1,721,095 research outputs found
Rouissage et pollution des cours d’eau en Languedoc méditerranéen (XVIIe-XIXe siècle)
No full text[Centemeri Laura, Daumalin Xavier (dir.) - ISBN 9782811112394 - (L’atelier méditerranéen)
Introduction. Recovery, resilience and repairing: for a non-reductionist approach to the complexity of post-disaster situations
No full textBurgess, J. Peter, Laura Centemeri & Sezin Topçu (2021) ’Introduction: Recovery, resilience and repairing: for a non-reductionist approach to the complexity of post-disaster situations’, in Burgess, J. Peter, Centemeri, Laura & Topçu (Drs.) Repairing Environments: A Critical Perspective on Recovery After Disaster, London: Routledge.International audienceThe introduction reviews the most relevant existing approaches to the study of recovery after disaster. It introduces a framework that is based on the analysis of repair processes and dispositifs, which is grounded in the assumption that any disaster situation is marked by the uncertainty of its 'what-ness'. This 'what-ness' depends on the diversity of actors experiencing its consequences and their involvement in a variety of processes of acknowledging, evaluating and managing these consequences at different scales. From this perspective, researching processes of recovery consists of following how the disaster and its consequences are made the object of a variety of struggles around the meaning of what happened and how it affected the given order of things and the possible future. The chapter illustrates how this approach overcomes some of the limitations of a recovery analysis framework that is based on the notion of resilience, pointing to the need to explore the multiple meanings of repairing environments in order to explain how communities recover after disaster. The chapter also highlights three different meanings of repairing in the field of recovery: repairing as redress, repairing as technical fixing and repairing as the everyday maintenance of one's own world in material, multispecies, experiential and emotional terms
Introduction. Recovery, resilience and repairing: for a non-reductionist approach to the complexity of post-disaster situations
No full textBurgess, J. Peter, Laura Centemeri & Sezin Topçu (2021) ’Introduction: Recovery, resilience and repairing: for a non-reductionist approach to the complexity of post-disaster situations’, in Burgess, J. Peter, Centemeri, Laura & Topçu (Drs.) Repairing Environments: A Critical Perspective on Recovery After Disaster, London: Routledge.International audienceThe introduction reviews the most relevant existing approaches to the study of recovery after disaster. It introduces a framework that is based on the analysis of repair processes and dispositifs, which is grounded in the assumption that any disaster situation is marked by the uncertainty of its 'what-ness'. This 'what-ness' depends on the diversity of actors experiencing its consequences and their involvement in a variety of processes of acknowledging, evaluating and managing these consequences at different scales. From this perspective, researching processes of recovery consists of following how the disaster and its consequences are made the object of a variety of struggles around the meaning of what happened and how it affected the given order of things and the possible future. The chapter illustrates how this approach overcomes some of the limitations of a recovery analysis framework that is based on the notion of resilience, pointing to the need to explore the multiple meanings of repairing environments in order to explain how communities recover after disaster. The chapter also highlights three different meanings of repairing in the field of recovery: repairing as redress, repairing as technical fixing and repairing as the everyday maintenance of one's own world in material, multispecies, experiential and emotional terms
Conclusion: Disaster recovery and the repairing perspective: between theory and practice
No full textBurgess, J. Peter, Laura Centemeri & Sezin Topçu (2022) ’Conclusion: Disaster recovery and the repairing perspective—between theory and practice’, in Burgess, J. Peter, Centemeri, Laura & Topçu (Drs.) Repairing Environments: A Critical Perspective on Recovery After Disaster, London: Routledge: 222-232.International audienceThe chapter clarifies how the approach to the study of post-disaster situations based on the exploration of multiple and diverse repairing processes is propitious to a cross-fertilization between disaster studies and current theoretical debates in social sciences. This dialogue is essential, on the one hand, to allow a better understanding of disasters as expression of multiple systemic crises, including climate change, financial instabilities and the crisis of democratic legitimacy. On the other hand, these debates can feed the ‘sociological imagination’ of the field of disaster studies and contribute to developing the inclusive potential of policies aimed at supporting collective capacities of prevention, preparedness and response to disasters. In return, the dialogue between disaster studies and the theoretical perspectives currently developed in social sciences can help to clarify and test the operability of approaches otherwise condemned to remain just a paper exercise. In particular, the authors discuss the articulation of the reparative perspective with the systemic perspective that focuses on the interconnectedness of disasters, economic interests, globalization, financialization and the ongoing dynamics of colonialism. In the final section, building on the debate about how to transform urban planning to meet climate change challenges, the authors discuss the perspective of design activism against ‘defuturing’ as a way to renew the understanding of recovery
Conclusion: Disaster recovery and the repairing perspective: between theory and practice
No full textBurgess, J. Peter, Laura Centemeri & Sezin Topçu (2022) ’Conclusion: Disaster recovery and the repairing perspective—between theory and practice’, in Burgess, J. Peter, Centemeri, Laura & Topçu (Drs.) Repairing Environments: A Critical Perspective on Recovery After Disaster, London: Routledge: 222-232.International audienceThe chapter clarifies how the approach to the study of post-disaster situations based on the exploration of multiple and diverse repairing processes is propitious to a cross-fertilization between disaster studies and current theoretical debates in social sciences. This dialogue is essential, on the one hand, to allow a better understanding of disasters as expression of multiple systemic crises, including climate change, financial instabilities and the crisis of democratic legitimacy. On the other hand, these debates can feed the ‘sociological imagination’ of the field of disaster studies and contribute to developing the inclusive potential of policies aimed at supporting collective capacities of prevention, preparedness and response to disasters. In return, the dialogue between disaster studies and the theoretical perspectives currently developed in social sciences can help to clarify and test the operability of approaches otherwise condemned to remain just a paper exercise. In particular, the authors discuss the articulation of the reparative perspective with the systemic perspective that focuses on the interconnectedness of disasters, economic interests, globalization, financialization and the ongoing dynamics of colonialism. In the final section, building on the debate about how to transform urban planning to meet climate change challenges, the authors discuss the perspective of design activism against ‘defuturing’ as a way to renew the understanding of recovery
Commentary to Gennaro Avallone' Interview to Jason W. Moore
No full textThe paper offers critical considerations over the conversation entertained by Jason Moore and Gennaro Avallone. Questions of world ecology, capitalism and ecological crisis are critically addresse
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
