Quarantellie’s “Converting Disaster Scholarship Into Effective Disaster Planning”

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Critical Remarks
Discussion Questions
Reference

Introduction

In his article, Quarantelli (1993) discusses five main themes pertaining to the problem of disaster management. The first claim made by the author is that a considerable amount of social research does not match the classic scientific research model, but can still be of great use (Quarantelli, 1993). For instance, there are numerous studies that do not produce a specific answer to a particular problem but provide general information that can still be utilized, e.g., for policy planning. This information can be employed instrumentally (for action), conceptually (for better comprehension), and symbolically (politically).

The second point considered by Quarantelli (1993) is that the implementation of research findings in disaster management depends, to a certain degree, upon the nature of the disaster. The disaster response in the U.S. is usually divided into four areas (prevention, emergency preparedness, disaster response, and, finally, recovery); a variety of people and structures may be involved in each of these areas, and they use different research. According to Quarantelli (1993), it is needed to “feed” all types of studies to each of the groups responsible for these areas, and it is advised to make research more practice-focused (rather than methodology-focused).

The third point the author makes is that emergency planning (that is similar to strategy) and emergency management (that is similar to tactics) are very different (Quarantelli, 1993). It is stated that while one area can be believed to have significantly improved, the other one may remain at the same stage of development. According to Quarantelli (1993), studies show that while it is often claimed that emergency planning has been enhanced, emergency management still remains at the same level as before, which poses a problem.

The fourth point is that studies too often concentrate on the past when they should focus on forecasting and planning for the future (Quarantelli, 1993). There are two aspects of this: 1) new disasters are always somewhat different from the previous ones; 2) new disasters are usually more threatening for a number of reasons (e.g. because economic growth means that there will be more to impact in the future) (Quarantelli, 1993). Thus, more focus on forecasting is recommended.

The fifth point is that there is often a difference in aims and interests between scholars and research users (Quarantelli, 1993). This gap results in difficulties – in communication, for example. Therefore, there is a need for social roles that could bridge this gap. Also, it may be recommended that representatives of each of these two different areas expose themselves to the other area (Quarantelli, 1993).

Finally, the author provides the example of the Titanic to show that in some situations, knowledge is present, but it is not used to a full extent, which leads to severe consequences such as deaths of people (Quarantelli, 1993).

Critical Remarks

Therefore, the author points out and discusses several serious problems that exist (and persist) in the area of disaster response and management, and may have a considerable adverse impact on the efforts made to address natural disasters and reduce their aftermath (Quarantelli, 1993). The problem of the lack of coordination and understanding between researchers and research users is a significant one, and it results in a situation when research evidence is not used in practice and is often presented in a form that is difficult to be used. It appears that the solution that the author proposes – to create social roles that would bridge the gap between scholars and research users (Quarantelli, 1993) – is an optimal one, for it might allow for better communication between the two areas while not disrupting the focus of either of them.

Discussion Questions

Is it possible to state that in the modern U.S. system of disaster response and management, there exist specialists whose role is to bridge the gap between scholars and research users?
Do you believe that in the area of disaster response and management, there is effective communication and exchange between researchers and those who use their results nowadays?

Reference

Quarantelli, E. L. (1993). Converting disaster scholarship into effective disaster planning and managing: Possibilities and limitations. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 11(1), 15-39.

Click Here To Order Now!

Quarantellie’s “Converting Disaster Scholarship Into Effective Disaster Planning”

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)