Purpose

The notion that disasters are not natural is longstanding, leading to a growing number of campaigns aimed at countering the use of the term “natural disaster.” Whilst these efforts are crucial, critical perspectives regarding the potential risks associated with this process are lacking, particularly in places affected by violent conflict. This paper aims to present a critical analysis of these efforts, highlighting the need to approach them with care.

Design/methodology/approach

The author draws upon insights and discussions accumulated over a decade of research into the relationship between disasters and conflict. The article includes a critical literature review on the disaster–conflict relationship and literature specifically addressing the idea that disasters are not natural. The analysis of field notes led to a second literature review covering topics such as (de) politicisation, instrumentalisation, disaster diplomacy, ethics, humanitarian principles, disaster risk reduction, peacebuilding and conflict sensitivity.

Findings

This analysis underscores the importance of advocating that disasters are not natural, especially in conflict-affected areas. However, an uncritical approach could lead to unintended consequences, such as exacerbating social conflicts or obstructing disaster-related actions. The article also presents alternatives to advance the understanding that disasters are not natural whilst mitigating risks, such as embracing a “do-no-harm” approach or conflict-sensitive analyses.

Originality/value

The author offers an innovative critical approach to advancing the understanding that disasters are not natural but socio-political. This perspective is advocated, especially in conflict-affected contexts, to address the root causes of both disasters and conflicts. The author also invites their peers and practitioners to prioritise reflective scholarship and practices, aiming to prevent the unintentional exacerbation of suffering whilst working towards its reduction.

中文翻译：

---

谨慎推进“无自然灾害”：冲突地区将灾害视为政治现象的风险和战略

目的

“灾害不是自然灾害”的观念由来已久，导致越来越多的运动旨在抵制“自然灾害”一词的使用。虽然这些努力至关重要，但缺乏对这一过程相关潜在风险的批判性观点，特别是在受暴力冲突影响的地方。本文旨在对这些努力进行批判性分析，强调需要谨慎对待它们。

设计/方法论/途径

作者借鉴了十多年来对灾害与冲突之间关系的研究积累的见解和讨论。本文包括对灾害与冲突关系的批判性文献综述以及专门讨论灾害非自然这一观点的文献。对实地记录的分析导致了第二次文献综述，涵盖（去）政治化、工具化、灾害外交、伦理、人道主义原则、减少灾害风险、建设和平和冲突敏感性等主题。

发现

这一分析强调了主张灾害不是自然灾害的重要性，特别是在受冲突影响的地区。然而，不加批判的做法可能会导致意想不到的后果，例如加剧社会冲突或阻碍与灾害相关的行动。本文还提出了一些替代方案，以加深人们对灾害非自然灾害的认识，同时降低风险，例如采用“不造成伤害”的方法或冲突敏感分析。

原创性/价值

作者提出了一种创新的批判方法，以加深人们对灾害不是自然灾害而是社会政治灾害的认识。提倡这种观点，特别是在受冲突影响的情况下，以解决灾难和冲突的根源。作者还邀请同行和从业者优先考虑反思性学术和实践，旨在防止痛苦无意加剧，同时努力减少痛苦。