1. Worin bestand eigentlich das Desaster? Überflutung und Wiederaufbau in einem bulgarischen Dorf 2012.
- Author
-
Petrov, Petǎr
- Subjects
FLOODS ,ETHNOGRAPHIC analysis ,NATURAL disaster research ,NATURAL disasters & society ,CRISIS management ,BULGARIAN politics & government, 1990- ,SOCIAL history - Abstract
After heavy rains and rapid thaw in February 2012, the dam of an artificial lake broke and the water flooded the village Biser. It took the lives of six people, destroyed 56 houses and damaged many others. What does this flood tell us about society is the general question of this paper. Empirically, it is based on ethnographic fieldwork in Biser and in other Bulgarian villages and small towns that have been flooded over the past ten years as well as on the analysis of publications in the media. The first section of the paper uses as a starting point the conceptual definition of natural disasters as phenomena that occur at the intersection of nature and society. It shows that political, economic and social practices have a share in the causation of floods. Mismanagement or neglect of infrastructure, improper or unauthorized use of reservoirs, illegal exploitation of sand and gravel from the rivers, and disposal of household waste and building rubble in the rivers belong to the “potentially destructive agents” that accumulate problems, create unsafe conditions and generate “natural” disasters. From another theoretical point of view, disasters are conceptualized as “empirical windows upon the inner working of society” that give us insights into values, attitudes, practices, and processes which are dominant in a particular society. In the Bulgarian case, these include indifference and even irresponsibility of politicians, experts, and “common” people towards the public sphere (outdoor space, infrastructure, regulations, laws, common interests, welfare), lack of long-term planning, and focus on short-term profits that is characterized by both disrespect of legal norms and disregard of safety rules and measures. The second section deals with the political use of rescue operations, social assistance, and reconstruction in Biser. Disaster management was simultaneously carried out as a political image campaign and reconstruction became an arena for political activism. The central government pushed itself into the spotlight in the role of local crisis manager. Using the media, politicians focused public attention on their assisting and rebuilding projects (material and financial aid, compensation, reconstruction of damaged houses, construction of new houses). The third section shows how aid and reconstruction caused a new disaster, a social one. The recovering projects and the resource allocation turned into “destructive agents” that triggered social conflicts. The initially single group of flood-affected people was disintegrated into several groups that were defined by the type and the amount of material and financial aid they received. Envy, mutual distrust, competition and even hostility broke out. Since the reconstruction followed a top-down approach and was guided by political decisions, it largely neglected local social reality. It did not return the village back to normal, as the government wanted, but rather it reshaped and restructured the village both physically and socially. Thus the reconstruction has some similarities with the 25 years long post-socialist transition: It created winners and losers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2014
- Full Text
- View/download PDF