ABSTRACT

Many policy makers today accept that climate change poses substantial risks to human and natural systems and that effective adaptation is essential. An important element of adaptation policy making and disaster risk management is how to best combine individual with communitarian approaches to resilience building. The difficulty for effective leadership in this effort resides in comprehending various understandings of, and approaches to, resilience and their real-life consequences for affected populations to deal with disasters induced by climate change. Here, we conduct a comparative analysis of 89 influential disaster management leaders in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. We examine the extent to which their perspectives on resilience and vulnerability are framed by either communitarian or individual-focused notions. Our quantitative analysis of an initial questionnaire and subsequent content analysis of interview transcripts indicate three core findings. Firstly, a tendency towards a communitarian understanding of resilience emerging from the questionnaire was replaced by a more diverse picture during the interviews, including a stronger focus on individual resilience. Secondly, most leaders asserted it was reasonable to expect citizens to be resilient to climate change, particularly when feeling overwhelmed by their responsibility for providing protection during extreme events. Finally, world views among leaders that encourage individual responsibility occluded systemic or reflexive thinking and action to minimize loss. Our study highlights the need for a relational leadership framework underpinned by an ethic of compassion that supports leaders pursuing and implementing policies that reduce harm and suffering in the face of disasters influenced by climate change.

Key policy insights

• Communitarian approaches to resilience and vulnerability provide opportunities for disaster management leaders to better appreciate human suffering and improve their policy advice and decision making to minimize it.

• Conversely, individualistic approaches drive disaster management leaders’ narrow world views that downplay vulnerability whilst shifting responsibility for resilience too far towards individuals.

• Governments would be well advised to specifically address the root causes of socio-economic vulnerability in resilience policy frameworks.

• Disaster management leaders would benefit from an ethic of compassion supported by a relational leadership framework that guides their resilience policy advice and decision making to further minimize suffering from disasters.

摘要

今天，许多决策者都接受气候变化对人类和自然系统构成重大风险，有效的适应至关重要。适应政策制定和灾难风险管理的一个重要要素是如何将个人与社区主义方法最好地结合起来，以进行抗灾力建设。在这种努力中，有效领导的困难在于理解对复原力及其对受影响人口应对气候变化引发的灾难的现实生活后果的各种理解和方法。在这里，我们对澳大利亚，新西兰和美国的89位有影响力的灾难管理负责人进行了比较分析。我们考察了他们对抵御力和脆弱性的看法在多大程度上被社群主义或以个人为中心的观念所构架。我们对初始问卷的定量分析以及随后对访谈笔录的内容分析表明了三个核心发现。首先，在调查过程中，以问卷调查形式出现的趋向于社区主义的趋势被更多样化的图片所取代，包括更加关注个人的韧性。其次，大多数领导人声称，有理由期望公民能够抵御气候变化，特别是当他们感到极端事件中提供保护的责任不知所措时。最后，领导者之间倡导个人责任的世界观阻碍了系统性或反身性的思想和行动，以最大程度地减少损失。

重要政策见解

• 社区采取的抵御能力和脆弱性方法为灾难管理领导者提供了机会，使他们可以更好地体谅人类的苦难，并改善他们的政策建议和决策以将其最小化。

• 相反，个人主义的方法驱使灾难管理负责人狭narrow的世界观轻视脆弱性，同时将应变能力的责任转移到个人身上。

• 建议各国政府在复原力政策框架中具体解决社会经济脆弱性的根本原因。

• 灾难管理领导者将从同情精神中受益，该同情精神由关系领导框架提供支持，该框架将指导他们的复原力政策建议和决策，以进一步减少灾难带来的痛苦。