Abstract
Disaster recovery from industrial pollution such as major oil spill presents formidable challenge for governance and disaster management considering their adverse environmental and socioeconomic impacts. The community’s social dynamics could explain how responses to such perturbation are made and what inherent traits of the households and communities contribute to their adaptiveness to disasters. The collective decisions and actions leading to a desired and improved end likewise plays considerable role in their adaptive capacity. Using both qualitative and quantitative approaches in research, this chapter examines the ecological and sociological impacts as well as the adaptive and transformative capacities of selected communities affected by oil spill in Guimaras, Philippines—one of the worst cases in the country’s history. Questionnaire elicits data on community’s quantitative level of adaptive capacity while focus group discussion, in-depth interviews, observations and narrative analysis were employed for qualitative data. Justification for the different parameters of adaptive and transformative capacities of communities was also explored. Results showed that communities are fairly adaptable to the oil spill disaster as revealed by the household adaptive capacity index developed for the study namely economic well-being and stability, demographic structure, interconnectivity to higher level processes and natural resource dependence. Each of these indicators’ result was analyzed why the community is fairly adaptable during perturbations. In the same manner, the desired trajectory towards transformative capacity was not evident as there are individual and group decisions and actions needing redirection. The spill incident was not seen as an opportunity by the residents to further improve the existing social institutions. Instead, the decisions made were generally based on their intuition and expediency without consideration of future and long term consequence. The study concluded that for communities to better respond to future spills, there should be an institutionalization of processive and systemic change. Prescriptive approach by outsiders e.g. aid and grant by donors and inadequately informed organizations should be discouraged. Spontaneous actions and those attributed to informal organizations must be effectively harnessed with the understanding that these are for long term benefits and sustainability. Its realization will further strengthen the community’s adaptive capacity in addressing future hazards. The chapter concluded with a proposed framework/model with GET (governance, education, technology) matrix in developing adaptive and transformative capacities of communities.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adger W (2003) Social capital, collective action and adaptation to climate change. Econ Geogr 79(4)
Adger WN, Arnell NW, Tompkins EL (2005) Successful adaptation climate change across scales. Global Environmental Change Part A 15(2):77–86
Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, O’Brien K, Pulhin J, Bulwarty R, Smit B, Takahashi K (2007) Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity. In: Parry MM, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 717–743
Alabastro E (2006) Science-based intervention in solar 1 oil spill. http://www.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=160&Itemid=89. Accessed 16 June 2007
Arata C, Picou J, Johnson D, McNally S (2000) Coping with technological disaster: an application of the conservation of resources model in the Exxon Valdez oil spill. J Trauma Stress 12(1):23–39
Badri SA, Asgary A, Elfekhari AR (2006) Post disaster resettlement, development and change: a case study of the 1990 Manjil earthquake in Iran. Disasters 30(4):451–468
Baldwin M, Davis E, Witham B (2000) Recent development: a review of developments in ocean and coastal law 1999–2000. Ocean Coast Law J 5(2):367–368
Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) (2002) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Brooks N (2003) Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: a conceptual framework. Working paper 38, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, Norwich
Cheng Y, Wilkinson S, Potangarao S, Seville E (2012) Resourcing for post-disaster reconstruction: a comparative study of Indonesia and China. Disaster Prev Manage 21(1):7–21
Cheong SM (2011) A social assessment of the Hebei–Spirit oil spill. Geo J 76:539–549. doi:http//doi.10.107/s10708-010-9368-4
Cosculluela R (2006) Guimaras oil spill a national disaster. http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/ilo/2006/08/27/news/guimaras.oil.spill.a.national.disaster.html. Accessed 16 June 2007
Folke C, Colding J, Berkes F (2002) Building resilience for adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Gallopin GC (2006) Linkages between vulnerability, resilience and adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Chang 16:293–303
Gallopin GC, Gutman P, Maletta H (1989) Global impoverishment, sustainable development and the environment: a conceptual approach. Int Soc Sci J 121:375–397
Holling CC (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405
Karunasena G, Amaratunga D, Haigh R, Lill I (2009) Post disaster waste management strategies in developing countries: case of Sri Lanka. Int J Strategic Property Manage 13:171–190
Kasperson JX, Kaspeson RE (2001) Global environmental risk. United Nations University Press and Earthscan, New York
Krishna A (2003) Understanding, measuring and utilizing social capital: clarifying concepts and presenting a field application from India. CAPRi working paper 28, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington. http://www.capri.cgiar.org/pdf/capriwp28.pdf
Kusamasari B, Alam Q (2012) Local-wisdom based disaster recovery model in Indonesia. Disaster Prev Manage 21(3):351–369
McCormick S (2012) After the cap: risk assessment, citizen science, and disaster recovery. Ecol Soc 17(4):706, http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-05263-170431
Magramo M (2006) Political interplay during the Guimaras oil spill. Paper presented during the international conference on research dissemination, Centro Escolar University, Manila, 12–14 October 2006
Olshansky R, Johnson I, Horne J (2008) Planning for the rebuilding of New Orleans. J Am Plann Assoc 74(3):273–287
Olsson P (2003) Building capacities for resilience in social ecological systems. Doctoral dissertation. Stockholm University, Sweden
Picou J, Marshall B, Gill D (2004) Disaster, litigation and the corrosive community. Social Forces 82(4):1426–1497
Rajkumar AP, Premkumar TS, Tharyan P (2008) Coping with the Asian tsunami: perspective from Tamil Nadu, India on the determinants of resilience in the face of adversity. Soc Sci Med 67(5):844–853
Resources, Environment and Economic Center, Inc. (REECS) (2006) Preliminary cost of oil spill in Guimaras. http://www.rees.org. Accessed 5 December 2006
Sabucedo JM, Constsantino A, Ferraces MJ, Merino H, Duran M (2009) Psychological impact of the prestige catastrophe. Int J clinic Health Psychol 9(1):105–116
Scheffer M, Brock W, Westley F (2000) Mechanisms preventing optimum use of ecosystem services: an interdisciplinary theoretical analysis. Ecosystems 3:451–471
Shaw R (2006) Indian Ocean tsunami and aftermath:need for environment-disaster synergyin the reconstruction process. Disaster Prev Manage 7(1):5–20
Smit B, Pilifosova O (2003) From adaptation to adaptive capacity and vulnerability reduction. In: Smith JB, Klein RJT, Huq S (eds) Climate change, adaptive capacity and development. Imperial College Press, London
Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Glob Environ Chang 16:282–292
Smit B, Burton I, Klein R, Wandel J (2000) An anatomy of adaptation to climate change and variability. Climate Change 45:223–251
Smithers J, Smit B (1997) Human adaptation to climatic variability and change. Glob Environ Chang 7:129–146
Sutton P (2007) The environment: a sociological introduction. Polity, UK, pp 78–80. ISBN: 9780745634333
Tan A, Pulhin J (2012) Collective action and adaptive capacity of communities during disasters: the case of oil spill in Guimaras, Philippines. J Environ Sci Manage 15(1)
Tenner E (1996) Why things bite back: technology and the revenge of unintended consequences. Alfred A. Knopft, New York
Vincent K (2007) Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale. Glob Environ Chang 17:12–24
Walker B, Carpenter SR, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming GS, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson GD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6, (online) http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol6/iss1/art14/pring.pdf
Yohe G, Tol R (2002) Indicators for social and economic coping capacity – moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Glob Environ Chang 12:25–40
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Japan
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tan, A.E.S., Pulhin, J.M. (2014). Adaptive and Transformative Capacities of Communities After Disaster: The Case of Oil Spill in Guimaras, Philippines. In: Shaw, R. (eds) Disaster Recovery. Disaster Risk Reduction. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54255-1_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54255-1_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Tokyo
Print ISBN: 978-4-431-54254-4
Online ISBN: 978-4-431-54255-1
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)