Management Essay: What is a Disaster?

What is a Disaster?
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
What is a Disaster?
Developing a conclusive definition of “a disaster” remains necessary in understanding the essence and content of the concept. A distinctive definition is more valuable to social scientists who should educate the world first by understanding and specifying the concept through its causes, conditions, and impacts. Still, it remains a challenge to classify occurrences such as terrorist attacks and genocides at the same breath as one would classify natural and technological occurrences. Even more, questions arise when disasters are explored based on their settings. That is, it is less likely a disaster if the occurrence is located in a place where resources are available, and recovery can be instituted faster to normalize the situation. Bearing the above challenges in defining a disaster, Quarantelli and Ronald Perry explore the definition through inputs from social science disaster scientists from different areas of specialization in the publication What is a Disaster? Perspectives on the Question. The authors advance their views through multiple international occurrences that are valuable in developing an insight into the tenets of a disaster and a conclusive definition of the concept.
Difficulties in Defining a Disaster
The difficulties in defining a disaster expose it as a moving target. That is, occurrences can be labeled as disasters depending on multiple factors. For instance, a similar occurrence would likely, say an earthquake of a similar magnitude, would be labeled differently in London, England, as opposed to Nairobi, Kenya. Similarly, natural occurrences should be accorded different labeling considering the scope of preparedness that people have to undergo before some of the artificial technological or terrorist attacks. With such challenges, the scholars in the publication deduced what could constitute the definition of a disaster. In an overall view, a remedy to developing a conclusive definition is by grouping them in a broad era with an emphasis on the paradigm or orientation.
Multiple factors pose challenges in constructing a definition for a disaster. First among the challenges is time. The world is anchored on dynamism. Things change fast, and people’s avenues of addressing challenges differ depending on time. In the case of defining disaster, the dynamism has been gross and more inputs come as older ones are subjected to deconstruction. The founding of the Disaster Research Center in 1963 brought many scholars together, and newer definitions were formed. More than 1000 empirical studies were conducted with the subject being forging a definition of disaster. With selectivity, scholars settled on understanding disasters on the grounds of understanding and specifying the phenomena of disasters as a preface to systematic research that delineates their causes, conditions, and consequences. Still, dynamism has not landed the scholars into a conclusive understanding.
Susan Cutter’s input on the definition and understanding of the concept gives a footprint on what should be done if people are to arrive at the right understanding of the concept, even if remotely. Cutter insists that there is a notable debate among scholars about what is right or wrong. She insists on the value of conflicting views in delivering universally acceptable outcomes. On her part, Cutter insists that including relevance and pragmatism in reaching for a definition forms a platform for understanding among the warring factions. Science, she notes, is just but one set of beliefs that helps in understanding the intrinsic nature of the order. Exploring different fields should deliver universal definitions. Cutter suggests an emphasis on pragmatic prospects such as the settings of occurrences and the perception of the affected as critical elements of defining disaster. Until the inclusion of pragmatism and relevance, the definition of the disaster remains opaque. That is because perceptions, resources, and nature of the settings must be included in such definitions. Hence, a reference to disaster as a sudden event that creates disruption and losses is deficient in understanding the concept in its entirety. Still, disaster is a moving target.
Role of Culture in Perceiving Disasters
Cultures play a significant role in the perception that people accord occurrences. To that extent, it is understandable to include the scope and inputs of cultures in defining and understanding terms such as disasters. Rohit Jigyasu notes that nothing sways people’s perceptions more than their cultures (Perry & Quarantelli, 2005). It is a culture that defines what people want and how they are willing to achieve their needs. Culture is also responsible for the things that people do and those that they don’t do. By extension, it is through cultures that people can effectively tell who they are, what they are experiencing, and why they are experiencing those things. Importantly, cultures govern the behaviors of the people. Under any singula...