S98-13
WORLD VIEWS, BELIEF SYSTEMS, AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS, RECOVERY, AND MITIGATION

Moderator: Richard Krajeski, Church World Service
Recorder: Elaine Clyburn, American Red Cross
Discussants: Jerry Mitchell, University of South Carolina; Lorna Jarrett, Church World Service; Russell Dynes, University of Delaware; Diane Merten, Benton County, Oregon, Emergency Management Council; Ben Wisner, California State University, Long Beach

World view is a concept of how the world operates. World view and belief systems involve all human activities including science and technology. One limited study of a sample of clergy in South Carolina did not reveal any differences in beliefs about disaster preparedness and mitigation. Another discussant suggested the continuing importance of the biblical flood story. The flood story of Noah had its origin in early Jewish tradition which elevated Noah's status as a link between Adam and Moses. Christian tradition made Noah a hero because he obeyed God. The flood was an allegory in early history. In time, the flood story became a part of popular culture. This has led to assumptions that: people behave badly in disaster; all is lost; technological fixes such as retrofitting, etc. is the answer; and response problems require authorities to control the response.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has practiced the principles of preparedness since the 1800s. Members of this church are taught self reliance and how to prepare for disaster, for example to store grain which will sustain life in an emergency. Concern for others in emergency is also an important aspect of the Church's teachings. The Church contributes millions of dollars world wide to other organizations and denominations for disaster relief.

Speaking from a Native American background, one panelist shared her thoughts and experiences, and provided a historical perspective on what influences the success of disaster response on Native lands. She stressed that we may fall under one category, Native Americans, but we all have different tribal customs and histories which influence our ways and legalities today. One example she noted was concerning language. First she related an example given by Kim Fletcher in an earlier session who described a very good example of cultural diversity and language usage when she said the following: "when it was just disaster responders sitting around the table, we all had a common language... however with the advent of terrorism, the FBI and other law enforcement teams joined our discussions and we soon learned we had to create new terms and define old ones - we didn't always speak the same language." This is a similar process when Natives sit at the table. It is important that we do not "assume" we are "all" speaking the same language, but we must define terms, and give everyone a chance to respond. We may use the same word but often with a different meaning or nuance. To respond successfully in situations of cultural diversity we should learn to be quiet, listen, choose our words carefully, and then speak with an open mind and heart. Being culturally sensitive does not mean we have to become like or adopt the other culture as ours, but to take the time to respect the life style and treat each human with courtesy.

Another discussant divided belief systems vis-a-vis disaster as logos: belief that humans are a causative force in the world and cosmos. The opposite belief is that there is nothing special about the human being. World views are filters, not causes. Coalitions may be an effective antidote to religious, secular, and political agendas which may be more narrow or limited in focus.


Return to Hazards Center Home Page

Return to Index of 1998 Session Summaries

August 28, 1998

hazctr@colorado.edu