Bloated bodies and broken bricks: Power, ecology, and inequality in the political economy of natural disaster recovery

Benjamin K Sovacool,Wokje Abrahamse,May Tan-Mullins

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.05.028

Abstract

Abstract Disaster recovery efforts form an essential component of coping with unforeseen events such as earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, and typhoons, some of which will only become more frequent or severe in the face of accelerated climate change. Most of the time, disaster recovery efforts produce net benefits to society. However, depending on their design and governance, some projects can germinate adverse social, political, and economic outcomes. Drawing from concepts in political economy, political ecology, justice theory, and critical development studies, this study first presents a conceptual typology revolving around four key processes: enclosure, exclusion, encroachment, and entrenchment. Enclosure refers to when disaster recovery transfers public assets into private hands or expands the roles of private actors into the public sphere. Exclusion refers to when disaster recovery limits access to resources or marginalizes particular stakeholders in decision-making activities. Encroachment refers to when efforts intrude on biodiversity areas or contribute to other forms of environmental degradation. Entrenchment refers to when disaster recovery aggravates the disempowerment of women and minorities, or worsens concentrations of wealth and income inequality within a community. The study then documents the presence of these four inequitable attributes across four empirical case studies: Hurricane Katrina reconstruction in the United States, recovery efforts for the 2004 tsunami in Thailand, Typhoon Yolanda in the Philippines, and the Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand. It next offers three policy recommendations for analysts, program managers, and researchers at large: spreading risks via insurance, adhering to principles of free prior informed consent, and preventing damage through punitive environmental bonds. The political economy of disaster must be taken into account so that projects can maximize their efficacy and avoid marginalizing those most vulnerable to those very disasters.

Highlights

Scale of a disaster’s impact . . . has more to do with the political economy of the country, region, and state than with the hurricane’s category strength.”
Critical development studies has emerged to critique an overly reductionist, top-down approach to development assistance and policy that seeks to remake the developing world in the image of western industrialized countries. Drawing from these admittedly diverse literatures, we propose that disaster recovery (DR) efforts can, at times, propagate four interconnected political economy processes that operate systemically
We synthesize from four separate disciplines—political economy, political ecology, justice theory, and critical development studies—to lay the groundwork for our political economy typology based on enclosure, exclusion, encroachment, and entrenchment

Summary

Introduction

The human response to a natural disaster can exacerbate its impact, even more than the event itself. Kates, Colten, Laska, and Leatherman (2006: 14659) write ‘‘because disasters tend to accelerate existing economic, social, and political trends, the trajectory for full recovery (preexisting population, economy, and infrastructure) is not promising.” Laska and Morrow (2006: 16) argue that the ‘‘goal of disaster resilient communities cannot be reached until basic issues of inequality and social justice are addressed.” Bullard and Wright (2009; xxv) add ‘‘Quite often, the. Has more to do with the political economy of the country, region, and state than with the hurricane’s category strength.” Their statements underline a stream of research showing how natural disasters are worsened by human factors such as mismanagement, underdevelopment, profiteering, neoliberal capitalism, and crisis politics (Hinchcliffe and Woodward, 2004; Klein, 2008; Weber and Messias, 2012; Cretney, 2017; Sovacool, 2017, 2018). Critical development studies has emerged to critique an overly reductionist, top-down approach to development assistance and policy that seeks to remake the developing world in the image of western (or Northern) industrialized countries Drawing from these admittedly diverse literatures, we propose that DR efforts can, at times, propagate four interconnected political economy processes that operate systemically. Key concepts or terms Resource curse, intrastate conflict, interstate war Resource economics, geopolitics, political geography, political science, economic geography

Presenting a conceptual typology of political economy and ecology

Research method

Policy implications and recommendations

Findings

Conclusion