Everyday Life “Turned upside Down”: Disasters, Future and Resilience
Abstract
Disasters change individuals and the social structure. Two categories are essential to study disasters: time and space. To these, we should add risk that is a cultural object resulting from interpretation. Its representations are subjective and they stem from the socio-cultural framework of reference. In the article, we will apply to the COVID-19 epidemic in Italy the four risk-related issues emerging by the interplay between the degree of knowledge (certain/uncertain) and that of consent (contested/complete) as in Douglas and Wildavsky. We will describe the four types of problems about the evaluation of the consequences concerning this health risk and we will consider the role of institutions. Since disasters disrupt the regularity and predictability of everyday life, the temporal dimension individuals experience is flattened onto the present. Our conclusions reflect on the possibility to counteract this and on available tools to foresee when constructing a future after a disaster.
References
Adam, B. (1995). Timewatch. The Social Analysis of Time. Cambridge: Polity.
Adam, B. (2004). Time. Cambridge: Polity.
Augé, M. (2008). Où est passé l’avenir?. Paris: Éditions du Panama.
Barbieri, A.S.A. & Mangone, E. (2015). Il rischio tra fascinazione e precauzione. Milan: FrancoAngeli.
Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt an Main: Suhrkamp.
Bonanno, G.A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we understimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely eversive events?. American Psychologist, 59, pp. 20-28.
Bonanno, G.A., Galea, S., Bucciarelli, A. & Vlahov, D. (2006). Psychological resilience after disaster. Psychological Science, 17, pp. 181-186.
Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction. Critique sociale du jugement. Paris: Ed. De Munuit.
Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.
Collins, R. (1988). Theoretical Sociology. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and Danger. An Analysis of Conceps of Pollution and Taboo. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Douglas, M. (1985). Risk Acceptability According to the Social Sciences. New York: Rus-sel Sage Foundation.
Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and Blame. Essays in Cultural Theory. London: Routledge.
Douglas, M. (1997). The Depoliticisation of Risk. In R.J. Ellis & M. Thompson (eds.). Cul-ture Matters: Essays in Honor of Aaron Wildavsky (pp. 121-132). Bolder: Westview Press.
Douglas, M. & Wildavsky, A. (1983). Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Selection of Tech-nological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Ewald, F. (1993). Two infinities of risk. In B. Massumi (ed.). The Politics of Everyday Fear (pp. 221-228). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust. New York: The Free Press.
Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity.
Gillespie, R.D. (1942). Psychological Effects of War on Citizen and Soldier. New York: Norton.
Kreps, G.A. (2001). Disasters, Sociology of. In N.J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (eds.). The in-ternational encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol. 6, pp. 3718-3721). Oxford: Elsevier.
Leccardi, C. (2014). Time of Society and Time of Experience: Multiple Times and Social Change. Kronoscope, 14(1), pp. 10-24.
Lévy, P. (1994). L’intelligence collective. Pour une anthropologie du cyberspace. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
Loury, G. (1977). A Dynamic Theory of Racial Income differences. In P.A. Wallace & A. Le Mund (eds.). Women, Minorities, and Employment Discrimination (pp. 121-155). Lexingtone: Lexington Books.
Loury, G. (1987). Why Should We Care About Group Inequality. Social Philosophy and Policy, 5, pp. 249-271.
Luhmann, N. (1991). Soziologie des Risikos. Berlin-New York: de Gruyter.
Mangone, E. (2018a). From calamities to disasters: Pitirim Aleksandrovič Sorokin’s in-sights. Human Arenas, 1(1), pp. 79-85. Doi: 10.1007/s42087-018-0001-2.
Mangone, E. (2018b). The Reconstruction of a New System of Needs after a Post-War Emergency. In S. Schliewe, N. Chaudhary & G. Marsico (eds.). Cultural Psychology of Intervention in the Globalized World (pp. 135-154). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Mangone, E. (2019). Сорокин и исследование массовых бедствий [Sorokin and research of mass disasters]. Nasledie [Наследие], 1(14), pp. 32-41. doi: 10.31119/hrtg.2019.1.3.
Manyena, S.B. (2006). The concept of resilience. Disasters, 30(4), pp. 433-450.
Norris, F.H., Stevens, S.P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K.F. & Pfefferbaum, R. (2008). Community Resilience as a Metaphor, Theory, Set of Capacities, and Strategy for Dis-aster Readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, pp. 127-150.
Phillips, B.D., Thomas, D.S.K., Fothergill, A. & Blinn-Pike L. (2010) (eds.). Social Vul-nerability to Disaster. Boca Raton: CRC.
Putnam, R. (1992). Making democracy work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ricœur, P. (1991). Le temps raconté. Le courier de l’Unesco, 44(4), pp. 11-15.
Rosa, H. & Scheurman, W.E. (2009). High-Speed Society. Social Acceleration, Power, and Modernity. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Schütz, A. (1932). Der Sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt. Vien: Springer.
Simon, H.A. (1983). Reason in Human Affairs. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Sorokin, P.A. (1948), The Reconstruction of Humanity, The Bacon Press, Boston.
Sorokin, P.A. (1958). Integralism is My Philosophy. In W. Burnett (ed.). This is my Philos-ophy. Twenty of the World’s Outstanding Thinkers reveal the Deepest Meaning they have found in Life (pp. 180-189). London: George Allen & Unwin.
Sorokin, P.A. (1954). The Ways and power of Love. Types, Factors and Techniques of Moral Transformation. Boston: Beacon Press.
Sorokin, P.A. (2010). Man and Society in Calamity. Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers (ed. orig. Man And Society In Calamity; The Effects Of War, Revolution, Famin, Pestilence Upon Human Mind, Behavior, Social Organization And Cultural Life. New York: Dutton, 1942).
Tansey, J. & O’Riordan T. (1999). Cultural theory and risk: a review. Health, Risk & Soci-ety, 1(1), pp. 71-90.
Van de Eynde, J. & Veno, A. (1999). Coping with Disastrous Events: An Empowering Model of Community Healing. In R. Gist & B. Lubin (eds.), Response to Disaster. Psychosocial Community and Ecological Approaches (pp. 167-192). Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.
