can provide learning opportunities that can result in improved safety of forest operations and strengthened crisis management practices. A wildfire may also open up a "window of opportunity" (Doyle 1984;Kingdon 1984;Lidskog and Sjödin 2018), that is, a situation appears where particular kinds of decisions and actions become possible. These decisions and actions may then become a substantial part of how a disaster is evaluated by people and stakeholders.…”

“…In spring 2015, almost half of the area (6400 hectares) was declared a nature reserve, with the state offering either economic compensation or a new forest property in the vicinity for those owning forest in the newly established nature reserve. The economic consequences of the fire disaster were mixed (Lidskog and Sjödin 2018). Many of the affected forest owners (about 75%) had fire insurance that covered their economic losses.…”

“…We focused on personal consequences as well as general positive consequences, as much media coverage in the aftermath of the wildfire framed it as a "happy disaster", i.e. a disaster that had substantially fewer severe consequences than initially assumed but also to have a number of unforeseen positive consequences (Lidskog and Sjödin 2018).…”

Invented Communities and Social Vulnerability: The Local Post-Disaster Dynamics of Extreme Environmental Events

“…They influence actions and therefore have effects on the material, political and social worlds. Whether a particular environmental disaster is seen as exceptional or as something that may become a more regular occurrence has great implications for learning and the need to change practices and restructure institutions [24]. For example, beliefs about how to avoid future wildfires influence forestry practices and can transform forests and landscapes for decades to come [25,26].…”

“…In total 15,000 hectares were burned including three nature reserves and some ten areas for habitat protection and nature conservation. The total cost of the fire is estimated to at least 100 million euros [24]. The burned area was owned by a handful of large forest companies and forest associations and some 100 small-scale private owners.…”