Natural Hazard Observer Nov 2005

Home Browse Search

LI Ll practitioner communities, working within institutional restrictions and around them when necessary, supporting the efforts to create a new strata between the research group and the practitioner group, and supporting in- creased personal and professional interaction between the two groups.' It is time that we create more than a dialogue between researchers and practitioners. We must create a single disaster response community that no longer accepts two separate cultures— research and practice. Our stereo- types of each other must end. Despite the obstacles, and as has been demonstrated in past emergencies, local people, grass roots organiza- tions, and institutions did and are doing remarkable, crea- tive, and wonderful things (e.g., 65 grassroots organiza- tions have come together in a collaborative effort to re- build Louisiana). Adopting a participatory research ap- proach that also incorporates these valuable community resources into the process takes this community building a step further. In his article, "Participatory Research De- mocracy and Community," Peter Park says of participa- tory research that "first, it directly addresses people's practical problems that arise in their daily struggles for material, psychic, and social well being. Second, it is the people with the problem to solve who do the actual re- search. Third, the goal of participatory research is to ac- tually bring about change by engaging in beneficial social activities."' Kathleen Tierney echoed this sentiment when she stated that, "the strength and resilience of our society lies in community -based organizations, neighborhood as- sociations, nongovernmental organizations, schools, work- places, faith -based organizations, and the millions who vol- unteer to serve their communities in dealing with extreme events. s' Among the many things to learn from this disaster, one key lesson is that the survivors, caregivers, and their communities need us all to be working together as one community, with different tasks but a single goal. In the world of disaster recovery, as we believe Park would sug- gest, there can be no clear distinction between researcher, practitioner, activist, and survivor. The survivors, their caregivers, and their communities must be heard. To the degree that we can learn to work together we will better hear their voice. Kristina J. Peterson Presbyterian Disaster Assistance Center for Hazards Assessment, Response, and Technology (CHART) University of New Orleans `Anderson, Mary, and Peter Woodrow. 1989. Rising from the ashes: Development strategies in times of disaster. Boul- der, CO: Westview Press. 2Laska, Shirley. 2004. What if Hurricane Ivan had not missed New Orleans? Natural Hazards Observer 29(2): 5 -6. Tothergill, Alice. 2000. Knowledge transfer between re- searchers and practitioners. Natural Hazards Review 1(2): 91 -98. 'Park, Peter. 1997. Participatory research, democracy and community. Practicing Anthropology 19(3): 8 -13. 'Tierney, Kathleen. 2003. The challenges we face: Reflec- tions on the 2003 hazards workshop. Natural Hazards Ob- server 28(1): 1 -3. The Continuing Significance of Race and Class among Houston Hurricane Katrina Evacuees More than a quarter century ago, William J. Wilson published his controversial book, The Declining Signifi- cance of Race, in which he asserted that conditions were improving for middle -class African Americans and thus, the significance of race was declining in America.' Over a decade later, Joe Feagin published his now famous reply to Wilson, arguing that race remains an issue of continu- ing significance, particularly with respect to perceptions of antiblack discrimination in the United States.2 Recent experiences of Hurricane Katrina evacuees in Houston, Texas, highlight the continuing significance of race and class in America and offer new opportunities to explore issues of inequality within a catastrophic context. While Hurricane Katrina provided many significant challenges to disaster researchers, preliminary observations highlight the significance of race, class, looting, evacuation, shel- tering, and housing. Background On August 29, Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana creating a catastrophic situation that resulted in the prolonged inoperability of many Gulf Coast residential communities as well as facilities and operational bases for numerous emergency organizations.' The magnitude of this event, particularly in the city of New Orleans, re- sulted in a massive evacuation from a couple of large shel- ters at the New Orleans Convention Center and the Lou- isiana Superdome to Reliant Park in Houston, Texas, be- ginning August 31. Reliant Park is a sprawling four site property in downtown Houston that consists of Reliant Stadium, which was not used for evacuees, the Reliant Astrodome, Reliant Arena, and Reliant Center, each of which became large shelters. Additionally, the George R. Brown Convention Center, approximately six miles from Reliant Park, was also used for evacuees from Louisiana. At its peak on September 4, the four sites (Astrodome, Arena, Center, and Convention Center) sheltered ap- proximately 27,100 Hurricane Katrina evacuees. With funds from the Natural Hazards Center's Quick Response program, interviews were conducted with 46 evacuees at Reliant Park to gather perishable data regard- ing evacuees' experiences and their intentions to rebuild or relocate in Louisiana in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Based on that reconnaissance trip, this article highlights some preliminary observations on issues related to race, class, looting, evacuation, sheltering, and housing. 11 Natural Hazards Observer November 2005