Meriläinen Eija
Örebro University, Sweden.
Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London, United Kingdom.
Disasters. 2025 Apr;49(2):e12678. doi: 10.1111/disa.12678.
This paper studies how the relations between nature and society are constructed in disaster governance frameworks. Dominant disaster governance frameworks present nature and society as separate realms, and the organisation of society is increasingly seen as the key cause of hazards and disasters. Disaster impacts are similarly framed around adverse societal consequences, while other-than-human nature is merely the background across which disasters unfold, as property lost, or a means of disaster governance. Although the centrality of human impacts is troubled when biodiversity or a disaster flagship species is threatened, neither situation challenges the nature-society dualism embedded in dominant disaster governance frameworks. The attention and resources of disaster governance target the societal side of nature-society dualism. This study finds, though, that in peripheries characterised by remoteness from centres of power, a sparse human population, and large spaces of other-than-human nature, the vulnerabilities facing humans and other-than-human nature risk being ungoverned.
本文研究了在灾害治理框架中自然与社会的关系是如何构建的。主流灾害治理框架将自然和社会呈现为相互分离的领域，并且社会的组织越来越被视为危害和灾害的关键成因。灾害影响同样围绕着不利的社会后果来界定，而非人类的自然仅仅是灾害发生的背景，如财产损失，或者是灾害治理的一种手段。尽管当生物多样性或一个灾害旗舰物种受到威胁时，人类影响的核心地位受到了质疑，但这两种情况都没有挑战主流灾害治理框架中所嵌入的自然—社会二元论。灾害治理的关注焦点和资源都指向自然—社会二元论中的社会层面。然而，本研究发现，在那些远离权力中心、人口稀少且非人类自然空间广阔的边缘地区，人类和非人类自然所面临的脆弱性可能得不到治理。
