95
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Facilitating Sustainable Disaster Risk Reduction in Indigenous Communities: Reviving Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge and Practices through Two-Way Partnering

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Sendai Framework of Action 2015–2030 calls for holistic Indigenous disaster risk reduction (DRR) research. Responding to this call, we synergized a holistic philosophical framework (comprising ecological systems theory, symbolic interactionism, and intersectionality) and social constructionist grounded theory and ethnography within a critical Indigenous research paradigm as a methodology for exploring how diverse individual and contextual factors influence DRR in a remote Indigenous community called Galiwinku, in the Northern Territory of Australia. Working together, Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers collected stories in local languages using conversations and yarning circles with 20 community members, as well as participant observations. The stories were interpreted and analysed using social constructivist grounded theory analysis techniques. The findings were dialogued with over 50 community members. The findings deeply resonated with the community members, validating the trustworthiness and relevance of the findings. The grounded theory that emerged identified two themes. First, local Indigenous knowledge and practices strengthen Indigenous people and reduce the risks posed by natural hazards. More specifically, deep reciprocal relationships with country and ecological knowledge, strong kinship relations, Elder’s wisdom and authority, women and men sharing power, and faith in a supreme power/God and Indigenous-led community organizations enable DRR. Second, colonizing practices weaken Indigenous people and increase the risks from natural hazards. Therefore, colonization, the imposition of Western culture, the government application of top-down approaches, infiltration in Indigenous governance systems, the use of fly-in/fly-out workers, scarcity of employment, restrictions on technical and higher education opportunities, and overcrowded housing that is culturally and climatically unsuitable undermine the DRR capability. Based on the findings, we propose a Community-Based DRR theory which proposes that facilitating sustainable Indigenous DRR in Australian Indigenous communities requires Indigenous and non-Indigenous partners to genuinely work together in two-directional and complementary ways.

          Related collections

          Most cited references70

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Book: not found

          Constructing Grounded Theory

          <p>Lecturers, request your electronic inspection copy<br> <br> Kathy Charmaz presents the definitive guide to doing grounded theory from a constructivist perspective. This second edition of her groundbreaking text retains the accessibility and warmth of the first edition whilst introducing cutting edge examples and practical tips.<br> <br> This expanded second edition:<br> <br> - explores how to effectively focus on data collection<br> <br> - demonstrates how to use data for theorizing<br> <br> - adds two new chapters that guide you through conducting and analysing interviews in grounded theory <br> <br> - adds a new chapter on symbolic interactionism and grounded theory<br> <br> - considers recent epistemological debates about the place of prior theory<br> <br> - discusses the legacy of Anselm Strauss for grounded theory.</p> <p>This is a seminal title for anyone serious about understanding and doing grounded theory research. </p>
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Book: not found

            The Ecology of Human Development : Experiments by Nature and Design

            <p>Here is a book that challenges the very basis of the way psychologists have studied child development. According to Urie Bronfenbrenner, one of the world’s foremost developmental psychologists, laboratory studies of the child’s behavior sacrifice too much in order to gain experimental control and analytic rigor. Laboratory observations, he argues, too often lead to “the science of the strange behavior of children in strange situations with strange adults for the briefest possible periods of time.” To understand the way children actually develop, Bronfenbrenner believes that it will be necessary to observe their behavior in natural settings, while they are interacting with familiar adults over prolonged periods of time.<br><br>This book offers an important blueprint for constructing such a new and ecologically valid psychology of development. The blueprint includes a complete conceptual framework for analysing the layers of the environment that have a formative influence on the child. This framework is applied to a variety of settings in which children commonly develop, ranging from the pediatric ward to daycare, school, and various family configurations. The result is a rich set of hypotheses about the developmental consequences of various types of environments. Where current research bears on these hypotheses, Bronfenbrenner marshals the data to show how an ecological theory can be tested. Where no relevant data exist, he suggests new and interesting ecological experiments that might be undertaken to resolve current unknowns.<br><br>Bronfenbrenner’s groundbreaking program for reform in developmental psychology is certain to be controversial. His argument flies in the face of standard psychological procedures and challenges psychology to become more relevant to the ways in which children actually develop. It is a challenge psychology can ill-afford to ignore.</p>
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness.

              Communities have the potential to function effectively and adapt successfully in the aftermath of disasters. Drawing upon literatures in several disciplines, we present a theory of resilience that encompasses contemporary understandings of stress, adaptation, wellness, and resource dynamics. Community resilience is a process linking a network of adaptive capacities (resources with dynamic attributes) to adaptation after a disturbance or adversity. Community adaptation is manifest in population wellness, defined as high and non-disparate levels of mental and behavioral health, functioning, and quality of life. Community resilience emerges from four primary sets of adaptive capacities--Economic Development, Social Capital, Information and Communication, and Community Competence--that together provide a strategy for disaster readiness. To build collective resilience, communities must reduce risk and resource inequities, engage local people in mitigation, create organizational linkages, boost and protect social supports, and plan for not having a plan, which requires flexibility, decision-making skills, and trusted sources of information that function in the face of unknowns.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                20 January 2021
                February 2021
                : 18
                : 3
                : 855
                Affiliations
                [1 ]College of Health and Human Sciences, Charles Darwin University, Darwin 0810, Australia; douglas.paton@ 123456cdu.edu.au
                [2 ]Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra 2617, Australia; petra.buergelt@ 123456canberra.edu.au
                [3 ]Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra 2617, Australia
                [4 ]Wellbeing and Preventable Chronic Conditions, Menzies School of Health Research, Darwin 0810, Australia; james.smith@ 123456menzies.edu.au
                [5 ]College of Indigenous Futures, Arts & Society, Charles Darwin University, Darwin 0810, Australia; Elaine.maypilama@ 123456cdu.edu.au
                [6 ]Yalu Marŋgithinyaraw, Galiwin’ku, East Arnhem Land, The Northern Territory 0822, Australia; Dorothy.yungirrja@ 123456yalu.org.au (D.Y.); stevenlot133@ 123456gmail.com (S.D.); Rosemary.Gundjarranbuy@ 123456yalu.org.au (R.G.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: tahirali@ 123456outlook.com.au ; Tel.: +61-435-827-031
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1767-0345
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5248-2644
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8673-2178
                Article
                ijerph-18-00855
                10.3390/ijerph18030855
                7908329
                33498224
                f0efa051-da05-427c-8b99-97f152313de4
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 02 December 2020
                : 11 January 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                indigenous development,holistic indigenous research,disaster risk reduction,sustainable community development,partnership-based approaches,critical indigenous methodology

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log