Conceptual Issues in Disaster and Governance

Abstract

Disasters can be natural or man-made (the latter based on either human mistakes or terrorist attacks). Their spatial scale may vary from the global/multiregional (e.g. tsunamis, typhoons) to the national (e.g. an epidemic) and to the local (e.g. tornado, a terrorist attack on a facility). Some disasters require top-down governance, others bottom –up, and yet others need a mix of both. They are not restricted to government intervention (at different hierarchical levels) but may also need action from NGOS, business corporations, communities and volunteers. As for government interventions, the horizontal level is much more successful than the vertical. At the vertical level, the preferred approach is from local to State to Federal (in alternative systems, from local to provincial to national). The benefits of bottom-up governance (both in the public and private sectors) are usually preferable, especially in view of the contribution of disaster response to poverty alleviation (especially in developing countries). Other relevant issues include: moral hazard (no compensation in the event of disaster to homeowners who insist on buying homes in disaster-areas such as river banks or coastline in risky hurricane areas); czars vs. multiple decision makers (e.g. agencies); and corruption (e.g. fast disaster project contract awards instead of a formal tender process).