HOTSEP Analysis to Develop Disaster Research Integrated Book for Vocational Education (Drica) in 21st-Century

This study analyzed Higher-Order Thinking Skills of Environmental Problem (HOTSEP). It was conducted in March 2021. The sample comprised 114 vocational high school students, 66 male and 49 female students from several schools in Jakarta, Indonesia. The data was collected online using Google Form and Microsoft Excel for data analysis. The results showed that the HOTS score with analyzing environmental problems (C4) obtained an average score of 50. The thinking aspect of evaluating environmental problems (C5) obtained an average score of 49. The thinking aspect of making programs to overcome environmental problems (C6) obtained an average score of 47. Therefore, the study showed that the HOTS scores were relatively low since the average score was 51. The results showed that the HOTSEP score on the criticizing environmental problems (C4) obtained an average score of 24. The thinking aspect of environmental problem solving (C5) obtained an average score of 25. Furthermore, the thinking aspect of environmental innovation development (C6) obtained an average score of 23. Therefore, the study showed that the HOTSEP score was poor since the average score was 26. The research results suggest that learning media employed requires an improvement related to disaster mitigation. One media that can be developed is Disaster Research integrated book for Vocational Education (Drica). It can be concluded that the research results generally indicate that the vocational education students remain lacking in the HOTSEP aspect.

Aiming at a moving target: methodological reflections on the study of politics of citizen-centric governance in post-earthquake Nepal

PurposeThe growing prominence of disaster research has also prompted vibrant discussions about the motivation and ethical conduct of disaster researchers. Yet, the individual researchers' aspirations and aims, together with the challenging and changing circumstances under which one undertakes disaster research have received relatively scant attention. Drawing on the author’s personal experience of becoming a disaster researcher under the unexpected humanitarian crisis following the 2015 Nepal earthquakes, this paper seeks to contribute to the debates surrounding the role of reflexivity and ethical sensitivity in doing disaster research under the climate of uncertainty.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on the author’s reflections and vignettes to highlight the author’s experience of becoming a disaster researcher, and my trajectory of navigating the complex terrain of fieldwork.FindingsThe paper underscores how the process of becoming a disaster researcher was closely intertwined with and shaped by my concerns and care for the disaster-affected communities. The paper argues that doing contextually relevant and ethically sensitive research is not a static target. It demands constant reflexivity and improvisation, in response to the unpredictable real-world conditions of disasters. Instead of aiming to tame such uncertainty, disaster researchers may benefit from appreciating and embracing uncertainty as a major facet of its epistemological distinctiveness.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to the ongoing efforts in advancing methodological reflection and innovation in disaster research. In so doing, the paper is expected to aid early-career researchers who are often faced with ethical and practical dilemmas of doing fieldwork.

Towards the Next Stage of the Journal of Disaster Research

In the year 2021, the Journal of Disaster Research (JDR) had two memorable events: Professor MURAKAMI Suminao, one of the founders of the Journal, resigned as the editor-in-chief, and in February the JDR marked its hundredth issue, counting from Vol.1 No.1. These events gave us, the next generation of the editorial board members, the resolve to reinvent the JDR for its leap forward into the next stage. We have accomplished the following two projects this year. Establishment of MURAKAMI Suminao Award for Disaster Research and the JDR annual awards To acknowledge Professor MURAKAMI’s significant contributions to the JDR and disaster research in general, we rename the JDR Award to the MURAKAMI Suminao Award for Disaster Research. While we present this award to the person who has made the most significant contribution to disaster research as a whole, we hereby establish three more specific JDR annual awards: the JDR Award for the Most Cited Paper, the JDR Award for the Most Downloaded Article, and the JDR Award for the Most Contributory Reviewer. Applying the Creative Commons license The JDR introduced the Creative Commons license in August 2021, thereby becoming a fully open-access journal conforming to the international standard. This project makes all articles in the JDR easier to reuse and cite in academic activities. Now the JDR is widely known not only in Japan but also all across Asia, and its readership is spreading through North America and Europe. We will continue to strive for the further development of the JDR as an international journal dedicated to comprehensive disaster research.

Presenting the Seventh JDR Award

On behalf of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Disaster Research (JDR), it is my great honor and pleasure to present the 2021 JDR Award to Prof. and Dr. Suminao Murakami, or “Murakami Sensei.” Murakami Sensei has served as the founding Editor-in-Chief of the JDR for the past 16 years, since 2006. The JDR has now published more than 100 issues, becoming recognized as the leading Japan-based, international online peer-review journal on disaster risk reduction for all hazards except war, and Murakami Sensei has always been its greatest contributor. The Editorial Board reluctantly respected Murakami Sensei’s decision to resign from the position of Editor-in-Chief, but it has unanimously agreed to rename the JDR Award to the MURAKAMI Suminao Award for Disaster Research from 2022 on. The Journal of Disaster Research will continue its best efforts “to reduce the horrors of disaster through information,” as Murakami Sensei and Takiguchi Sensei wrote in the Message from the Editors-in-Chief in the first issue of the JDR.

A Comparative Analysis of Disaster Research Trends Using Topic Modeling and Network Analysis

This study aims to analyze differences in domestic and international disaster research trends. We first performed topic modeling on 20,477 papers published in three domestic and 12 international journals over the last 21 years (2000-2020) and then visualized the trends. Based on the extracted topics and keywords, we analyzed keyword networks using Gephi. Research in domestic journals mainly revolved around natural disasters like earthquakes, fire, and flooding. In contrast, international journals spotlighted policy-based topics such as disaster governance and community resilience. Meanwhile, globally, building and civil engineering research has shrunk in recent five years (we refer to this as a cold topic). On the other hand, in the past five years, fire and flood research has appeared more frequently in domestic journals, while international journals have presented more articles on community resilience, risk perception, and behavior (we refer to this as a hot topic). Results of this research can provide suggestions about the directions domestic disaster research should develop in the future.

Philosophical Underpinnings of Disaster Risk Reduction Research: The Case for Social Constructivism

In response to the growing interdisciplinarity of disaster research, this paper explores the philosophical underpinnings of disaster research to a) elucidate the methodological choices that disaster researchers make b) reflect on how these different choices and philosophical approaches consider disaster risk, and c) provide arguments infavor of the application of social constructivism for improving the results of disaster research. It investigates the epistemological and ontological underpinnings of social constructivism and objectivism and reflects on how they are applied in disaster research through a review of the literature. For ease and to avoid repetitive duplication of the references, the endnote reference manager was used in this study, with all references employed in this study managed using the endnote library. APA 6th reference style is followed to manage and harmonized the bibliographic section. Its findings indicate that the objectivist approaches that dominated the field until the 1980s emphasized the role of science and technology in reducing disaster risk focused on the physical and natural elements of different disasters, and therefore lack certain applicability. As a counter, this paper argues that a discursive, social constructivist approach that considers disasters as socially framed, rooted, and constructed may provide more fruitful applications of disaster research.