CIVIL SOCIETY AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT: CASE OF MARMARA EARTHQUAKE

Öz

Despite the abundance of studies on performance of public organizations involved in the disaster management system of Turkey, there had been limited attention to the role of civil initiatives involved in disaster management. The disaster response operations in the aftermath of the Marmara earthquake showed that the interaction between public organizations and civil society organizations, and the coordination among the civil society organizations themselves have been very limited. After reviewing the literature on interorganizational response systems following the Marmara Earthquake, this study uses a novel data set to decipher the collective action problems of civil society organizations in Turkish disaster response system using network analysis. The study concludes with a set of policy recommendations to enhance coordination and cooperation among organizations involved in the governance of Turkish disaster management system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disaster management
• civil society
• social networks

CIVIL SOCIETY AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT: CASE OF MARMARA EARTHQUAKE

Öz

Despite the abundance of studies on performance of public organizations involved in the disaster management system of Turkey, there had been limited attention to the role of civil initiatives involved in disaster management. The disaster response operations in the aftermath of the Marmara earthquake showed that the interaction between public organizations and civil society organizations, and the coordination among the civil society organizations themselves have been very limited. After reviewing the literature on interorganizational response systems following the Marmara Earthquake, this study uses a novel data set to decipher the collective action problems of civil society organizations in Turkish disaster response system using network analysis. The study concludes with a set of policy recommendations to enhance coordination and cooperation between organizations involved in the governance of Turkish disaster management system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disaster Management
• Civil Society
• Social Networks

Kaynakça

1. Bakir, P.G., and Boduroglu, H. M. (2002). Earthquake risk and hazard mitigation in Turkey. Earthquake Spectra, 18 (3), 427-447.
2. Bolin , R. and L. Stanford .(1998). The Northridge earthquake: community based approaches to unmet recovery needs. Disasters 22 (2), 21-38.
3. Civic Coordination against Disaster (CCAD). (2005). A Guide to the civil society organizations that were active during the Marmara Earthquake. Istanbul: Iletisim (in Turkish).
4. Ergunay, O. (1999). A perspective of disaster management in turkey: issues and prospects. urban settlements & natural disasters. IUA- The Chamber of Architects.
5. Erkoc, T. (2001). Briefing on Marmara earthquakes from general directorate of disaster affair to the members of center for excellence for disaster management-Istanbul Technical University, SDKM, ITU, Istanbul.
6. Ertan, G. (2018). Policy analysis in civil society organizations, in: C. Bakir and G. Ertan Eds) Policy Analysis in Turkey (Bristol: University of Bristol: Policy Press), pp. 199-212.
7. Heper, M. (1985). The state tradition in Turkey. London: Eothen Press.
8. International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR). (2006). Country report-Turkey.

9. Istanbul Technical University. (1999) Pre-assessment report for Marmara rarthquakes, (Ondegerlendirme Raporu).
10. Jalali, R. (2002). Civil society and the state: Turkey after the Earthquake. Disasters, 26(2), pp.120-139.
11. Karanci , N. and Aksit, B. (2000). Building disaster resistant communities: lessons learned from past earthquakes in turkey and suggestions for future. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 8 (3), 403-416.
12. Kubicek, P. (2001). The Earthquake, Europe, and Prospects for Political Change in Turkey, MERIA, 5 (2).
13. Kubicek, P. (2002). The Earthquake, civil society, and political change in Turkey: assessment and comparison with Eastern Europe. Political Studies, 50, pp.761-778.
14. McPherson, M. , Smith-Lovin, L. and Cook, J. (2001). Birds of feather: homophily in Social Networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-44.
15. Moore, S., Eng, E. and Daniel, M. (2003). International NGOs and the role of network centrality in humanitarian aid operations: a case study of coordination during the 2000 Mozambique Floods. Disasters, 27 (4), pp. 305-318.
16. Nelson, B. J., Carver, K. A. and Kaboolian, L. (2007). Creating concord organizations: institutional design for bridging antagonistic cultures. In: Helmut Anheier and Yudhishthir Raj Isar (eds.) Conflicts and Tensions. London: Sage, pp. 283–295.
17. Ostrom, Elinor. (1990). Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Ozerdem, A. and Jacoby, T. (2005). Disaster Management and Civil Society. New York: I.B. Tauris.
19. Ozerdem, A and Barakat, S. (2000). After the Marmara Earthquake: lessons for avoiding short cuts to disasters, Third World Quarterly, 21 (3), 425-439.
20. Rey, F. (1999). The complex nature of actors in humanitarian action and the challenge of coordination. The Humanitarian Studies Unit (Ed.) Reflections on Humanitarian Action: Principles, Ethics and Contradictions. Pluto Press: London.
21. Scott, J. (2000). Social Network Analysis. California: Sage Publications.
22. Sobel and Leeson (2006) Government's response to Hurricane Katrina: A public choice analysis. Public Choice, 127 (1), 496-509.
23. Twigg, J. and Steiner, D. (2002). Mainstreaming disaster mitigation: Challenges to organizational learning in NGOs. Development in Practice, 12 ,(4) pp.472-479.
24. UNDRR. (1998). Model for a National Disaster Management Structure, Preparedness Plan, and Supporting Legislation. Retrieved from https://www.preventionweb.net/files/5142_US01MH840-Ft.pdf.
25. UNDP.(2004).Reducing Disaster Risk: A Challenge for Development. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/bcpr/whats_new/rdr_english.pdf
26. World Bank.(1999).Turkey Marmara Earthquake Assessment. World Bank Turkey Country Office, September.