Understanding the similarities and differences between what the population think and the available science on the causes, processes, consequences and solutions of anthropogenic alteration of climatic phenomena opens a window to demonstrate that the common culture surrounding Climate Change (CC) can have a greater influence than its scientific representation, since the weight of certain variables associated with the ways in which this common culture is constructed in societies generates differences in the degree of importance given to the phenomenon. Understanding the social representation of CC among university students is of great interest, since communication about it is usually restricted to the field of research and its threat potential has barely reached the general public, causing a discontinuous flow that does not connect significantly with climate science, resulting in different beliefs about climate change and a common culture around it that generates doubts and uncertainties.
Despite an emphasis on explaining wildlife touristsâ experiences encountering a charismatic animal in the wild, there is a lack of research investigating these encounters amongst individuals not visiting nature-based tourism destinations. Most humans come across animals daily, yet we know little about the characteristics of memorable encounters with a wild animal. Furthermore, there is a lack of understanding of our emotional responses to these encounters and any potential lasting impact of how these individuals think about their relationship to the natural world following these meetings. To begin to investigate this area, we conducted a qualitative study of non-wildlife touristsâ experiences of their encounters with wild animals. Contrary to existing research, when asked to describe their emotional responses to these encounters, participants most frequently referred to fear. Surprisingly, when asked how this encounter might have changed their relationship to the natural world, participants referred to feelings of interconnectedness and respect.
ING AND INDEXING For a full list of databases in which this journal is indexed, please visit www.thesocialsciences.com/journals/collection. KNOWLEDGE COMMUNITY MEMBERSHIP Authors in The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies are members the Interdisciplinary Social Sciences Knowledge Community or a thematically related Knowledge Community. Members receive access to journal content. To find out more, visit www.thesocialsciences.com/about/become-a-member. SUBSCRIPTIONS The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies is available in electronic and print formats. Subscribe to gain access to content from the current year and the entire backlist. Contact us at cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com. ORDERING Single articles and issues are available from the journal bookstore at www.ijienst.cgpublisher.com. HYBRID OPEN ACCESS The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies is Hybrid Open Access, meaning authors can choose to make their articles open access. This allows their work to reach an even wider audience, broadening the dissemination of their research. To find out more, please visit www.thesocialsciences.com/journals/hybrid-open-access. DISCLAIMER The authors, editors, and publisher will not accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may have been made in this publication. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies Volume 11, Issue 4, 2016, www.thesocialsciences.com © Common Ground Publishing, Mir Rabiul Islam, Valerie Ingham, John Hicks All Rights Reserved. Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com ISSN: 2329-1621 (Print), ISSN: 2329-1559 (Online) Flooding in Bangladesh: An In-Depth Analysis of Community Disaster Resilience Applying the “Production Model” Mir Rabiul Islam, Charles Sturt University, Australia Valerie Ingham, Charles Sturt University, Australia John Hicks, Charles Sturt University, Australia Abstract: In a novel approach, this paper adapts the economic model of production and applies it to the production of community disaster resilience and psychosocial recovery. Utilising field data collected through in-depth interviews within three regions of Bangladesh, namely Sirajganj, Sunamganj, and Satkhira districts, we apply the “Production Model” to community disaster resilience and recovery, demonstrating that in the response phase local communities are almost entirely reliant on self-generated social capital. In the individual and community recovery phase, as with the preparation phase, the state is not relied upon to generate or organise adequate resources to rebuild communities. The proposed ‘Production Model’ demonstrates that an increase in state resourcing is necessary to better plan, respond and recover from flooding in Bangladesh. The model, in this specific case, clearly demonstrates that there is great potential for building community resilience through increasing the state disaster prevention activities, while the community contribution is already strained. Based on the field data, we conclude that in Bangladesh it is increasingly necessary to stabilise communities and build on their existing resilience strategies through greater government action, the provision of additional resources, and the development of strategies to ensure an integrated response by the government, NGOs, and the disaster-affected people. In a novel approach, this paper adapts the economic model of production and applies it to the production of community disaster resilience and psychosocial recovery. Utilising field data collected through in-depth interviews within three regions of Bangladesh, namely Sirajganj, Sunamganj, and Satkhira districts, we apply the “Production Model” to community disaster resilience and recovery, demonstrating that in the response phase local communities are almost entirely reliant on self-generated social capital. In the individual and community recovery phase, as with the preparation phase, the state is not relied upon to generate or organise adequate resources to rebuild communities. The proposed ‘Production Model’ demonstrates that an increase in state resourcing is necessary to better plan, respond and recover from flooding in Bangladesh. The model, in this specific case, clearly demonstrates that there is great potential for building community resilience through increasing the state disaster prevention activities, while the community contribution is already strained. Based on the field data, we conclude that in Bangladesh it is increasingly necessary to stabilise communities and build on their existing resilience strategies through greater government action, the provision of additional resources, and the development of strategies to ensure an integrated response by the government, NGOs, and the disaster-affected people.
