Given the increasing prevalence of large-scale natural disasters, why has progress on a global disaster risk reduction regime (e.g., Hyogo and Sendai frameworks) been so varied and so spotty? Are the politics associated with disasters any different than the politics of any other global issue?

Domestically, what explains differences in countries’ abilities to recover from natural disasters? While recent research has focused on factors such as previous experience, economic development and social capital, an analysis of the institutional frameworks in which recovery decision-making occurs has been lacking. There are theoretical reasons to believe that both formal and informal institutions matter and are likely to influence both the politicization and outcomes of disasters.


Jason Enia. “Does Contracting Save Lives? The Relationship Between Contract Intensive Economies and Disaster Fatalities.” [in progress]

Clayton Wukich, Brandon Boylan, Michael Siciliano, & Jason Enia. “The Formation of Transnational Knowledge Networks on Social Media: Disaster Response Organizations Across National Boundaries.” [under review]


Jason Enia (forthcoming) “Rules Versus Discretion: Comparing Disaster Declaration Institutions in the Philippines and Indonesia.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction.

Jason Enia (2015) “Global Disaster Politics,” Syllabus 4(2).

Jason Enia (2013) “The Spotty Record of the Hyogo Framework for Action: Understanding the Incentives of Natural Disaster Politics and Policy Making” The Social Science Journal 50(2): 213–224.