Introduction
It is possible to politicize environmental disasters, but many disasters have little to no impact on public opinion or government policies. This sense-making process occurs after a disaster, during which officeholders may be held responsible for any missteps that may have occurred in the aftermath of the event. When essential societal ideals are broken, blame is more likely to be assigned. Disasters, on the other hand, may lead to long-term institutional instability. Following the floods, policymakers in the UK and others have made important adjustments (Erik, 2020). A window of opportunity for institutional reform can be opened by media debates. In addition, news media create arenas in which actors strive to define and interpret the calamity that has occurred. It’s critical to examine the dynamics of catastrophe discussions in light of the significance of media coverage for policy change and praise or blame aimed at officeholders.
This paper suggests that when tragedy comes, urban political disorder patterns adapt to those circumstances, given the predicted urban population expansion and its implications for local infrastructure, as well as the climate-related variations in precipitation that occur. Post-flood-related psychopathology is influenced by the socioeconomic and political setting, according to this article (Albrecht, 2021). Contextual factors play an important role in the transition from disasters to post-flood chaos. To test these scenarios, a Qualitative Comparative Analysis of wild examples is used. It is clear that a quick post-flood response does not prevent the advent of disorder, but rather shows to be a condition associated to the emergence of conflicts. The study showed indications of chaos in cases where the government responded quickly to the flood. Aside from that, researchers looked into the importance of areas that are regularly flooded. There is a greater chance of disturbance if the flood is concentrated in poorer areas. In contrast, the sheer existence of a youth bulge or rapid urbanization appears to have no impact on the emergence of instability.
Among the numerous existing questions, this study will narrow down to addressing the following questions:
- How are catastrophes framed and politicized in the media in order to give a thorough evaluation of the discursive dynamics and external political settings of natural hazards?
- How can a flood lead to political unrest in a specific country?
- What causes certain countries to be plagued by a post-flood disorder while others are spared?
- What are the relationships between climate change, catastrophes, and small-scale conflicts, such as riots?
- Is political instability triggered by natural catastrophes, particularly floods, in diverse ways?
Research Design and Methods
Among the research methods that have been used to gain a better understanding of human society’s fundamental ethics, beliefs, and historical analysis, examination of conventional response tactics and practices, literature research and qualitative interviews with key informants (such as flood managers), social impact assessment and the use of secondary data are practices in the face of catastrophes (especially flood disasters).The study examines archives in order to better understand the political-economic impact of catastrophes, the federal-state dichotomy, and institutional frameworks (letters, agreements, reports, government documents, etc.) In order to research and evaluate institutions engaged in the disaster sector, the “criteria method” was used in conjunction with institutional analysis.
To foster a model, just as estimations and observational testing, for their review, the analyst decided to take on one of the current models of fierce struggle set up by the PITF, which the person viewed as valuable. It took a lot of thought and work in this examination to plan a factual model of political unsteadiness that is powerful, inadequate, and exact, which was then tried. Concerning a wide range of political insecurity, the PITF model accurately classifies the beginning of political flimsiness in roughly 80% of cases. This establishes a huge improvement over most of models, which neglect to clarify the greater part of the variety in the reliant variable, just like the case with most of models (Goldstone et al. 2005, 2010). In contrast with different models, the PITF model is recognized by its straightforwardness. A few highlights have been found as having a reliable connection with the beginning of political insecurity across various model details, measurable tests, and informational indexes, but this is a little number of elements contrasted with the absolute number of factors inspected. The model specification, which emphasizes features of political regimes, is particularly significant since it is compatible with the theoretical predictions of the research about the susceptibility of certain kinds of political institutions to crises. When it comes to political conflict, most research rely on an aggregate measure of democracy, as well as primary, secondary, and tertiary political regime indices built on the basis of the Polity IV dataset’s 21-value autocracy/democracy scale. It was determined that there that there was a connection between individual parts of vote based system and struggle by the PITF group. It still up in the air that there was a connection between different blends of those parts and their qualities on the beginning of political insecurity by the group.
Problems with statistical procedures have also been frequent in large-N studies of catastrophes and wars. Despite the importance of civil wars and other violent conflicts, they occur relatively seldom.. The well-known measurable methodologies used to look at these exceptional occasions might belittle the shot at struggle and yield one-sided coefficients on the factors of interest. With the assistance of the PITF’s strategy, this issue might be survived. To perform research on illnesses that happen seldom in different populaces, the PITF group utilized the irregular case-control correlation method, which is regularly utilized (Goldstone et al. 2005). States that have not experienced political instability for many years before and after the state collapse are linked up with the states that have suffered state failure in a random fashion. These “control” countries are then compared to the “failed” states before to their beginnings of instability and factors linked with a higher chance of instability have been established.
Another goal is to explain how natural disasters become political events by studying the discourse dynamics and political contexts of disaster coverage in media. The 2005 and 2015 floods in the United Kingdom have been compared because of their resemblance in substance and political claims. Mixed techniques are employed to investigate the political and social contexts of two floods that struck northern England in 2005 and 2015. Catastrophes that are presented as the outcome of policy or decision-making errors or failures are known as political natural disasters (Begg, et. al., 2015). Previously, we looked at the political ramifications of politicization, including policy change and accountability. The political impact of disasters has been understudied, despite the importance of the discursive interactions between actors that enable politicization. From an actor-centered perspective, understanding how disaster rhetoric is politicized increases our capacity to identify catastrophes as political events.
It is the goal of this research to examine the coverage of disaster management by the federal, regional, and local governments in the media. It is important to study the relationship between actors and the way disasters are politicized via political claims, which are described as demands, critiques, and suggestions. Frame and politicization may be measured in terms of both quantity and quality using this methodology. Researchers in disaster research have never used this methodological approach for the study of natural hazards before. When two occurrences are studied over time, they may be compared, which is especially important in places that are often hit by floods. Finally, the researcher will conduct a Wald test to determine whether or not natural catastrophes are relevant enough to include in a political instability prediction model. New models containing natural catastrophes will have their accuracy tested further using the Akaike information criterion (AIC), which is used to pick out the best models from a pool of plausible ones based on their “fit” with the data.
Research Ethics and Considerations
A good decision-making process that guarantees the correct thing is done for the right reasons is characterized by ethical contemplation. Even while technical knowledge is required for flood management, it is inadequate without an understanding of ethical principles that will maximize public benefits, limit flood damage, and ensure that flood mitigation and management systems are equitable and just. Developing the ability to behave responsibly toward others, especially the vulnerable, is achieved via ethical thought. A number of organizations, such as the Red Cross, have developed unique ethical guidelines to lead moral thought that takes into consideration the specific circumstances in which they are implemented. The formulation of ethical norms for flood control is advocated by others.When appropriate frameworks are utilized in conjunction with cases, ethical reflection may be facilitated. When faced with poor information and in the face of ambiguity, ethical contemplation may be a difficult and chaotic process. Ethical reasoning, as well as “moral imagination” and “aesthetic sensibility,” may be important for professionals who are inexperienced with value conflicts. Emerging research on disaster ethics highlights the wide range of ethical difficulties faced by many professions involved in catastrophe planning and response, according to Mitrovi et al. (2019). As a result, flood response teams and planners should always apply ethical concepts, values, and virtues to their work, no matter how unusual the situation may be. Such techniques must be implemented with some degree of adaptivity. Consequently, multidisciplinary cooperation (sociological, biological, geophysical, engineering and ethical) may be beneficial in the development of ethics in floods, as shown by the findings.
Disasters of all kinds create ethical difficulties and considerations. Because floods are unique in terms of ethics, their occurrence and effect are intimately related to human actions in a manner that other catastrophes, earthquakes, volcanoes, and storms are frequently not. Human-caused dam failures or intentional dam openings are only two examples from the literature that illustrate the link between human activity and floods. Another example is the intentional opening of dams. Three Gorges Dam, the world’s biggest dam and the source of the Yangtze River, in China, aroused ethical questions since it displaced over one million people, provoked deadly landslides, and caused environmental damage as a result of flood control choices (Neslen, 2017). Deforestation, the development of wetlands for commercial interests, and the construction of buildings in flood zones are all examples of human actions that may be related to flooding less directly. It is a contentious ethical issue when floodwater is diverted toward certain areas while remaining away from others. Increasing water levels at a dam downstream from Brisbane, Australia, prompted engineers to release water, resulting in flood losses of US$5 billion, the most costly natural catastrophe in the country’s history up to that point. It was necessary to make ethical decisions in addition to technical decisions, even if they were supported by technical evidence.
Because flood risk management is being implemented in response to climate change, numerous ethical considerations concerning how this should be done arise. If a flood plan calls for the permanent displacement of a specific town for the sake of a broader area, it will raise a slew of problems, including those about the ethics of such actions. Justice must be taken into account while removing flood-damaged buildings and rezoning floodplains for other purposes after a flood. As a society, we are faced with ethical dilemmas that go beyond the allocation of resources (Mariaselvam and Gopichandran 2016). The demographics of the most vulnerable groups in a particular community that has been affected should be known to social protagonists who want to help. For floods, this matters greatly if the proposed technique is to conform to the most stringent ethical guidelines. During disasters, ethics may be perceived and stressed differently by diverse groups of individuals, such as the affected population, rescue teams, volunteers, health care professionals, engineers, lawmakers, and other decision-making authorities. It is possible for ethical issues to occur when several specialists are engaged at different phases of a disaster, such as in the early stages of DRR or flood risk management, or in the aftermath, such as triage or recovery. It may be tough to keep up with the many responsibilities that come with being a professional. Concerns for the welfare of the whole population may conflict with the interests of an individual, raising ethical questions.
All sorts of publications in the databases selected for the study satisfied the inclusion criteria for the articles under consideration for the analysis. Hurricanes, monsoons, cyclones, and heavy rain were included, but floods produced by gradual disasters, such as sea-level rise, were omitted. For the purposes of this search, any publications dealing with ethical issues related to flooding (such as flood risk management and preparedness), disaster research (such as sociological issues), flood response (including environmental ethics), or disaster recovery (such as disaster relief) were considered for inclusion. For example, when floods were referred to as examples of environmental disasters or ethical dilemmas, they were not considered. Also excluded from the competition were articles that went into considerable depth about floods, but did not include ethics in any way.
References
Begg, C., Walker, G., & Kuhlicke, C. (2015). Localism and flood risk management in England: The creation of new inequalities? Enviornmental and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(4), 685–702. https://doi.org/10.1068/c12216
Goldstone, Jack A., Bates, Robert H., Gurr, Ted R., Lustik, Michael B., Marshall, Monty G., Ulfelder, Jay, and Mark Woodward. (2005) A Global Forecasting Model of Political Instability. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
Mitrović, Veselin & O’Mathúna, Dónal & Nola, Iskra. (2019). Ethics and Floods: A Systematic Review. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 13. 1-12. 10.1017/dmp.2018.154.
Mariaselvam S, Gopichandran V. (2016). The Chennai floods of 2015: urgent need for ethical disaster management guidelines. Ind J Med Ethics, 2016;1 (2):91–95.
Neslen A.(2017). Flood disasters more than double across Europe in 35 years. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/19/ flood-disasters-more-than-double-across-europe-in-35-years. Accessed November 10, 2021.
Plänitz, Erik.(2020). Natural Disasters and Political Disorder: Why Urban Flooding Turns Violent. Applying a Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy, vol. 26, no. 2, 2020, pp. 20190046. https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2019-0046
Frederike Albrecht. (2021). Natural hazards as political events: framing and politicisation of floods in the United Kingdom, Environmental Hazards, DOI: 10.1080/17477891.2021.1898926
write