# Draft 122903

# Disaster Studies Programs in North American Higher Education

# Historical Considerations

**By**

**Fred May, Ph.D., Director / Chair**

**Brandon University**

**Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies Program**

**Brandon, Manitoba, Canada**

**INTRODUCTION:**

Applied disaster programs in higher education have arisen largely in the
U.S., but are beginning in Canada. The difference between applied
programs and others are that applied programs have a built-in
relationship with public and private sectors, especially relating to
emergency management interests. Some are multidisciplinary in nature
requiring students to study topics related to disaster studies; such as,
sociology, political science, geography, geology, psychology,
engineering, mathematics, and others, under the assumption that
emergency managers are called upon to analyze disasters from a variety
of perspectives and are called upon to interact with professionals from
those disciplines. These programs address disasters, not the hazards
that cause them, except as the two areas of consideration overlap
conceptually at the nature-society interface, and are, therefore, unique
within the curricula of universities. The concepts, theories, and
practices of disaster studies are based on the development of disaster
arts and sciences largely during the past 30 years, and are still in a
state of development, collection, and synthesis. The appearance of
disaster studies, as a university curriculum, has interesting historical
development, not unlike that of other arts and sciences. Introducing a
new discipline into a body of existing disciplines (established
departments) in any given university has, historically, been a daunting
task and sometimes an uncomfortable experience for those introducing the
discipline. The historical development of applied disaster studies as a
university discipline will be compared in this article to that of
geology, an older established science. It will also be compared to a
newer combined art and science, that of Behavioral Genetics, which began
showing indications of becoming its own discipline at about the same
time as disaster studies.

NOTE: As a point of reference, disaster is defined as some rapid,
instantaneous or profound impact of conditions or phenomena, generated
in the nature-society interface, upon human systems. The field of study
thus includes technological, cultural and natural risks, and the
interaction between the threats from hazards and the built environment.
In times past, disasters were analyzed largely from the perspective of
the God-society interface, in that the cause of disasters was thought to
be a god, and that the consequences of disasters were thought to be the
will of god. Such ideas persist today, but it was not until the early
1900s that the analysis of disasters began to focus on the interactions
that occur at the nature-society interface.

**GEOLOGY: A HISTORICAL COMPARISON**

The rise of disaster studies programs was delayed in a historical
context, as compared to other sciences, for example Geology. By
comparison, geological studies have a history dating back to the 1600s,
with the axioms of Nicholas Steno circulated in 1669. Such basic early
observations withstood the tests of time and remain applicable. Early
geological studies included the writings of Robert Hooke in 1670; John
Woodward in 1723; J.E. Guettard in 1746; James Hutton, 1785; A.L.
Lavoisier; Georges Cuvier and Alexandre Brogniart at about 1780; William
Smith in at about 1800; and many others. From these roots, evolved the
principles on which geological sciences are based (Dott and Batten,
1981).

Geology was not always an identified or defined science. Early students
of the earth's rocky surface were often not aware of each other and were
not "geologists" -- geologists did not exist yet. For example, William
"Strata" Smith (1800) was a surveyor or "canal digger", with little
formal education, who observed sedimentary strata and fossils while
digging canals across England and introduced the important principle of
faunal succession. James Hutton, called the "Father of Geology", was an
apprentice lawyer, medical doctor, and, later, farmer, who became
interested in earth's origins. He expounded that everywhere evidence may
be seen that the present rocks of the earth\'s surface have been formed,
in great part, out of the waste of older rocks. His observations lead to
the concept of "Uniformitarianism" and introduced "Plutonism" as a
replacement for the concepts of Neptunism and Catastrophism.

The rise of geology as an academic discipline began within the more
general context of natural history. This is still, in today's world, an
accepted relationship, as geological exhibits at the Smithsonian
Institution are contained within the Museum of Natural History. The
introduction of earth science in North America began in some of the
older academic institutions; such as, Yale University and Washington and
Lee University. The website of the Yale University Department of Geology
and Geophysics, explains that "the teaching of geology started at Yale
in 1802, when Yale President Timothy Dwight appointed Benjamin Silliman
as Professor of Chemistry and Natural History. It was an act of courage
and vision, for natural history was not a recognized discipline in
America. Dwight was widely condemned as radical, if not heretical. But
Silliman, his student James D. Dana, and their successors went on to
become world leaders in the earth sciences. The Department of Geology
and Geophysics has remained a top-ranked earth science department for
nearly two centuries. Today, it includes about 20 faculty members, whose
disciplines span geochemistry, geophysics, petrology, tectonics,
paleontology, oceans, and atmospheres, reflecting the multidisciplinary
nature of geology. The interdisciplinary and experimental approach
evident at the inception of geology is still central to the department
and to modern earth sciences in general. In 1818, Silliman founded the
American Journal of Science, America\'s oldest surviving journal of
natural science, which emphasizes geology. In addition to that journal,
the department currently publishes Advances in Geophysics, and the
Journal of Marine Research." The first graduate degrees in Geology in
North America were also awarded at Yale University between 1847 and
1861. Graduate education at Yale is directed toward training the next
generation of scholars.

This presentation of the historical information, above, from Yale
University contains several points that are useful to the discussion on
the historical arrival of disaster studies: 1), as with applied disaster
studies, natural history (Geology) was not a recognized discipline in
America (North America); it was a [new discipline]{.underline} in 1802,
as was applied disaster studies when it was first introduced in North
America at the University of North Texas in the 1980s. There are also
striking similarities with the remaining comparisons; 2) the person who
introduced the discipline of natural history to Yale University was
considered a radical, if not a heretic; 3) the graduates of the Yale
program were very successful, becoming world leaders in the earth
sciences.; 4) the first person at Yale University to be appointed to
teach natural history, was not, himself, a natural historian and was a
combined chemist and natural history professor, but with no degree in
natural history; 5) the students of Silliman were the first to earn
degrees in earth science; and 6) natural history was introduced as being
interdisciplinary.

THE RISE OF BEHAVIORAL GENETICS -- AN INTERESTING COMPARISON:

The study of the acceptance of applied disaster programs would not be
complete without looking at another newly-arriving discipline, for
example, that of Behavioral Genetics. Additionally, discussions with
colleagues demonstrates that virtually every social and natural science
had a first arrival in a university someplace, often with poor
acceptance by established departments. For example, chemistry was not
well received by established sciences. As stated, this is sometimes true
of applied disaster studies programs, including in Canada where a first
attempt at establishing such a program is still in progress. This
attempt in Canada makes a good case study for implementation of an
applied program proposal in the midst of established social and natural
sciences. In the case of Behavioral Genetics, a concise summary of the
history of this discipline is provided by Gottesman (2002). He reports
that current progress in acceptance of this discipline "may well mark
the end of a long cold war". He reports that there are indications that
this new discipline may be getting a "vote of confidence in the
authenticity of behavioral genetics as a worthy facet of the many that
make up... the broader discipline of psychology." He reports that " in
1993, the American Psychological Association (APA) published [Nature,
Nurture, and Psychology]{.underline} (Plomin and McClearn, 1993;
eds.)... wherein behavioral genetics came of age but had been largely
resisted by established psychology. In 2001, the APA awarded Irving I.
Gottesman (author being cited) the Distinguished Scientific
Contributions Award for his career in behavioral genetics. Still,
Gottesman reports that within the APA, none of the APA Divisions
represents behavioral genetics -- "a consequence of historical origins
and science politics".

As with Geology and, also, with Applied Disaster Studies, behavioral
genetics began with a heterogeneity of professional roots. The early
developers of behavioral genetics came from the multi-disciplines of
physical anthropology, statistics psychometrics, biology, zoology,
psychology, psychiatry, agriculture, and medicine. Gottesman describes a
history of publications in the development of behavioral genetics dating
back to the 1960s, not unlike the historical appearance of applied
disaster studies. Also like Geology and Applied Disaster Studies, the
first workers in behavioral genetics did not have degrees in behavioral
genetics. Indeed, the first academicians teaching genetics did not have
high degrees in genetics. Behavioral genetics went through a historical
development, step-by-step, as did other academic disciplines, including
Applied Disaster Studies.

**A VIEW TO THE PAST -- THE 1700S AND EARLIER:**

The study of disasters, as natural events and their relationship to
society (nature-society interface), was delayed for generations through
superstition and supernatural beliefs, breaking out of darkness
sufficiently in the early 1900s. It is clear that the 1700s were a
period of supernatural interpretation of the nature-society interface,
where disasters happened at what would have to be called the God --
Society Interface. Causes, losses, and consequences were all attributed
to God. The first major disaster where the cause was attributed to
nature was the Lisbon, Portugal, Earthquake of 1755; yet this was also
the last disaster where an execution of a person took place, as a result
of the Inquisition. The Inquisition alone delayed the natural basis for
disaster studies for at least one century. This "supernaturalizing" of
causes and effects, rather than naturalizing them, is observed
throughout the times of ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, the
Inquisition, the Protestant Reformation, and even into current
Christianity, Judaism, and native North American traditions. During much
of the Inquisition anything that went wrong in the community from
natural disasters to still-births was attributed to the malevolent
activities of people, to a large part women, in league with the devil.
One result was witch hunts beginning around 1450 and came to an end by
1700. It is noteworthy that even as late as 1889, the causes of the
Johnstown Flood were being attributed, even in newspaper articles, to
the wrath of God. The term "Act of God" lingers today.

A VIEW TO THE PAST: THE 1800S:

There was certainly the opportunity to study disasters at the
nature-society interface in North America in the 1800s. There were noted
disasters, the New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811 and 1812, the Charleston
Earthquake of 1886, and the Johnstown Flood of 1889. These disasters
were studied from the standpoint of rebuilding and relief but not from
the standpoint of understanding and adjusting cause and effect at the
nature -- society interface. The objective was to rebuild and not
analyze It was not until 1940 that an academic study of the Johnstown
flood happened (Shappee, 1940). It was not until 1983 that a
nature-society interface study was conducted for the 1883 eruption
Krakatau and resulting disaster in Indonesia. The 1800s was a time of
weaning disaster students away from superstitions and a time of
developing modern understandings, tools and concepts, including planning
concepts.

Death is a strong indicator of human suffering in disasters, but it was
not new to North Americans in the 1800s. The westward expansion meant
constant threat from hostile environments. There were ongoing tragedies.
Medical problems lingered with the beginnings of microscopy and the "not
yet" antibiotics. The Civil War waged from 1861 to 1865 when 600,000
soldiers died. The battle of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, in 1863, alone
claimed 51,000 lives. The earthquakes and floods of the 1800s claimed
far fewer lives and considering that both the Battle of Gettysburg and
the Johnstown Flood both happened in Pennsylvania just 26 years apart,
the loss of 2,209 lives in the flood was not that striking. Those who
settled North America brought with them their own superstitions and
histories of hardship and death, then, they encountered more in North
America. Death was not new, whether caused by natural hazards or by
warfare or persecution. Death by disaster fell within the realm of the
expected.

DISASTERS -- COMING TO OUR SENSES IN THE 1900S:

Academic apathy toward human consequence in natural disasters persisted
into the early 1900s. The 8,000 fatalities in the Galveston Hurricane of
1900 was eclipsed by the Influenza Pandemic of 1918 which claimed
600,000 lives in North America. That, in turn was eclipsed in numbers by
World War I (1917 -- 18), which claimed the lives of an estimated 4.8
million soldiers. These were years of mixed feelings about human
consequence caused by natural or man-caused events. Natural disasters
were taking a "back seat". The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake resulted in
popularized books on the event and human impact, but not in academic
studies of the nature -- society interface. But by the 1920s-40s,
interest in natural disasters began to be of interest; technology to
study disasters and the appearance of the pertinent university
disciplines and departments merged and we see the first academic studies
of disasters done on the Halifax Explosion of 1917 (published in 1920)
and the Johnstown Flood (Shappee, 1940).

Although there are many influences on the beginnings of disaster studies
at the nature society interface, a few things become clear. What drives
disaster studies today may be largely a result of what happened with
transportation and communication in the 1800s and the influences these
capabilities had on academic disciplines that appeared in North American
universities largely in the early 1900s. Basic modern concepts and tools
of several disciplines appeared, including for sociology, political
science, geography, geology, and psychology. The awareness of disasters
came about largely through communication, visual and aural. It was a
time of bringing disasters to the human senses: seeing, hearing,
touching, and (as one could imagine) smelling. Until then, most people
had to experience disasters vicariously, and with considerable time
delay.

Transportation to disasters was an obvious impediment. The
Transcontinental Railroad in the U.S. was completed 1869 and in Canada
in 1885, and was helpful only if disasters occurred along main lines.
Most places were accessible in the early 1900s. Vicarious accessibility
happened in the late1800s through photography. Unlike Geology where
accessibility to the earth was almost in everyone's backyard, disasters
were not. Visual perception seemed to be a factor. Writing about
disasters was not nearly enough; "seeing was believing". For most
people, including academicians and government officials, the
nature-society interface required sights and sounds, at least to drive
imaginations and curiosities. This is why people today "chase
ambulances" and monitor television broadcasts of disasters. Photography
was an invention of the late 1800s but was not available to most people
until the 1900s. The 1883 eruption of the volcano Krakatau seemed to
have had no photographic images until some, about a dozen images, were
found in a box in an attic in Paris, France, a century later in 1983.
The 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, Earthquake yielded numerous
photographs, but taken only by professional photographers or well-to-do
hobbiests. This was a time of daquerrotypes and heliotypes, not an
endeavor for the average person. It was not until 1884 that George
Eastman introduced flexible film and five years later, in 1889, the year
of the Johnstown flood, that he introduced the box camera, which made
photography available to many people. By the early 1900s, people could
take pictures and get them processed in a few days. The interesting
aspect of the Johnstown Flood of 1889 is the number of excellent
photographs. Still, these came largely from professional photographers
and appeared in newspapers and popular books published on the incident.

Communication was a requirement for disaster studies. Telegraphy and
transoceanic cables, and wireless communication were products of the
1800s, but mainly in the late 1800s. It was not until 1915 that the
first coast-to-coast telephone conversation was made and it was in the
1930s that magnetic tape for sound recordings was made in Germany.
Transoceanic cables linked most of the world by 1900. Is it a
coincidence that the first sociological study of disaster happened in
1920 on the Halifax explosion and that other 19^th^ century disasters
simply escaped being studied due to a lack of these basic technological
ingredients. It was not until 1900 to 1903 that the first motion
pictures were available and in 1935 for color motion pictures. It was
not until 1920 that the first commercial radio station began
broadcasting and in 1926 the first radio network, NBC, was formed. Short
wave radio appeared in the 1930s. By this point in time, disasters and
the associated human consequence became visible, with realism, for the
masses. Television began as a reality in 1936 to 1938 in London,
England, when regular broadcasts were made and in 1949 with the first
news broadcasts, and in 1953 the first color television broadcasts
appeared and people began seeing disasters in real-time and in color. It
seems a little crass to suggest that the ability to sensationalize
disasters through the media initiated the attraction to disasters and
that government and academia responded, and continue to do so. The media
became the eyes and ears of disaster researchers. It is an interesting
point that in most provincial or state emergency operations centers that
tuning in to major news networks is a major means of monitoring
disasters.

There was also the lack of onsite access to disasters. The 1800s was not
a good century for travel in North America, but the 1900s were. In the
1800s, North America was still largely a frontier. Unlike Geology, where
people could find rocks and fossils almost in their back yards, people
had to travel to disasters. Those desiring to study disasters had to go
there. In the year 1900, only the wealthy had automobiles. That was the
year of the Galveston Hurricane. Few could drive to it to study it. In
1903 the Wright brothers flew their first airplane. In 1940 the first
modern helicopters flew. In 1920 the first transcontinental mail service
happened. In the early 1930s the first commercial airline companies
appear. The first transatlantic passenger service began in 1939.
Commercial airlines were active in North America in the early 1940s. In
today's world, disaster scientists travel to disasters with considerable
ease and speed, facilitating such studies.

TECHNOLOGY MERGING WITH DISASTER ARTS AND SCIENCE:

As the arrival of technology facilitated the awareness of disaster
studies, it likely prompted the initiation of disaster studies and the
needed arts and sciences applications and concepts. The first
empirically based social science study of a disaster was published in
1920 by Samuel Henry Prince who lived in Halifax, Nova Scotia, when the
1917 Halifax Explosion disaster happened. He assisted with the response,
caring for the dead and injured. He then enrolled at Columbia University
and wrote a historic doctoral dissertation on that event, which he
published in 1920. He studied under the sociologist F.H. Giddings (who
published [Principles of Sociology]{.underline}, 1926), who encouraged
him to use social research methods and theory. Prince identified key
observations about this event that later researchers discovered could be
generalized to other disasters: family priority, lack of preparedness,
convergence behaviour, rumors, and fear of looting (Drabek, 1996;
Prince, 1920).

What we learn from this information about Prince and his research is
that at Columbia University social research methods and theory existed
prior to 1917, but that the application of these methods and theories
had not yet, in Giddings mind, been applied to disaster. This is an
interesting message, in that the application of these methods and
theories coincided very well with the arrival of the needed technologies
discussed above. It also fits in well, as for timing, to see that the
Sociology Department at the University of Pittsburgh was created in
1926, not in time to study the nearby Johnstown Flood (1889). It is
interesting that the first academic research done on the Johnstown Flood
was completed in 1940 at the University of Pittsburgh, 50 years after
the flood. The message here seems to be that sociology was not yet "hot
on the trail of disasters". This notion that the arts and sciences,
which should have been pursuing disasters, was "not on the trail" seems
to be confirmed by the statements of Gilbert White in the discussion
below, where he indicates that Geography in the 1960s was not yet
dealing with these issues. The postulation is that once technology and
associated disaster awareness arrived on the scene, along with the
relevant academic departments, in the early 1900s, that researchers then
began to gradually conduct research on disasters studying the nature --
society interface.

It was in the 1950s when a noticeable increase in interest in disaster
studies happened through field teams working for the National Opinion
Research Center (NORC). These teams studied a variety of disasters,
including an earthquake, a tornado, and three plane crashes. A few of
the better-known names in disaster research emerged from that group and
several noteworthy publication resulted. It was also in the 1950s that
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) created their Committee on
Disasters and the Disaster Research Group. Funding for disaster studies
also appears to have been a result of the 1950s. It was shortly
thereafter that the first university based disaster research centers
began to emerge. By this point in time, technology made it possible to
draw attention to disasters and human consequence and universities
developed an interest in them, but not as multidisciplinary programs,
but as single-discipline programs. Still, it took a wide variety of
disciplines to understand disasters (Quarantelli,1988; Drabek 1996).

Part of the resources required for studying disasters involved the
development of basic measuring tools. The first earthquake intensity
scale appeared in the 1880s in Europe. The measurement of the 1906 San
Francisco Earthquake was based on this early version, even though a more
refined intensity scale came from G. Mercalli in 1902. The Richter Scale
appeared in 1935. The Saffir-Simpson Scale for measuring hurricanes
appeared in the 1970s and the Fujita Scale for measuring tornadoes
appeared in 1971. Of these tools, the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale
for earthquakes and the Fujita Scale for tornadoes relate directly to
disasters at the nature -- society interface; whereas, the Richter Scale
and the Saffir-Simpson scales do not (relate more to results from the
energy of the hazard).

DISASTER STUDIES IN ACADEMIC LITERATURE:

Susan Cutter (1994) of the University of South Carolina at Columbia
published, [Environmental Risks and Hazards]{.underline}, providing
under one cover the more important disaster studies publications. The
oldest synthesizing article provided was that of Gilbert White, 1973,
titled [Natural Hazards Research.]{.underline} This article reflected to
the 1920's and 30's, considering early North American flood control on
U.S. river systems. Flood control; however, was not so much about the
nature -- society interface, but about controlling rivers. White makes
an interesting statement: "To a remarkable degree during the 1960's,
geographers turned away from certain environment problems at the same
time that colleagues in neighboring fields discovered these issues. This
cluster of problems relates to the relationship between man and his
natural environment, with particular reference to the kinds of
transactions into which man enters with biological and physical systems,
and to the capacity of the earth to support him in the face of growing
population and of expanding technological alteration of landscape. In
their self-conscious efforts for developing the theoretical lineaments
of a discipline, geographers tended to overlook those problems with
which they, by tradition, had been concerned and which do not fall
readily into allotted provinces of other scientific enterprise." White's
article refers to no concepts or references older than 1927 and his
bibliography refers to no publication, other than government documents,
older than 1942. Also noteworthy is White's observation that disaster
sciences in the 1960s were just noticing the problems associated with
man and his environment.

It is interesting throughout the articles republished by Cutter, that
there are no bibliographic references to earlier periods of disaster
studies; nothing into the 1800s. Judging by the clustering of
publication dates, it would also appear that the renaissance of disaster
studies occurred in the 1980's, when the greatest number of significant
articles were published. Thus, we see disaster studies, as an art and
science, making its appearance in the early to mid-1900s, with a
renaissance in the 1980s. As compared to Geology, this is quite a delay
in arrival. The first multi-disciplinary academic programs began in the
mid-1990s, with the A-DES program in Canada being first conceived of
following the Red River floods of 1997 and faculty being hired in
2002-03.

### GEOLOGY AS MULTIDISCIPLINARY?

The multidisciplinary approach in university education in disaster
studies requires students to take courses from a variety of disciplines.
Disaster studies, then, require a composite of types of knowledge, from
sociology, to psychology, to geography, to geology, etc. It is clear,
when one attends a disaster studies conference today that the conference
cannot happen without speakers representing a variety of these
disciplines. It is much like what happened in the development of
geology, as its own discipline. When one views the names of the
subdisciplines of geology, it becomes obvious as to what happened:
geophysics, geochemistry, paleobiology, seismic geomorphology, seismic
stratigraphy, geomatics, etc. People from different disciplines came
together to form the subdisciplines of geology. As Dennis Mileti,
Director, University of Colorado at Boulder, Hazards Center, stated, as
an example, at the Manitoba Disaster Management Conference, 2002
(Conference videotape), there had to be a first dentist. The first
dentist must have emerged from a meeting between a wood carver, a
chemist, and a biologist. The same holds true for the first
university-educated disaster studies professionals. The possibility for
such an education resulted from academicians representing a variety of
disciplines coming together at conferences and finally figuring out that
they could create a discipline called disaster studies within
institutions of higher education. As a result, programs like, A-DES,
began springing up in North America, basically following the same
historical experience as did Geology. Given that the whole is equal to
the sum of its parts, we recognize immediately that disaster scientists
represent the sum of the parts, all being academic disciplines.

It is now possible for emergency managers and scientists working in
governmental agencies, or in corporations, to identify the discipline to
which they belong. This is a rather new phenomenon. By contrast, for
decades, if one were to ask a civil engineer to which academic
discipline they relate they could say "engineering" as taught at
whichever university. Geologists know that they belong to an academic
discipline called Geology taught at universities. The same holds true
for accountants, planners, sociologists, political scientists, and
others. Disaster studies professionals have, as of the past two decades,
also been provided with the same solution to their academic identity.
This is, in fact, a noble accomplishment, creating an academic
discipline that focuses on protecting life and property and preventing
human suffering caused by the forces of nature.

ANSWERING THE THREE QUESTIONS

Where does the science and art of hazards and disaster studies stand
today? While we have come a long ways, disaster studies, like Geology
has yet to drill through our version of the Mohorovicic Discontinuity.
Disaster scientists are also just scratching the surface. One can look
to the courts as one example. The struggle between local governments and
developers goes on, as developers continue to build in disaster-prone
areas and local governments attempt to resist. The conclusion, most
often, is that both hazard and disaster sciences are not yet able to
predict events nor the relationship between people and events. The three
unanswerable questions asked of disaster specialists remain: 1) when
will it happen; 2) where will it happen; and 3) "how big" will it be?
Attempts are being made to answer these questions.

It wasn't until in the mid-1990s that the first earthquake loss
estimation models (ATC 36 and HAZUS) appeared showing how various
magnitudes of earthquakes relate to losses, as a predisaster
determination. These approaches lend some sophistication to answering
one of the three questions (how big will it be?) because probabilistic
models could now estimate losses. These losses have been calculated for
earthquake-prone cities in the United States and preliminary estimates
have been determined for Vancouver, British Columbia. Still, most areas
of North America have not been settled long enough to understand
disaster histories and cycles, nor the relationship of these events to
people. Most Canadians have yet to experience their first major event,
let alone to study recurring events.

HIGHER EDUCATION DISASTER STUDIES PROGRAMS: THE FEMA CONNECTION

The future growth of disaster studies programs in Canada can be
estimated based on the growth of U.S. programs. On June 4 - 5, 2003, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted its annual Higher
Education Conference at Emmitsburg, Maryland, and the author of this
article attended and participated. Conference statistics were
impressive, as presented by Dr. Wayne Blanchard, manager of FEMA's
Higher Education Project. He reported (Blanchard 2003) that at this
conference "there are 111 participants, the largest amount ever for
Emergency Management and Homeland Security. Represented at the
conference were 79 colleges and universities; 7 college systems,
associations, or centers; and 3 partners (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
National Science Foundation, and the Public Entity Risk Institute).
Forty States, three countries (United States, Turkey, and Canada), and
the District of Columbia were represented in the Higher Education
Project." He reported that "there has been a steady growth of the
project since it began in 1995, when there were just 5 academic
programs. In 2001, there were 72 Emergency Management Programs in
colleges and universities throughout the Nation. In 2002, there were 78,
and in 2003, there are currently 96. Of these 96 programs, 7 are
doctoral-level programs; 23 are master's level; 9 are bachelor programs;
15 are associate programs; and 42 are certificate programs or minors.
Since the last Higher Education Conference, 20 new programs had emerged
and 2 had folded (these were Emergency Management Certificate programs).
There has been a net increase of 18 new programs, which averages 1.5
programs per month, with many more scheduled for implementation this
fall. There are currently 100 programs under development. Of these, 32
are associate level; 39 are bachelor level; 27 are graduate level; and 1
is unsure. There are only four States that do not have, or are not
currently investigating, an Emergency Management program at the college
or university level: Maine, Vermont, Nebraska, and Montana. The border
states with programs include Washington, Idaho, North Dakota, Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Michigan, and New York." Dr. Blanchard reported on the
success of emergency management programs in universities by providing
these examples: "Emergency Management programs are continuing to grow in
size as well as in numbers." Dr. Dianna Bryant of Central Missouri State
University stated that, "the Crisis and Disaster Management Program has
steadily grown---to the point that it is now the second largest in the
home department." Bill Waugh of Georgia State University agrees, stating
that, "The MPA EM Concentration program was overwhelmed this year---had
to turn students away---more in queue for next semester."

An example of a successful university program was provided at the FEMA
Higher Education Conference by Dr. Stephen Meinhold (Meinhold, 2003),
Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina at
Wilmington who is working with FEMA on a project titled [Hazard
Mitigation Partnerships Between Higher Education Institutions and
Communities]{.underline}. The goal of the UNC project is to motivate
higher education institutions and communities to work together to reduce
damage from future disasters. Dr. Meinhold stated "we know that hazards
and their impacts on society are complex phenomena, and we know that
colleges and universities are in the business of teaching about,
understanding, and helping solve such complex phenomena. The benefits
derived from higher education institutions and communities working
together should be obvious." He discussed a new dimension in education
called "community scholarship". Community scholarship is defined as "the
products that result from active, systematic engagement of academics
with communities for such purposes as addressing a community-identified
need, studying community problems and issues, and engaging in the
development of programs that improve health."

The goals of the FEMA Higher Education Project are to:

1.  Increase Collegiate Study of Hazards, Disasters, and Emergency
    Management.

2.  Enhance the Emergency Management Profession

3.  Support Colleges and Universities

The FEMA Higher Education program facilitates the educating of emergency
management professionals through academic emergency management programs
across North America, including Canada. "In order to accomplish
emergency management responsibilities nationwide, a cadre of
professionals is required at every level of government and within the
private sector which can bring to an organization management team
requisite knowledge-based competencies (education) and skills based on
operational competencies (training)." FEMA further indicates that they
view emergency management to be a profession and they define a
profession as follows:

-   Systematic Body of Knowledge

-   System for Advancement and Dissemination of Knowledge

-   University Degrees in Subject Area

-   Identification of Minimum Standards

-   Standards of Conduct or Ethics

-   Professional Societies

-   Public Recognition

FEMA explains that "the ways of the past are ending, where emergency
managers were not university-educated. The knowledge base for emergency
managers has been experiential, and is now becoming education-based. The
new generation of emergency managers are university educated, many with
emergency management degrees, professional knowledge, knowledge-based in
science and research, technically more capable and adept, younger, more
diverse and culturally-sensitive, with emergency management being their
first career of choice." The career directions that FEMA sees the new
generation of emergency managers taking "is a risk-based approach to
emergency management; having a focus on building disaster resistant
communities as a catalyst for a safer America; emphasizing social
vulnerability reduction, programmatically rooted in emergency management
fundamentals; performing strategic planning with jurisdictional
stakeholders; being life-long learners; maintaining a professional
library; joining professional associations; maintaining a broad range of
working contacts (applied network) to fulfill the multi- and
interdisciplinary requirements of the job."

The logic for the emphasis in a paradigm shift in higher education is
obvious, given that the threats from the hazards that face the North
America can immediately bring about billions of dollars in economic
losses and thousands of fatalities. The looming threat is that the "big
one" could occur along the Cascadia subduction zone. Estimates of the
damage that could result, for example, in Oregon from a magnitude-8.5
quake are well over \$12 billion to buildings (not including lifelines
such as bridges) and more than 13,000 casualties. Such figures can be
extrapolated into northwestern Canada (example, Vancouver area).
Scenarios, such as these, are ample justification that there is a need
for both an art and a science to reduce risk at the nature -- society
interface.

It is important to note that disaster research centers and
curriculum-based programs across the U.S. are applied and
multidisciplinary and they conduct research related to, and into, the
grass roots of communities. Considering a few examples, the Disaster
Research Center at the University of Delaware describes its program as
being based on field and survey research on group, organizational and
community preparation for, response to, and recovery from natural and
technological disasters and other community-wide crises. The Hazard
Reduction and Recovery Center (HRRC) at Texas A&M University indicates
that it engages in research on hazard mitigation, disaster preparedness,
response, and recovery. The staff of the HRRC is multidisciplinary in
nature and includes the expertise of architects, engineers, geographers,
psychologists, and sociologists. The HRRC provides access to hazards
information for homeowners, professionals, business investors, and the
academic community. The Hazards Research Lab at the University of South
Carolina is a research and graduate training lab focused on the use of
geographic information processing techniques in environmental hazards
analysis and management. As an example, the U.S.C. Hazards Research Lab
publications include items; such as, [A GIS-Based Hazards Assessment for
Georgetown County, South Carolina]{.underline}. They are also currently
working on the South Carolina Hazards Assessment working directly with
the South Carolina Division of Emergency Management. One of the
University programs offering a full curriculum is that of University of
North Texas (UNT) at Denton, Texas. Denton, Texas, is also the location
of the FEMA Region VI Headquarters, which serves as a partner. This UNT
program will be discussed below.

DISASTER STUDIES PROGRAMS: THE OLDEST AND THE NEWEST

The ongoing rise of disaster studies programs in the U.S. means that
each new program has the spotlight only momentarily. Still, the newest
program, as of the writing of this article, is the one at North Dakota
State University at Fargo. The oldest program appears to be at the
southern end of North America, being in Texas. The following is a report
on these two programs.

**The Newest Program:** The applied style of these higher education
programs is typified by the new Emergency Management Program at North
Dakota State University (NDSU), at Fargo, which works in partnership
with the North Dakota Division of Emergency Management. The NDSU program
requires its students to take four training courses from NDDEM in order
to graduate from NDSU. Additionally, NDSU conducts both a Master's and
Ph.D. program in emergency management. The NDSU emergency management
curriculum is described as: "Required core courses introduce students to
the nuts and bolts of emergency management. The first four courses below
are offered in association with the North Dakota Division of Emergency
Management and are all-day classes lasting two or three days. They are
alternately available in Fargo or Bismarck, ND." The new NDSU emergency
management faculty also attended the 2003 FEMA Higher Education
Conference.

**The Oldest Program:** The oldest program in North America is the
pioneering Emergency Administration and Planning Program (EADP) program
at the University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, founded in 1983. An
immediate similarity with A-DES is that EADP is located in a city which
also houses a governmental disaster management organization, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region VI (the Manitoba Emergency
Services College is housed in Brandon, to the benefit of the A-DES
program). This EADP program has demonstrated much success in its 20
years of existence and is worth reviewing in this article. This unique
degree program has drawn students from Alaska, California, Florida,
Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Washington, Wyoming and others.  International students
have come from Barbados, Canada, the Dominican Republic, Ethiopia,
Germany, Japan, Nigeria, Sweden, and Taiwan.

An examination of the ability of EADP to place students into
professional employment shows that 625 students have earned the bachelor
of science degree in Emergency Administration and Planning.  Graduates
and have obtained jobs with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), American Red Cross
National Headquarters, the State of Texas Division of Emergency
Management, State of Tennessee Emergency Management Agency, Texas
Instruments, Perot Systems, SAIA Motor Freight, CURA Emergency Services,
local emergency management offices, local Red Cross Chapters, etc.  At
the international level, graduates work as disaster planners for the Red
Crescent in Qatar, flood plain managers in Bangladesh, and Red Cross
representatives in Kenya.  Others have even become the directors of
emergency management in Barbados and in Fiji.

Students at EADP founded the International Emergency Management Student
Association (IEMSA). The association is recognized by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency Higher Education Program and the President
of this association was a speaker at a plenary session of the FEMA
Higher Education Conference in June 405, 2003. This level of recognition
is noteworthy and is indicative of the coming together of students in
disaster studies in North America, in general.

**A BEGINNING IN CANADA:**

The first disaster studies program in Canada offering an undergraduate
degree is at Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada. The Applied
Disaster and Emergency Studies (A-DES) Program began in the Spring of
2001, when program funding was approved by the Province of Manitoba
(Council on Post-Secondary Education -- COPSE). The program proposal
with its multidisciplinary educational design was developed by Dr. Emdad
Haque, who, at the time, was the Chair of the Geography Department. Dr.
Haque left Brandon University later in 2001 to become the Director of
the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) at the University of Manitoba.
Development of the proposal and gaining its approval was met with
on-campus opposition by a vocal group largely within the science
faculty. Throughout the approval process; however, the voting was in
favor of program approval. A change in administration brought in new
senior university administrators who were in a position to insert their
feelings of having, or not having, such an applied program during the
implementation phase of the program. Brandon University implemented the
program by recruiting a Director / faculty member, and two additional
faculty to conduct the program. The implementation process basically
meant getting the program re-approved as courses that had been approved
during the approval of the program proposal now had to be reapproved
prior to being actually taught on campus. In some cases, courses
approved in the program proposal could only get re-approved on an
experimental basis, as experimental courses. Space needs for the
program, identified and approved in the program proposal, had to be
re-approved with a debate over approval for about a year.

The history of A-DES, at this point, is not lengthy. It began early in
2000 with the preparation of a Statement of Intent submitted from the
Faculty of Science / Dean of Science to the University Senate. The
Statement was approved by the Senate and the Board of Governors and
accepted by COPSE, prior to formal proposal submittal by Dr. Louis P.
Visentin, President of Brandon University, on January 24, 2001. This
formal proposal was approved by COPSE with minor changes. COPSE set the
level of funding on March 16, 2001. Advertisement for a Director and
faculty began and applicants were interviewed over the school year 2001
-- 2002. The Director, Dr. Fred May, came onboard in August 2002. The
other two faculty, Drs. Ali Asgary and Niru Nirupama, arrived in
February and August 2002. A Sessional Instructor and a Term Appointee
supplemented teaching in 2001 and 2002. In addition, six courses from
years one and two of the program were developed for distance education,
also using two contractors, John R. Lindsay (Manitoba Public Health) and
Dr. Laurie Pearce (University of British Columbia). Student enrolments
more than doubled from school year 2002-03 to 2003-04, and the number of
students declaring themselves A-DES majors approach 30; it appears that
the A-DES program is succeeding. Distance education courses made their
ways onto the internet. The new Canadian program is succeeding, as
planned in its original proposal.

A-DES THROUGH THE EYES OF THE PROVINCE OF MANITOBA:

The Manitoba Council on Post Secondary Education (COPSE), which funded
A-DES, describes A-DES, as follows:

"This program provides the skills and knowledge necessary to enable
graduates to intervene effectively in natural and man-made disasters
that occur throughout the world. Examples of disasters would be floods,
earthquakes, fires etc. Program graduates will be able to assist with
the emergency responses needed to manage the crisis, and then provide
support to the people affected by the disaster as they try to get their
lives back to normal" (Janet Wright, Ph.D., Dean of Science, Brandon
University, prepared for COPSE 2001/2002).

The following statements and bullets are extracted from the A-DES
program proposal submitted to the Council on Post-Secondary Education
(Brandon University A-DES Program Proposal, Haque, 2001):

"The ADES program represents a completely new direction for Brandon
University, responding to the 1993 Manitoba University Education Review
Commission\'s recommendations, and our current provincial educational
policy that **encourages universities to establish links with colleges
and applied sectors**." Note: Text made "bold" identifies the aspects of
the applied program that make it unique.

1.  Curriculum that will enable future emergency managers to accomplish
    their interdisciplinary work responsibilities, to understand the
    concepts and approaches in the **science of emergency management.**

2.  Curriculum to enable students to understand the main subjects of
    emergency and disaster studies.

3.  Learning environment that deals with **real-world problems and
    solutions** related to environmental risks, hazards, and disasters.

4.  Highly interactive, and **interdisciplinary curriculum.**

5.  Opportunity to apply their knowledge in a series of **practical
    exercises** emphasizing the development of personal and team skills,
    and human and organizational management.

6.  Solid foundation in the physical, biological, and social sciences
    relevant to the study of disaster issues within the framework of an
    interdisciplinary curriculum (i.e., **integration of knowledge from
    diverse areas**) that will enable students to develop the knowledge
    and experience necessary to conceptualize disaster and emergency
    issues from a **holistic perspective**.

7.  Provide students with a comprehensive understanding of the linkages
    between theoretical/ conceptual knowledge and **real-world
    phenomena**.

8.  Equip students with the necessary academic skills to enable them to
    critically analyse, successfully manage, and contribute to research
    and policy-making and planning processes.

9.  Provide students with **hands-on skills** to deal with \"global\"
    (all types) hazards, disasters, and emergencies that may arise with
    particular emphasis on those pertinent to the Prairies as well as
    modern, developed economies.

10. There is a clear need for **education, research and training** to
    better understand and cope with catastrophic disasters and
    emergencies.

11. The program offered by Brandon University, **in conjunction with the
    Manitoba Emergency Services College**, will emphasize an
    **integration between practical (hands-on) and theoretical aspects
    of disaster and emergency studies**.

12. The program will service all levels (i.e., provincial, regional
    \[Prairie\], and national) of **constituency of students and
    practitioners**."

**THE DIRECTION OF DISASTER STUDIES IN MANITOBA: THE ROBLIN REPORT:**

The Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies Program at Brandon University
met provincial educational priorities in being applied, closely tied to
Manitoba communities, and being career oriented. This information is of
value in examining the full North American perspective in disaster
studies programs. These priorities are outlined in the Roblin Report,
titled Roblin Report, Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba, [Doing
Things Differently]{.underline}, Report of the University Education
Review Commission, December 1993, and being compatible with the
Government Response to Roblin Report, [Doing Things
Differently]{.underline}, Response of the Government of Manitoba to the
Report of the University Education Review Commission, June 1994. It
appears a coincidence that the priorities established in the Roblin
Report appear in keeping with the rise of disaster studies programs in
both Canada and the United States. In the U.S., the rise of disaster
studies programs began in the mid-1990s. In Canada, the beginning of
A-DES was the Red River Flood of 1997. In both Canada and the U.S.,
disaster studies programs arose out of need and with the appearance of
high-tech employment markets in disaster management. The report
indicates that universities in Manitoba need to respond in a timely
fashion to a rapidly changing environment and to reinforce its capacity
to serve our society.

The guidance directs universities to develop new initiatives that the
times may require and provide greater contribution to the economic,
social, and cultural needs of society. Regarding research, the Roblin
Report states that "a more effective link between universities and the
community must be achieved"... "As far as we could ascertain from the
information available to us, self-directed research is only tenuously
linked to Manitoba\'s social, cultural and economic interests".
"Technology transfer is underdeveloped. This need not be so... We
recommend that better links be formed both by policy and infrastructure
to connect internally self-directed university research to Manitoba\'s
social, cultural and economic interests..."

The Roblin Report met with a favourable response by the government of
Manitoba, which published the Government Response to Roblin Report,
[Doing Things Differently]{.underline}, Response of the Government of
Manitoba to the Report of the University Education Review Commission,
June 1994.

As the provincial response made clear, "we live in challenging times
requiring that we do things differently and creatively. There is broad
recognition that our society is in the midst of unprecedented change.
The emerging society is driven by information technology and innovation.
This new environment compels our post-secondary institutions to embark
on a process of change, which will allow them to respond to the demands
of a very different society.... The challenge, therefore, is for our
institutions to change the way they do business: establishing program
priorities, **transforming the learning and research environments** by
**emphasizing multidisciplinary approaches**, **redefining
scholarship**, using **information technologies**, **creating active
partnerships with the public and private sectors of our society**,
**cooperating with other post-secondary institutions** and providing
quality education on campus, at home and in the workplace to full- and
part-time students. To meet the fiscal challenge and simultaneously
respond to the demands of the community will require nothing short of
re-engineering and redesigning the education enterprise so that
universities and community colleges can improve their **contribution to
the social, cultural and economic development of the province**."

Centres of Specialization:

"Government believes in creating centres of specialization as a
strategic investment for our future. These centres of specialization
will be **directly related to jobs** and to the economic growth
industries of our province as outlined in the government\'s **Framework
for Economic Growth**. These include health care, aerospace, information
and telecommunications, environmental industries, agri-food processing
and tourism. As of 2001, the Province added disaster and emergency
studies to this list. Additionally, it is crucial that the vast pool of
intellectual capital resident in the Arts, Sciences and Humanities be
brought to bear directly on the social, cultural and economic
development of the province."

### INDICATORS OF THE DIRECTIONS OF DISASTER STUDIES IN CANADA:

The organized effort to understand hazard and disaster studies in Canada
is new. This is evident in both the fact that the A-DES program is the
first of its type in Canada and, also, in the fact that any organization
of hazard and disaster researchers has yet to effectively take place. In
October 2003, several of the Canadian hazard and disaster studies
researchers gathered at the University of Toronto under the auspices of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This conference
represented an effort to organize Canada's hazards and disaster studies
researchers into one group and to relate them to the United States and
Europe. The group of about a dozen Canadian researchers met for a
working dinner to discuss the creation of a Canadian organization. As
with the organization of the conference, this meeting revolved around a
core group of researchers, including Drs. Emdad Haque, Natural Resources
Institute, University of Manitoba (formerly of Brandon University and
the principal creator of the A-DES program proposal) and David Etkin,
Environment Canada, Adaptation and Impacts Research Group, Institute for
Environmental Studies, University of Toronto. Drs. Etkin and Haque are
two of the three Editors of the recent publication, [An Assessment of
Natural Hazards and Disasters in Canada]{.underline} (Natural Hazards,
Vol, 28, nos. 2-3, 2003; Kluwer Academic Publishers). This recent
publication provides a view onto the contemporary directions of hazard
and disaster studies in Canada. The NATO conference provides a view onto
the types of researchers within NATO countries. The Canadian group is a
part of, and fits in purpose and scope within, this NATO group.

In the Editorial of [An Assessment of Natural Hazards and Disasters in
Canada]{.underline}, the editors referred back to July 1999 when members
of this group got together at the Natural Hazards Workshop run by the
Natural Hazards Research and Information Centre at Boulder, Colorado.
Regarding that meeting, they state that "We all felt that there were
significant risks in Canada, but also large gaps in our understanding of
these risks. Both from an academic perspective and from a desire to
serve the public good, it was felt that there was also a need to
undertake the first ever assessment of natural hazards and disasters in
Canada. Consequently, Chris Tucker (Office of Critical Infrastructure
Protection and Emergency Preparedness -- OCIPEP), Emdad Haque, and David
Etkin began the challenging task of engaging the Canadian hazards
community in this undertaking." This group created a Canadian Hazards
Assessment Project and solicited a set of background technical papers on
a wide range of interdisciplinary topics followed by a synthesis
document. Many of those papers were published in [An Assessment of
Natural Hazards and Disasters in Canada]{.underline}. A review of the
types of authors and papers demonstrates several important
considerations in Canadian disaster studies:

-   disaster studies in Canada are applied

-   the authors and co-authors represent a mix of institutional and
    private and public sectors, working together

-   topics selected are quite applied, relating to the real world.

Note: Events such as the development of the first hazard and disaster
assessment for Canada are historical events, fitting within the matrix
of historical events of the past few decades throughout North America.
The overall group of disaster studies academicians and researchers, some
mentioned in this study, certainly can be considered among the founders
and early developers of the art and science of disaster and emergency
studies.

This Canadian hazards and disaster assessment is asking the question "do
hazards and disasters exist, where do they exist, and why is it
important to understand about Canadian disasters"? This is a direct
parallel and indicative of the rise of a new art and science in Canada
called, for now, Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies. It is
noteworthy that although the formal names of other arts and sciences
have arisen over time (geology, physics, chemistry, psychology,
geography) that no acceptable single-word (see below) name has yet
arisen for applied disaster and emergency studies. Had "people from the
future" been able to go back in time and track down the forefathers of
geology, Nicholas Steno (1669), or Cuvier or Brogniart in the 1700s, and
asked them the name of the science they were involved in, they would not
have known. In other words, they could not have produced a
definition-answer like, "I am involved in the scientific study of the
origin, history, and structure of the earth, the structure of a specific
region of the earth\'s crust, and the scientific study of the origin,
history, and structure of the solid matter of a celestial body" and we
are calling it "Geology" which means "\[Medieval Latin
ge![](media/image1.png){width="6.25e-2in"
height="0.14583333333333334in"}logia, *study of earthly things*  : Greek
ge![](media/image1.png){width="6.25e-2in"
height="0.14583333333333334in"}-, *geo-* + Greek
-logi![](media/image2.png){width="7.291666666666667e-2in"
height="0.15625in"}, *-logy*.\] (The American Heritage® Dictionary,
2000)*.* Such a definition or technical explanation had to come much
later.

As an observation, if one were to ask the Canadian research group
meeting in 1999 in Boulder, Colorado, the same question our "time
traveler might have asked Steno, Cuvier, or Brogniart, I postulate they
would have an equally-difficult time producing a concise definition or
explanation of the technical details of this new art and science and
could not provide a single-word identifying the specific art and
science. Will a single term naming the art and science of disaster and
emergency studies arise? All one can say is that single-word names did
arise for the others, likely when they grew weary of repeating the many
syllables it took to state the descriptive explanation of what their
applied studies related to. They had to create a word, as did the
psychologists, physicists, geographers, sociologists, etc., who created
it long ago, when their art or science was maturing and gaining
definition. Current textbooks refer back to those who used descriptive
explanations of the arts and sciences as "founders" of the arts and
sciences.

Note: A single name, disastrology, has been proposed for the name of the
science of disaster studies **(**Masellis M., Ferrara M.M., Gunn S.W.A,
1999). The problem with this term is that it is rather reminiscent of
the term "astrology", with a prefix of "dis", latin, referring to
"apart" or "asunder". Thus, "disastrology" could refer to something
apart or asunder from astrology. Astrology being the study of the
positions and aspects of celestial bodies in the belief that they have
an influence on the course of natural earthly occurrences and human
affairs (American Heritage Dictionary, 2000). The single name for the
science of disaster studies should not be ambiguous, nor allied with a
controversial discipline.

The Table of Contents in "the assessment" lists the works of 39 authors
and coauthors in 18 separate articles. It is of value to see the
affiliations of these authors. Of these, 21 authors/coauthors are from
universities, 11 are from the public sector, and 7 are from the private
sector. Most of the 18 articles are coauthored with this mix of
academia, public and private sectors. If we assume that this mix of
sectors represents what is required to address hazard and disaster
studies in Canada (or North America in general), according to the
identified objective of filling the large gaps in understanding from
both an academic perspective and from a desire to serve the public good,
then we find ourselves in an applied research design very similar to the
design of the Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies program. The hiring
of A-DES faculty did focus on the backgrounds of applicants in emergency
management and their ability to network with institutions, public, and
private sector. This indicates that the design of A-DES is in keeping
with the research approaches being used nationwide in Canada to fill in
the gaps of knowledge for this first (pioneering) hazard and disaster
assessment in Canada.

GUIDANCE FOR THE NEED FOR A PARADIGM SHIFT IN DISASTER STUDIES
EDUCATION: DR. DENNIS MILETI AT MANITOBA DISASTER MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
(OCTOBER 2002):

At the November 2002 Manitoba Disaster Management Conference in
Winnipeg, the Keynote Presenter, Dennis Mileti, Ph.D., Director of the
Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado, Boulder, included the
following statement "don't you get it, you have been doing emergency
management wrong for all these years". His point was that approaches
used in North American Emergency Management are failing as disaster
losses continue to rise in spite of the development of government
emergency management programs and funding. He pointed to the obvious
need for professional emergency managers, trained in universities and
able to think in multi- and interdisciplinary ways. He stated to the
audience that "I dare say that no-one in this room is trained to think
that way" (in multi- and interdisciplinary terms). He followed up by
stating that what is needed is a new generation of emergency managers,
educated in universities and able to address and integrate the required
knowledge systems. He pointed out that dentists, for example, are
trained in universities, but that there had to be a first dentist
(discussed above).

DISASTER STUDIES CURRICULUM - EDUCATION OR TRAINING?

The A-DES program proposal refers to both education and training. Even
though the primary aim of the A-DES program is to educate students in
the broader aspects of disaster studies, it is obvious from the
beginning of the proposal that an important objective is toward career
objectives. Traditionally the terms \'education\' and \'training\' have
each had a specific focus. Education has been associated with gaining
knowledge for broad vocational, cultural and civic ends (e.g.
understanding the world and civilizing society). It has typically taken
place in the early stages of the life cycle in formal institutions such
as schools and universities. Training has more often taken place in
institutions oriented toward specific vocations, or in the work
environment, and been focused on developing or enhancing skills used in
the learner\'s work. However, in recent times the distinction between
education and training has diminished. Education is now seen as
extending beyond the formal institutions, and as continuing throughout
adult life. **It has become increasingly focused on economic and
vocational outcomes**, (e.g. on producing marketable skills). Similarly,
training now extends beyond vocational institutions and the workplace,
and is available in schools, with students able to study for vocational
certificates as part of their school work. Ultimately, education and
training are both vital supports to the lifelong learning process. They
both equally enable individuals to take their place in a skilled and
changing labour force, to lead fulfilling lives, and to become active
members of the community.

Training initiatives are attached to the A-DES program through
interactions with partners; such as, the Manitoba Emergency Services
College (MESC) or the Manitoba Emergency Measures Organization. Training
means a more narrowly focused program that leads to high proficiency in
a specific skill. It prepares students for a particular job or activity
but provides less broad perspective and flexibility of approach. On the
other hand, education, as we see it in the A-DES program, enables
students to see the forest and the trees. It encourages general
approaches to problem solving as experienced in practical exercises and
inculcates ways of thinking that are productive, effective, and
rewarding. An education prepares students to deal with and solve a broad
range of problems, and to choose which problems are important and which
are not. Thus, from the perspective of education, A-DES students are
educated in principles; such as, disaster systematics, comparative and
relational concepts and terminology, historical comparisons, and
interdisciplinary applications of knowledge from a wide variety of
disciplines, all aimed at better protecting life and property during
times of concerns about hazards and during disasters and emergencies.
What could be of greater value given that disaster costs throughout
North America are escalating, as is threat to life. The A-DES faculty
can approach disaster education from the perspective of earth science,
disaster and hazards management, engineering, and urban planning, but
with the wide array of multidisciplinary courses required, the
educational benefits seem almost endless (Moore, 1998;

CONCLUSIONS:

The history of disaster studies arose from seeds planted from the
research of individuals (initially not attached to disaster studies
programs). This article has not attempted to list these researchers,
except as highlighted, although many are presented in Cutter (1994).
Research needs increased due to the number of disasters and major loss
of life and property and the availability of funding. Research resulted
in knowledge about disasters that found its way eventually into
classrooms, but often not directly into the offices of disaster
management practitioners. As universities became aware of employment
markets, some decided to teach students in more organized ways and
programs resulted. The first teaching programs came about to educate
students for employment markets and they were successful in placing
students into emergency management employment.

There are two basic methods by which disaster studies programs are
conducted in universities. One is where research is conducted but
teaching is not a focus. The other is where both teaching and research
are the foci. Each of these methods happen under a variety formats. The
basic research focus has a longer and more pervasive history and many of
these researchers will indeed find themselves highlighted in future
disaster studies textbooks. It is easier for individual researchers to
take an interest in disaster studies than to create teaching programs.
Researchers can publish at will on topics of interest. The establishment
of new teaching programs is a lengthy bureaucratic process requiring
much consideration about funding, program design, assigning space, and
the hiring of faculty. The successful establishment of a teaching
program requires a majority of political support, not only by the
faculty, but also by the university administration. A change in
administration can change the support. There are two stages in the
establishment of a teaching program. The first is the design of a
program proposal (on paper), and obtaining funding and political
support. The second is the implementation of the approved program,
creating the program within the university, moving into office space,
hiring faculty, and obtaining materials and equipment to support the
teaching of courses and conducting research.

The appearance of new academic disciplines in universities share similar
experiences in their early periods of establishment. New programs arrive
in the midst of established departments and faculties. Being established
means that departmental budgets and staffing already exist, and are
often strained. Newly arriving programs must bring with them their own
budgets. New disciplines can be opposed by the establishment, even
because they are new or because they are applied, and they can be
opposed twice, once during the development and approval of the program
proposal and once during program implementation. Several teaching
programs have arisen successfully and are listed on the Federal
Emergency Management Agency website on the webpages of the FEMA Higher
Education Program. Teaching programs in the U.S. have come to be
numerous with as many as 100 additional programs being designed. In
Canada, only one teaching program has arisen (in the process of
implementation), that being at Brandon University in Brandon, Manitoba,
Canada. There are rumors of other such programs being considered in
Canada. The increase in numbers of programs in North America means
increasing employment competition. Employment may only come to the
best-educated and prepared. Excellent teaching may not be enough, but
acquaintance with technology and disaster management programs and
systems is also necessary. Another necessity is a relationship between
teaching programs and disaster management agencies and offices in
corporations.

The relationship between academic applied disaster programs and
government emergency management agencies or offices is an interesting
one. If one listens to the statements of Dennis Mileti (discussed
above), as provided at the Manitoba Disaster Management Conference,
there appears to be both a discovery and confrontational relationship,
accompanying the need for a paradigm shift. There is wisdom in Mileti's
statements and the doorway to compatibility must build on his
statements. The foundation for a compatible relationship between
academia and disaster management practitioners lies in win-win
relationships. There are benefits in hiring graduates who chose disaster
studies as a first career choice and who spent four years, or more,
studying the roots, trunk, and branches of emergency management before
arriving on the job. In the case of multidisciplinary disaster studies
programs, future employers gain new employees who understand the
relationship of sociology, psychology, geography, geology, political
science, management, etc. to the management of both hazards and
disasters.

At present, students are being educated by self-learned teachers lacking
degrees in disaster studies. If disaster studies curriculum-based
programs are successful, then there will be a time when students with
advanced degrees in disaster studies will themselves teach future
students. It will be routine for disaster services agencies to require a
degree in disaster studies (or emergency management), in order to be
hired. There will be a new type of relationship, which will bond applied
disaster academic programs with government, for the first time. This
will provide a continuing interaction between applied disaster research
and its application in government and business. In a time when more is
being required of hazards and disaster managers due to increasing
technology, threats and risk, the flow of multi- and inter-disciplinary
information and discovery is essential.

The required knowledge to protect people and property from increasing
and more powerful disasters lies within established university
disciplines. It was the sociologist F.H. Giddings at Columbia University
who taught Samuel Henry Prince, who conducted the first disaster study
at the nature -- society interface, that the theories of sociology could
be applied to disaster studies. This applies not only to the theories of
sociology, but also to those of psychology, political science,
geography, geology, genetics, and many others. The complete hazard or
disaster manager must be equal to the sum of the parts of knowledge
required. Can any hazard or disaster manager know enough, considering
what is at stake? The study and understanding of hazards requires a
university-level effort, as does the study of disasters. The
understanding of the relationship of nature to society, and vice-versa,
requires considerable knowledge in the arts and sciences. It seems
reasonable that academic institutions would readily agree that there
could be no more noble effort than to educate students in the kinds of
knowledge it takes to protect life and property from the forces of
nature and man.

##### BIBLIOGRAPHY

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition*.* Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by
Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Applied Disaster and Emergency Studies, Formal Program Proposal,
submitted to the Manitoba Council on Post-Secondary Education by Brandon
University President Louis P. Visentin, Ph.D. to Don Robertson, Ph.D.,
Chair (COPSE), on January 24, 2001.

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2001, Measuring Well-Being,: Framework
for Australian Social Statistics, Chapter 5, Education and Training,
Defining Education and Training.

<http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/7f76f83d321f5539ca256b5f0080424b?OpenDocument>

Blanchard, Wayne, Ph.D., Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Higher Education Project Update, June 4, 2003

<http://www.training.fema.gov/emiweb/downloads/AgendaHiEdConf2003.doc>

The Commission (1993). *Manitoba University Education Review Commission
Report -- Post Secondary Education in Manitoba: Doing Things
Differently: Report of the University Education Review Commission.*
Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Cutter, Susan, 1994, [Environmental Risks and Hazards]{.underline}, pub.
Pearson Education.

Dott Jr., Robert H. and Roger L. Batten, 1981, *[Evolution of the
Earth]{.underline}*, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.

Drabek, Thomas E., 1996, [Social Dimensions of Disaster]{.underline},
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Course Manual.

Etkin, David; Haque, C. Emdad; and Brooks, Gregory R. (eds)

[An Assessment of Natural Hazards and Disasters in Canada]{.underline},
2003, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Gottesman, Irving I, 2002, [A Behavioral Genetics
Perspective]{.underline}, in Behavioral Genetics in the Post-Genomic
Era, Robert Plomin, John C. Defries, Ian W. Craig, and Peter McGuffil,
Eds; pub. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.

Haque, E, 2001, Formal Program Proposal, Applied Disaster and Emergency
Studies Program, Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada,
submitted to Manitoba Council on Post-Secondary Education.

The Manitoba Council on Post-Secondary Education (COPSE), New Programs,
2001/2002,

<http://www.copse.mb.ca/en/whatsnew/newprograms/new_programs2001.htm>

Masellis M., Ferrara M.M., Gunn S.W.A, 1999, [Fire Disaster And Burn
Disaster: Planning And Management]{.underline}, Annals of Burns and Fire
Disasters - vol. XII - n0 2 - June 1999.

McCullough, David, [Johnstown Flood]{.underline}, 1968, publ.
Touchstone.

McGough, Michael R., [The 1889 Flood -- Johnstown, Pennsylvania,
2002]{.underline}, Thomas Publications

Meinhold, Stephen, 2003, FEMA Higher Education Conference Report, Hazard
Mitigation Partnerships Between Higher Education Institutions and
Communities, University of North Carolina at Wilmington.

More, John Henry, 1998, Education Versus Training, Journal of Chemical
Education, vol. 75, no. 2, p 135). (Note: Dr. Moore is on the faculty at
the University of Wisconsin at Madison, WI).

Prince, Samuel Henry, 1920, [Catastrophe and Social Change]{.underline},
Doctoral Dissertation, Columbia, University, published 1920 and
re-published in 1926 and again in 1968.

Quarantelli, E.L, 1988, Disaster Studies: [An Analysis of the Social
Historical FactorsAffecting the Development of Research in the
Area]{.underline}, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and
Disasters, vol. 5 (3), pp. 285-310.

Shappee, Nathan D., 1940, [A History of Johnstown and the Great Flood of
1889; A Study of Disaster and Rehabilitation. Pittsburgh,
PA]{.underline}, University of Pittsburgh, unpub. Doctoral Dissertation,
1940.

Swan, Neil, 1999, Canada Earthquake Loss Estimation, Geological Survey
of Canada, Open File Report 1364.

White, Gilbert, 1973, Natural Hazards Research, from [Directions in
Geography]{.underline}, R.J. Chorley (Ed.), London: Metheun, pp.
193-216.