Converting disaster scholarship into effective disaster planning and managing : Possibilities and limitations

I have spent most of my professional life since the 1950s doing research on the social aspects of disasters. This social science research in wich I have participated, is of course part of a much larger body of studies undertaken in the last 40 years, could be characterized in a whole variety of ways as to findings, motifs, implications, uses, etc. But there is one theme that runs through the bulk of the work that has been done up to now: according to research findings much of what is generally believed about disaster related individual and group behavior is not true or correct. As I and others have phrased it, we are embedded in a great number of misconceptions or myths about behavior in disasters. This disaster mythology clearly does not make for planning for or managing of such crisis occasions. (AU)

Organizational response to the Mexico City earthquake of 1985 : Characteristics and implications

A study involving a collaborative rffort between American and Mexican social scientists was made of the individual and organizational response to the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City. Our general findings only about the activities of organizations are summarized under five general themes: (1) the massive and complex organizational response was decentralized, (2)resources for organizational actions were not problematical but there were difficulties in their quick and effective use, (3)the dominant organizational behavior was emergent rather than traditional, (4)organizational personnel carried out their work and occupational roles, and (5)there was changes in disaster planning of organizations as a result of the disaster. Both practical and theoretical implications of our research findings are noted.(AU)

Disasters and catastrophes : Their conditions in and consequences for social development

Our paper is organized around three central questions: What can be conceptualizaed as a disaster? What are important conditions that generate these occasions? What are major consequences of disastrous occasions?. In the first part of the paper we show that from a conceptual point of view, disastrous occasions are usefully dividable into "disasters" and "catastrophes". In particular we note the quantitative and qualitative differences between both everyday emergencies and "disasters" as well as between "disasters" and "catastrophes". In the next part of the papaer we extensively discuss important social factors or conditions which facilitate or generate disasters and catastrophes. It is especially noted how disastrous occasions are rooted before impact in the ongoing social developments or the social changes and trends already existing in societies. Such projected changes almost assure that in the future we will have more and worse disastrous occasions. The paper concludes with a short discussion of how planning for disastrous occasions is also being positively affected by social changes.(AU)

Disaster planning for transportation accidents involving hazardous materials

Disasters from mishaps and accidents in the transportation of hazardous materials-chemical, nuclear or biological-will become more numerous and worst in the future. We indicate some reasons for this probable trend. Problems in establishing and developing preparedness planning for such kinds of disastrous occasions are then discussed on the basis of findings and observations from social science research studies. In addition, we examine some of the difficulties that exist in mounting an emergency or first response to actual crisis occasions. Particularly looked at are some typical situational contingencies in hazardous material disasters.(AU)