In recent years there has been an increasing emphasis on achieving convergence in disaster research, policy, and programs to reduce disaster losses and enhance social well-being. However, there remain considerable gaps in understanding “how do we actually do convergence?” In this article, we present three case studies from across geographies—New South Wales in Australia, and North Carolina and Oregon in the United States; and sectors of work—community, environmental, and urban resilience, to critically examine what convergence entails and how it can enable diverse disciplines, people, and institutions to reduce vulnerability to systemic risks in the twenty-first century. We identify key successes, challenges, and barriers to convergence. We build on current discussions around the need for convergence research to be problem-focused and solutions-based, by also considering the need to approach convergence as ethic, method, and outcome. We reflect on how convergence can be approached as an ethic that motivates a higher order alignment on “why” we come together; as a method that foregrounds “how” we come together in inclusive ways; and as an outcome that highlights “what” must be done to successfully translate research findings into the policy and public domains.

近年来，人们越来越重视在灾害研究，政策和计划中实现融合，以减少灾害损失并提高社会福祉。但是，在理解“我们实际上如何进行融合？”方面仍然存在很大差距。在本文中，我们提供了来自不同地区的三个案例研究-澳大利亚的新南威尔士州，美国的北卡罗来纳州和俄勒冈州；以及社区，环境和城市弹性等工作领域，以批判性地研究融合带来了什么，以及融合如何使各种学科，人员和机构减少在二十一世纪面对系统风险的脆弱性。我们确定关键的成功，挑战和融合的障碍。我们在围绕当前需要以问题为中心，以解决方案为基础的融合研究的必要性的讨论基础上，还考虑了将融合作为道德，方法和结果的必要性。我们思考如何将趋同作为一种道德观来实现，从而促使人们对“我们为什么走到一起”进行更高层次的协调。作为一种以“包容性”方式看待我们“如何”走到一起的方法；结果强调“必须做什么”才能成功地将研究成果转化为政策和公共领域。