Abstract
This chapter pursues the investigation on traces of risk in the landscape, and through memories of longtime residents. A discussion of the Oakland Fire and the legacy of the 1906 earthquake are used as example of the unfolding of a natural disaster and the subsequent question of definitions and reconstruction. Controversies about scale and the legacies of past disasters, urban practices inherited from the time of the region’s early urban planning, and relationships between residents and their territory add a further layer of complexity to the definition of earthquake risk. Building on these elements, the chapter discusses the theoretical foundation of a concept of “network of attention to the risk” and how it connects with individuals that nurture it: the Earthquake Junkies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
After the quotation, the discussion continued as follows:
“C: What about 9/11?
M: Whoa…5000 people, it was not a lot of people! It has a psychological impact in the fact that Americans felt that their country was impacted, but that is very different from the very impact of the disaster. The real impact of the disaster was a tiny, little part of Manhattan. I mean, nobody lost power across the river, you know. It was a very small number of people. There was inconvenience relative to the size of Manhattan and the size of [New York]. And so those things, they don’t affect people on the same level. We did not have an earthquake of the scale of the one [that] affected China, where you have 5 million people displaced, or Haiti where you have 2 million people displaced. We hadn’t had this sort of disaster in the U.S.” (Interview, M., 2009).
- 2.
Self (2005) has shown that the construction of the city itself is entrenched between conflicting movements that emerged from the progressive suburbanization of the city: defensive Black Power community politics on one side, and, on the other, the White conservative homeowner associations. As Self noted, “In 1945 boosters in Oakland envisioned their metropolis in the tradition of California Urbanist, as a verdant, interconnected garden that combined suburban growth and urban vitality. Thirty years later the Black Panthers Party and other African American activists viewed Oakland as an exploited colony that was controlled from the suburban perimeter” (Self, 2005: 4).
- 3.
Building up on Mike Davis’ essay, “The Case for Letting Malibu Burn” (Davis, 1998).
- 4.
Accomplished via financial remuneration by the homeowners’ insurances companies.
- 5.
To the panel of interviewees, the fire has had a particular meaning: some of those interviewed had lost their homes during the event, and many had relatives and friends that had been living in the Oakland Hills at the time of the fire.
- 6.
Together, these ideas and principles are probably what have earned the community the nick-name of “Nuts Hills,” used by some.
- 7.
Some of these houses remain today, mostly visible in the Panoramic Hills, where residents have fiercely defended their space from encroachment.
- 8.
The FEMA report was realized by a private consulting firm, Tridata Corporation, which, according to its website, “is one of the nation’s leading public safety consulting firms. We specialize in research, analyses, and management studies in fire protection and emergency medical services, prevention and preparedness, and homeland security. Our array of fire and emergency research extends across the U.S., supporting the federal government; state, municipal, and local governments; and the private sector” (http://www.sysplan.com/capabilities/fire_ems/index.html).
- 9.
Firefighting units from different counties were unable to use Oakland hydrants because of the differences between their hoses and the sizes of the hydrant outlets.
- 10.
In an interesting move, some of the quotations have a status between several modes or types of narrative: they are journalistic accounts rewritten from personal correspondence or diaries, or they are in the form of biographic novels. In each case, the literary forms are the necessary condition for the transmission of what matters to the authors: the transmission of an emotion and an experience.
- 11.
“It was a windy, hot, dry day, and 2,500 houses went up, just ‘poof.’ […] And then there was the rest of day, where it’s kind of moved slowly, but gradually. Because the wind died down. And it wasn’t until the wind died down that they were able to put the perimeter around it, and stop it” (S.14, 2009).
- 12.
“Women in our society, as part of our domesticity, act as social connectors. We are, to a large extend, the linesmen of our ties and the ‘bondsmen’ of our everyday social circles” (Hoffman, 1998: 59).
- 13.
The term “space of risk” was coined by Michael Taussig in an influential and provocative essay that tackled the culture of terror created by the colonial exploitation of rubbers trees in the Putumayo Region in Peru. In the context of Taussig’s study, “the space of death is here the Indians, African and white gave birth to the new world” (Taussig, 2009: 5). In Taussig’s research, the space of death is defined as a web where European and Indian understandings of evil and the underworld, their cultural backgrounds came into contact with one another, and metamorphosed each other: “The space of death is preeminently a space of transformation: through the experience of coming close to death there well may be a more vivid sense of life; through fear there can come not only a growth itself consciousness but also fragmentation, then loss of self-comforting authority” (Taussig, 2009: 7).
- 14.
“In 1934, geographer Henri Lefebvre noted: ‘Upon the basis of acts repeated billions of times (practical, technical and social acts, like the acts of buying and selling today), customs, ideological interpretations, cultures and lifestyles erect themselves. The materialist analysis of these styles has progressed very little’.” (Lefebvre, 1934: 72, as quoted by Thrift, 2008: 147).
- 15.
“Just before 5:12 a.m. on April 18, 1906, a magnitude 4.0 foreshock on the San Andreas Fault quietly rumbled throughout the Bay Area. About 20 seconds later, a magnitude 7.8 to 7.9 temblor began to rupture, with its epicenter below the Pacific Ocean, just 3 kilometers west of Ocean Beach, San Francisco. Violent shaking swept throughout the entire region and included 17 serious aftershocks within 1 hour. The quake ruptured 477 kilometers of the San Andreas Fault between San Juan Bautista to the south and Cape Mendocino to the north. [By comparison, the Bay Area’s 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake had a rupture length of only about 35 kilometers and one-thirtieth the energy.] The rupture propagated up to 5 kilometers per second. The amount of horizontal displacement between the Pacific and North American plates varied from 0.5 to 9.7 meters. The earthquake was felt from southern Oregon to Los Angeles and inland as far East as central Nevada. Kevin Starr, professor of history at the University of Southern California and California State librarian emeritus, described the earthquake during a presentation to Lawrence Livermore employees last April. He termed the quake ‘one of the greatest catastrophes in U.S. urban areas.’ In all, more than 28,000 buildings were destroyed, many of them unreinforced structures that collapsed instantly. From a population of about 400,000, the earthquake killed approximately 3,000 people and left 225,000 homeless” (Heller, 2006).
- 16.
Looking at pictures taken directly after the earthquake but before the fire, Tobriner has established a new estimation of the 1906 destruction. In doing so, he has also contested what “many scholar and popular historians have accepted and repeated [namely] the idea that San Francisco of the 1860s denied the existence of seismic danger […]. However, historical records show that architects, engineers, and even everyday citizens understood the consequences of the earthquake of the 1860s and tried to inventory the damages, to understand what had happened, retrofit building to resist future earthquake and to build earthquake resistant structures” (Tobriner, 2006: 35).
- 17.
The last survivors, who were very young at the time of the disaster, have passed away in recent years.
- 18.
“The earthquake shook down in San Francisco hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of walls and chimneys. But the conflagration that followed burned up hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of property. There is no estimating within hundreds of millions the actual damage wrought. Not in history has a modern imperial city been so completely destroyed. San Francisco is gone. Nothing remains of it but memories and a fringe of dwelling-houses on its outskirts. Its industrial section is wiped out. Its business section is wiped out. Its social and residential section is wiped out. The factories and warehouses, the great stores and newspaper buildings, the hotels and the palaces of the nabobs, are all gone. Remains only the fringe of dwelling houses on the outskirts of what was once San Francisco” (Tobriner, 2006: 197).
- 19.
James’ perspective is very different from the one used by Freud in the years following James’ Principles of Psychology (1890), followed by Psychology: The Briefer Course, in 1892. The relation between Freud and James is investigated well in a paper by Barbalet (2007). Also, though he recognized that Freud’s work represents the future of research in psychology, he expressed reticence about what he calls Freud’s “fixed ideas.” James wrote, “I can make nothing in my own case of his dream theories and obviously symbolism is a most dangerous method” (as quoted in Barbalet, 2007: 41).
- 20.
As we shall see later, this idea of a “mode of action” being, at the same time, active and passive is one of the main characteristics of the ANT concept of “attachment.”
- 21.
As I shall discuss later, James’ theory is important in decision-making theory. In most circumstances, we are forced to decide without knowing the outcome of the situation. It is what James called the “forced option,” a concept which, as we shall see, is useful in the context of facing a risk.
- 22.
Barbalet also noted that James’ last book, Some Problems of Philosophy (1911), unfinished at the time of his death, is a treatise on metaphysics, in spite of the anti-metaphysics of his first propositions. Even if we are not pursuing the same objective of dismissing metaphysics, I believe that James’ account of emotions and social life is still noteworthy.
- 23.
“Philosophy has only ever generated differences by taking being qua being as a starting point (the Copernican revolution never happened: philosophy is still geocentric). It should be possible to adopt another position by ‘trying out the Other’. This inquiry into the different ways of altering certainly has something empirical about it; in any case, it should stick as closely as possible to what is given in experience (in the full sense of the second empiricism, not the limited version of the first). The number of modes is greater than two, so we will ignore the subject/object dualism and call an end to the bifurcation of nature, not through going beyond it (that would only be counting to three) but through erasing it in a thousand different ways. The modes are of equal dignity; they are the product of a specific history—I would add of an historical anthropology—which does not aim to define a general ontology” (Latour, 2011: 316).
- 24.
For instance, Gauss has “employed relative conception of space to show that ‘activities and objects…define special field influence’…Thus spatial properties cannot be distinguished from object ‘in’ space and space itself can only be understood as a system of relation” (D. Harvey, as quoted by J. Murdoch, 1998: 358).
- 25.
As much as this chapter proposes to take into consideration articulations across the interactions between space and “modes of existence,” we should keep in mind that this is also because boundaries exist between the self and the world, between I and the others—thus, that, specifically, “otherness” can exist. In this sense, it is important that the reticular organization of the network also bears the mark of this reality.
- 26.
“Attention, ce qui, pour certains, relève d’un commerce libre par rapport aux catégories du devoir, de ce qui ne peut être enfreint sans que, par la même, ils se trouvent séparés de ce qui fait d’eux des humains” (Stengers, 2002: 28).
- 27.
In other writings, Stengers has called for our attention as a matter of civic duty: the necessary attention or awareness of our environment, which is a call echoed by authors concerning the question of political ecology and the consequences of the 2008 global financial crisis (see Hache, 2011; Serres, 2009).
- 28.
“James indicated that there are a great many categories of fringe experiences, not just one. However, he did not attempt an exhaustive list, or a systematic analysis of their relations to each other, or to other mental phenomena. He offered a few examples: 1. feelings of familiarity (p. 252). 2. feelings of knowing; e.g., as in the ‘tip-of-the-tongue’ experience (p. 251) 3. feelings of relation; these are subjective qualities associated with the relations between objects or ideas, as indicated by words such as ‘and,’ ‘or,’ ‘if,’ and ‘but.’ James says, ‘We ought to say a feeling of “and”…quite as readily as we say a feeling of cold…’ (p. 245). 4. feelings of action tendency; e.g., the intention to say so-and-so, just before it is articulated (p. 253). 5. attitudes of expectancy; the commands, ‘wait,’ ‘look,’ ‘hark,’ elicit distinct feelings of the domain from which a new impression is to come (p. 250). 6. feelings of ‘rightness’ or being ‘on-the-right-track’: this is a feeling that the content currently in the nucleus of awareness is congruent in some global way with our current goal structure (what James calls the ‘topic’ of our thought)” (Galin, 1994). The tip-of-the-tongue experience is particularly interesting, as it shows the progressive building up of the psychoanalytical theory between William James and Sigmund Freud. For James, “This state of our consciousness is peculiar. There is a gap therein: but no mere gap. It is a gap this is intensively active. A sort of wraith of the name is in it, beckoning us in a given direction, making us at moments tingle with the sense of our closeness, and then letting us sink back without the longed-for term. If wrong names are proposed to us, this singularity gap acts immediately to negate them…and the gap of one word does not feel like the gap of another, all empty of content as both might seem necessarily to be when described as gaps” (James, [1890] 1950: 251–252, quoted by Galin, 1994: 379). Galin notes that James’ dual construction of awareness had limited impact between contemporary psychologists and cognitivists. The arguments against it have been the extremely limited time period during which the complex relationship between the fringes and the nucleus operate. A second argument has been the too-limited elements of definition between the fringe and the nucleus. Here, Galin argues that, “There must be some qualities more fundamental that definiteness that make the fringe information unsuitable for the purpose served by the nucleus information, and vice versa” (Galin, 1994: 13).
- 29.
The expression is borrowed from Emile Benveniste (1973).
- 30.
- 31.
Hennion firmly inscribes this in his opposition to a sociology of culture, for which these moments “are directly denounced as ritual whose principal function is less to make amateurs ‘feel’ than to make them ‘believe’” (Hennion, 2007: 98).
- 32.
First developed by Latour in 1999, the quotation of attachment has been comically illustrated by the Spanish artist Quino. In his drawing, an emblematic little girl, Mafalda, says to her father, who is smoking a cigarette, “I thought the cigarette was smoking you.” The humor here is based on the question of relations, according to the dialectical construction of being either active or passive; meaning that one is either the master of an object or is dependent on it.
References
Adler, P. (1992). Fire in the hills. Auto-published.
Amador, F. (2004). The causes of 1755 Lisbon earthquake on Kant. Actas VIII Congreso de La Sociedad Espanola de Historia de Las Ciencias Y de Los Tecnicos, 485–495. Retrieved from http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/dcfichero_articulo?codigo=1090088.
Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2007). Cultural-economy and cities. Progress in Human Geography, 31(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507075361.
Barbalet, J. (2007). Classical pragmatism, classical sociology: William James, religion and emotion. In P. Baert & B. Turner (Eds.), Pragmatism and European social theory (pp. 20–21). Oxford: The Bardwell Press.
Bennett, J. (2004). The force of things: Steps toward an ecology of matter. Political Theory, 32(3), 347–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591703260853.
Benveniste, E. (1973). Problems in general linguistics. In Problems in general linguistics (p. 317). Miami: University of Miami Press.
Bessy, C., & Chateauraynaud, F. (1995). Experts et Faussaires. Paris: Métailié.
Bingham, N., & Thrift, N. (2000). Thinking space. In M. Crang & N. Thrift (Eds.), Thinking space (pp. 281–301). London: Routledge.
Bird, E. A. R. (1987). The social construction of nature: Theoretical approaches to the history of environmental problems. Environmental Review, 11(4), 255–264.
Coen, D. (2013). The earthquake observers: Disaster science from Lisbon to Richter. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cutter, S. (2005). Are we asking the right questions? In R. Perry & E. L. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster? New answer to old questions (pp. 39–49). Philadelphia: Xlibris.
Datson, L., & Galison, P. (2010). Objectivity. Cambridge: Zone Books.
Davis, M. (1998). Ecology of fear: Los Angeles and the imagination of disasters. New York: Vintage Books.
de Certeau, M. (1988). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Demeritt, D. (2002). What is the “social construction of nature”? A typology and sympathetic critique. Progress in Human Geography, 26(6), 767–790. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132502ph402oa.
Depraz, N. (2013). Attention et Affection: la micro-genèse husserlienne de l’attention à la lumière des perspectives empiriques de Stumpf, James, de Külpe et de Titchener. In Phenomenology 2005, Vol. 3: Selected essays from Euro-Mediterranean area, Part 1 (English, Spanish and French Edition, pp. 103–135). Bucharest: Zeta Books.
Dynes, R. R. (1971). The dialogue between Voltaire and Rousseau on the Lisbon earthquake: The emergence of social science view (No. DE 19716).
Dynes, R. R. (1997). The Lisbon earthquake in 1755: Contested meaning in the first modern disaster (No. #255).
Favier, R., & Granet-Abisset, A.-M. (2009). Society and natural risk in France, 1500–2000: Changing historical perspectives. In C. Mauch & C. Pfister (Eds.), Natural disasters cultural response (pp. 103–136). Lanham: Lexington Book.
Fressoz, J. (2007). Beck back in the 19th century: Towards a genealogy of risk society. History and Technology, 23(4), 333–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341510701527419.
Galin, D. (1994). The structure of awareness: Contemporary applications of William James’ forgotten concept of fringe. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 15(4), 375–400.
Genthes, A. (1936). As I remember. Retrieved from http://www.zpub.com/sf/history/ag/ag-asi-10.html.
Gilbert, C. (2007). Crisis analysis: Between normalization and avoidance. Journal of Risk Research, 10(7), 925–940. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870701504731.
Gomart, E., & Hennion, A. (1999a). A sociology of attachment: Music amateurs, drug users. The Editorial Board of The Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03490.x.
Gomart, E., & Hennion, A. (1999b). A sociology of attachment: Music amateurs, drug users. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network theory and after (pp. 1–28). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hache, E. (2011). Ce à quoi nous tenons. Propositions pour une écologie pragmatique (Les empech). Paris: La Decouverte.
Hansen, G. (1989). Denial of disaster: The untold story and photographs of the San Francisco earthquake of 1906. San Francisco: Cameron & Company.
Harvey, D. (1997). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Oxford: Blackwell.
Heller, A. (2006). Re-creating the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Retrieved from https://www.llnl.gov/str/Sep06/Rodgers.html.
Hennion, A. (2004a). Pragmatics of taste. In M. Jacobs & N. Hanrahan (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to the sociology of culture (pp. 131–144). Oxford: Blackwell.
Hennion, A. (2004b). Une sociologie des attachements. D’une sociologie de la culture à une pragmatique de l’amateur. Sociétés. Pratiques Musicales, 3(85), 9–24.
Hennion, A. (2007). Those things that hold us together: Taste and sociology. Cultural Sociology, 1(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975507073923.
Hoffman, S. (1998). Eve and Adam among the embers: Gender patterns after the Oakland Berkeley firestorm. In E. Enarson & B. Hern Morrow (Eds.), The gendered terrain of disaster: Through women’s eyes (pp. 55–61). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.
James, W. (1890). Classics in the history of psychology. Henry Holt and Company. Retrieved from https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/prin11.htm.
James, W. (1906). On some mental effects of the earthquake. The Youth’s Companion. Reprinted in James, H., Jr, 1911, Memories and Studies (H. James, Jr.) Longmans, Green, & Co. (Vol. June). New York.
Keeley, J. (2005). Fire history of the San Francisco East Bay region and implications for landscape patterns. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 14, 285–296.
Kingston, M. H. (2003). The fifth book of peace. New York: First Vintage International Edition.
Latour, B. (1991). Nous n’avons jamais été modernes. Essai d’anthropologie symétrique (Poche). Paris: La Découverte.
Latour, B. (1993). The pasteurisation of France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (2005). What is the style if matters of concerns. In Spinoza Lectures (p. 27).
Latour, B. (2009). Sur le Culte Moderne des Dieux Faitiches. Paris: Les Empecheurs de Tourner en Rond, La Decouverte.
Latour, B. (2011). Reflections on Etienne Souriau’s Les differents modes d’existence. In G. Harman, L. Bryant, & N. Srnicek (Eds.), The speculative turn continental materialism and realism (Anamnesis, pp. 304–334). Melbourne: re.press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?id=coBDqJQeAQYC&pg=PA304&lpg=PA304&dq=Latour+Souriau&source=bl&ots=wHqRXjOttu&sig=GjPBBQjrUsrgrRgvWeykV9m6Q7Q&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XDFnUe_ZNoXmiwK7toDADQ&ved=0CGIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=LatourSouriau&f=false.
Latour, B., & Girard Stark, M. (1999). Factures/fractures: From the concept of network to the concept of attachment. RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics, 36(Autumn), 20–31. Retrieved from http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/downloads/76-FAKTURA-GB.pdf.
Lévy, J., & Lussault, M. (2000). Logique de l’espace, esprit des lieux. Géographie à Cerisy. Paris: Belin.
Lussault, M. (2007). L’homme spatial, la construction sociale de l’espace humain. Paris: Editions du Seuil.
Mialet, H. (1994). Le Sujet de l’invention. Etude empirique de la conception d’une idee neuve: comparaison des methodes philosophique et sociologique. Sorbonne Paris I.
Mialet, H. (2012a). Hawking incorporated: Stephen Hawking and the anthropology of the knowing subject. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Mialet, H. (2012b). Where would STS be without Latour? What would be missing? Social Studies of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312712440311.
Mitchell, M. (2011). Fire ruin renewal. The Phenix Firestorm Project. Retrieved from http://www.margarettamitchell.com/firestorm/.
Mol, A. (2010). Actor-network theory: Sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 50(1), 253–269.
Murdoch, J. (1998). The spaces of actor-network theory. Geoforum, 29(4), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(98)00011-6.
November, V., Penelas, M., & Viot, P. (2009). When flood risk transforms a territory: The Lully effect. Geography, 94, 189–197.
Pigeon, P. (2005). Géographie Critique des Risques (Antropos). Paris: Economica.
Pratt, M. L. (1992). Imperial eyes: Travel writing and transculturation. London: Routledge.
Routley, G. J. (1991). The East Bay Hills fire Oakland-Berkeley, California USFA-TR-060. Oakland-Berkeley, CA. Retrieved from http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-060.pdf.
Schenk, G. J. (2007). Historical disaster research, state of research, concepts, methods and case study. Historical Social Research, 32(3), 9–31.
Schiewe, J. (2011, October 19). After Oakland Hills fire, residents build of-the-wall homes. Oakland North. Retrieved from http://oaklandnorth.net/2011/10/19/after-oakland-hills-fire-residents-build-off-the-wall-homes/.
Self, R. (2005). American Babylon: Race and the struggle for postwar Oakland. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Serres, M. (2009). Temps des crises (Manifestes). Le Pommier.
Shapin, S., & Shaffer, S. (2011). Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Solnit, R. (2009). A paradise built in hell: The extraordinary communities that arise in disaster. London: Viking.
Stengers, I. (1999). Savoirs Scolaires : qu’est-ce qui est digne d’être enseigné? In Conseil de l’Europe (Ed.), La responsabilité, du principe aux pratiques Delphes. Retrieved from https://books.google.ch/books?id=BP5dhvqJ9TIC&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=savoirs+vivant++isabelle+stengers&source=bl&ots=1qsblPBk2S&sig=ACfU3U2FjwSthHnhkBfCUTkq4DppJJ7w6w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiclrSNhd_hAhVU8aYKHfwuDyQQ6AEwCHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=savoirsvivantisabellestengers&f=false.
Stengers, I. (2002). Un engagement pour le possible. Cosmopolitiques, 1, 27–36.
Taussig, M. (2009). Culture of terror—Space of death: Roger Casement’s Putumayo report and the explanation of torture. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 26(3), 467. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500011105.
Taylor, T. (2011). 20 years after the fire, revelation and tribute. The New York Time. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/us/richard-misrach-reveals-his-images-of-oakland-berkeley-fire.html?_r=0.
Thrift, N. (2008). Non-representational theory, space, politics, affect (International Library of Sociology) (J. Urry, Ed.). London: Routledge—Taylor & Francis Group.
Tobriner, S. (2006). Bracing for disaster. Earthquake-resistant architecture and engineering in San Francisco, 1838–1933. Berkeley: The Bancroft Library, University of California Berkeley.
Walker, R. (1995). Landscape and city life: Four ecologies of residence in San Francisco Bay Area. Cultural Geographies, 2(1), 33–64. Retrieved from http://oldweb.geog.berkeley.edu/ProjectsResources/Publications/BayLandscape.htm.
Watts, M. J., & Bohle, H. G. (1993). The space of vulnerability: The causal structure of hunger and famine. Progress in Human Geography, 17(43), 43–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913259301700103.
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. (2006). At risk. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mazel-Cabasse, C. (2019). Traumatic Legacies: Shaping the Space of Risk. In: Waiting for the Big One. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15289-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15289-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-15288-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-15289-5
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)