Rivalling Disaster Experiences

1. Why did you choose this topic?

By chance, during a field trip on La Palma back in 2012, I learned about the underwater volcanic eruption of El Hierro. Several local volcanologists arranged the trip and I noticed that there were heated debates about the ›correct‹ interpretation of the risks with respect to the seismo-volcanic event. Apparently, the social tension between scientists, politicians, the media and the public became a greater ›threat‹ to the effective management of the crisis than the volcanic hazard itself. I was intrigued by this and decided to find out why such disputes occur and how individuals cope with them.

2. What new perspectives does your book offer?

Most work takes as its focus the constitution of different dealings with risk, I concentrate on the ruptures and dynamics in-between. Rivalling interpretations of risk should not be understood as an exceptional phenomenon, an undesirable side effect or generally as an ›flaw in the system‹. Rather, different dealings and the resulting ambiguities are core elements that determine how societies experience crises and disasters. Or more to the point, the clash between different rationales is the real disaster.

3. What makes your topic relevant for current research debates?

In the context of the ongoing climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic it is evident that rivalling interpretations are causing profound social conflicts. Obviously, the negative effects of these conflicts are a growing challenge for the management of crises. The methodological and theoretical frameworks provided in this book contribute to a better understanding of such phenomena.

4. Choose one person you would like to discuss your book with!

I would love to discuss the book with a politician or disaster manager who still sees and handles disasters as if they were purely ›natural disasters‹ and thus ignores the social aspects, dismissing all actions outside of his or her ›box‹ as irrational. Different groups experience the disaster completely differently and therefore naturally develop creative solutions for dealing with ›their‹ risks. Actions that are denounced as ›irrational‹ from one perspective may appear perfectly rational from the everyday logic of the actors. If this is ignored, disaster management becomes a disaster in itself.

5. Your book summary in one sentence:

It is the nature of a disaster that we all experience a different disaster.