A critical review of the significance of elitism and pluralism to disaster risk management

Abstract

Disasters and disaster risks are social phenomena that take place in a political space shaped by different political ideologies. Despite this connection, the field of disaster risk management has been developed without a deliberate incorporation of political theories. Using a narrative literature review methodology, this paper sought to elucidate the significance of political theory in shaping both the policy and practice of disaster risk management. The review reveals notable intersections between political theories, such as elitism and pluralism, and established disaster risk management paradigms, specifically objectivism and constructivism. Notably, elitism and objectivism tend to promote expertise, marginalize citizen participation, and emphasize centralized disaster management, whereas pluralism and constructivism advocate for diversity, tolerance, and competition, aligning with the concept of disaster risk management. The paper argues that ignoring political theories in disaster risk management can conceal a deeper understanding of the power relations between different stakeholders, as well as the historical, economic, social, and political characteristics of a society. It advocates for future studies to examine the contributions of political theories explicitly and critically to disaster risk policies and practices. This call highlights the need for a deeper understanding of how political theories impact the effectiveness and equity of disaster risk management.