Discourses of Disaster Response 1

Running head: DISCOURSES OF DISASTER RESPONSE

The discourses and discursive constructions of disaster response

for victims of residential fires

Mary Michaela Grace L. Aquino

Nio Jose Alberto D. Atilano

Ateneo De Manila University

 Discourses of Disaster Response 2

Abstract

Residential fires that plague and damage communities are events that entail more than physical
harm to individuals but also social and psychological impacts as well. The efforts done during or
immediately after these calamities, in the form of disaster response, are usually intended to help,
aid or provide relief from such adversities. However, our research has shown that disaster
response has also been paired with negative perceptions from the individuals who experience it.
This research focuses on the 2014 large-scale fire experienced by members of the Parola
community in Tondo, Metro Manila. This research aims to identify the different discourses
surrounding such an incident. The results of our analysis suggest that disaster response was
perceived by the individuals belonging in the community to have fostered a unifying effect in the
form of pagkakaisa but also a divisive outcomes in the form of korupsyon. The study
highlights the importance of the discourses surrounding disaster response in the Philippines as
well as emphasizes the need to conduct more research should be done with regard to residential
fires as well as disaster response both internationally and in the context of the Philippines.
 Discourses of Disaster Response 3

The discursive construction of disaster response

for victims of residential fires

Disaster response is a pivotal event during or immediately after a crisis situation wherein

various groups of people are mobilized to provide subsistence or to prevent further destruction of

property or life (NDRRMC, n.d.). Disaster response is the third phase of the framework for

national disaster risk reduction and management (NDRRM), a framework crafted by the Office

of Civil Defense of the Philippines in 2010. The framework was created as a response to RA

10121, following the destruction wrought by Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng, to create a protocol

for crises including earthquakes and fires. It also defines a system of networks spanning from the

grassroots level, to the local government units, to regional, and national sectors, and so creates

accountability, delineating responsibilities of parties involved. Moreover, the framework aims to

prepare for and mitigate disasters and their effects, as well as to increase awareness of climate

change among citizens; that is, to empower communities to develop a proactive stance in crises.

Its implementation, especially within low-income communities, is met with difficulty.

Low-income communities do not have the funding to accommodate programs or to conduct

seminars necessary to disseminate information (Pulhin, Shaw, and Pereira, 2010), nor do they

have the physical resources or equipment to carry out the protocol. The existing tension between

members of a community and those from outside of it also hinders the process (De Silva, 2009;

Scharffscher 2011). These create a problem, especially since the Philippines is highly vulnerable

to different disasters given its location within the Pacific (SEPO, 2013). And, due to its high

population density, the Philippines is fire prone (Wallace, 1978), as illustrated by the 600 fire

outbreaks that occurred just between January to February 2015 within Manila (Makas, 2015).
 Discourses of Disaster Response 4

At many instances, the various levels operating within the NDRRM framework interact.

However, we would like to focus on disaster response alone as it is that point at which

communities and external institutions initiate direct contact within an emotionally charged and

psychological context, as disaster response happens during or immediately after crisis (Keane,

Pickett, Jepson, Mccorkle, and Lowery, 1994)

In this paper, we would like to investigate two things

1) How disaster response is construed among individuals from a low-income

sector following a disaster; and

2) What discourses gave way to these constructions

To investigate, we will focus on the discourses and discursive constructions of the

disaster response as experienced by people from Parola, Tondo following a large community fire

that engulfed their community last 2015.

Review of Related Literature

Difficulties in Implementing a Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework

Worldwide, our vulnerability to disasters in general has already been recognized (SEPO,

2013) In the Philippines, fire-related accidents alone comprise 39% of reported health emergency

alerted response systems from 2005 to 2009, and all occurring within the same geographical area

(Velasco, 2013). Our vulnerability led to the creation and implementation of our own NDRRM

framework. However, the framework does not translate well into practice when brought down to

communities (Pulhin, Shaw, and Pereira, 2010) due in part to lack of funding or resources with

which to employ the protocols (Broad 1995). In our context of urban poor communities,

financing is allocated to immediate needs such as food, clothing, medicine, housing, and

education, which makes recovery from disasters burdensome. To circumvent troubles in

 Discourses of Disaster Response 5

financing, local government units may mobilize volunteers to help in disaster response. Although

perceived as a welcome form of help, professional responders hesitate to actually work alongside

them because the volunteers are not properly trained or equipped (Hutchinson, n.d.).

Another challenge to the implementation of this framework is poor risk perception which

may provide an explanation for resistance met in some communities. To illustrate, a study

conducted by Misanya and Oyhus (2014) found that a certain tribe perceived natural calamities

as Gods willing, which led to the belief that mortal efforts to prevent these disasters were futile,

further disempowering the tribe.

Leadership and governance might also hamper the process, especially when the manner

of implementation in more local levels of government are at odds with the macro-level (Pulhin,

Shaw, and Pereira, 2010). The personal qualities of the leader might also enable or debilitate

him/her, especially when he or she lacks technical know-how. The leaders may also be perceived

as corrupt, which sows mistrust within constituents (Duggan, Deeny, Spelman, and Vitale, 2010;

Asad, Sajid, and Hussein 2014).

There may also be barriers to communication, such as the language or technology being

used. These can also be alluded to differences in culture, which may also cause tension in

between groups of different ethnicities or even socio-economical status due to the disconnection

between them (De Silva, 2009; Scharffscher 2011). This disconnection prevents those giving

relief to empathize with the community folk, and may even cause them to depersonalize the

disaster or relief-giving (Carroll, Cohn, Seesholts, and Higgins, 2005).

The danger to this depersonalization lies in the very experience of disaster: when people

are not seen as affected by it, the disaster may leave psychological scars and other health issues

within victims .
 Discourses of Disaster Response 6

The Person in the Context of Disasters and their Experience of Fire

Fire disasters are different because they have the most number of direct man-made causes

(International Civil Defense Organization, 2014). Philippines easily has a lot of man-made fires

due to overpopulation, lack of proper electrical routing and management, negligence with

heating or electrical equipment, and use of jumpers (Wallace, 1978; Forjuoh, 2006). Though

common, fire incidents still bring with it many health hazards, including lung disease, due to the

combustion and presence of toxic chemicals (Stern and Kerry, 1996; Stefanidou, M.,

Athanaselis, S., & Spiliopoulou, C.,2008; Laugharne, Watt, and Janca, 2011).

In a fire-related incident, the manner by which people cope is dependent on the

perception they have of the disaster, its risks, and their response to it. According to Getachew

(2008), response to a disaster is dependent on perception. For instance, in Misanyas study

(2014) with the tribes, they did not respond at all to the disaster as they perceived it to be Gods

doing. Likewise, the coping is also dependent on the perception and experience of disaster

(Scoones, 1995). A person who believed that the event brought some form of good -- for

example, thinking that a fire would mean a new life or a new home-- might cope better relative

to another person who construed the fire as loss, which may be material, financial, or symbolic

(Cox, 2006). Those who see it as bringing some kind of rebirth might develop post-traumatic

growth (Walsh, 2006). Meanwhile, the person who experienced loss might develop PTSD or

depression (Laughgarne, Watt, Janica, 2011; Walsh, 1996). They may also construe the fire as a

disruption in life or livelihood, diminishing their sense of security (Rosenfeld, 1989). In the

context of an urban poor community, a fire would debilitate people as it would destroy their

homes and burden them with repairs. It may also lead to debts, which further prevent the people

from recovering.
 Discourses of Disaster Response 7

The experience of a fire may also cleave communities: they may be divided due to finger-

pointing, or be united in their efforts to fight a fire (Keane et al, 2010).

The Gap

These studies highlight issues scattered around the phases of disaster risk reduction and

management, and tend to identify the issues as seen from the perspective of those implementing

the protocol. There are very few studies that view disaster risk reduction and management from

the perspective of the community members themselves, much less for disaster response. And of

these studies that do consider the perspective from below, none have questioned how those

constructions came into being; that is, none have found what lens enabled people to construe

disaster response in such ways. We too have not encountered studies that explored the dynamics

of power between responders and those being responded to, even when the very relationship

itself is hinged upon this difference in power.

Theoretical Framework

For this paper, we will focus on disaster response, as well as the relationship between

individuals belonging within the grassroots level: the communities, and those immediately

responding to them such as the firefighters and local government. We hope to identify what

causes the tension between these groups. To do so, we will use Foucauldian Discourse Analysis

to analyze the kind of talk that people have about disaster response; identifying the different

discourses that enable such constructions, and also pinpoint the positions that communities and

other actors occupy within the social space created during a disaster response phase.

Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA) allows an approach in investigating social

realities by expanding the context of analysis and thorough examination of discourses. FDA
 Discourses of Disaster Response 8

demonstrates a critical analysis of discourse by considering wider societal contexts as opposed

the interpersonal context tackled by discursive psychology(Potter, 1996). He added, that this type

of analysis is not so much concerned with establishing truths but understanding how texts are

used to present different versions of reality, and accordingly subscribe to relativism. FDA

therefore has a firm social constructionist framework (Potter, 1996b). The use of this analysis

will reveal power relations that comprise bodies of knowledge which systematically create and

reproduce particular social institutions (Holloway, 1997, p.48; Hall, 2000).

In our study concerning victims of residential fires, FDA will allow an evaluation of

subjectivity and power in order to engage in the critical strand of social constructionist

psychology (Burr, 2003; Nightingale & Cromby, 1999) Psychological discourse practices

generally utilize talk from sources of interview data but FDA can be performed wherever

meaning exists, upon various types of communication and textual material (Willig, 2001, p.108).

Through its use, it will enable the researchers to see how the discourses that emerge in the

transcripts construct an individuals own unique and individual reality which allows certain ways

of seeing a particular phenomenon or being in the context of the phenomenon.

Foucauldian discourse analysis will allow the researchers to examine ways in which the

discursive constructions of the people from Parola position objects and subjects, and create

different versions of reality, society and identity as well as maintaining certain practices and

institutions (Willig, 2008). With the use of this type of analysis, we will be able to see how

discourses explore the role of language in participants descriptions of events and conversations

(Smith et al., 1999). This type of analysis will also allow the researchers to view contrasting

positionings of subjectivity as well as how objects and subjects are constructed by the use of
 Discourses of Disaster Response 9

language and ones own subjective positioning of individuals or institutions within the use of

language.

Statement of the Problem

What are the discourses and discursive constructions of disaster response among people

that have experienced a fire?

Method

A qualitative method was employed for a thorough investigation of the events

surrounding the phenomenon studied. The researchers approached the study using Foucauldian

Discourse Analysis following Willigs six-step method (2008) in order to gain insight on the

discourses surrounding disaster response among fire victims.

Data Gathering

Sampling and Participants

From an initial set of 70 residents from Parola, Tondo, we gathered 18 participants of

various ages through purposive sampling. The 18 participants of the FGD were the individuals

that actively participated throughout the seminars for fire prevention and first aid as observed by

the seminar facilitators.

The participants were grouped into three by their age: 14 21 years old; 22 39 years

old; 40 70 years old. These participants all experienced the 2015 fire, and have at least lived

within the Parola community for ten years and have been privy to other experiences of

residential fires within their compound.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 10

Collection and Transcription

The dataset for this study is part of another research endeavor which focuses on

leadership, hence the design of the interview schedule used. The FGD proper lasted 1 hour and

30 minutes. It began at 4:00pm and ended at 5:30pm. There were three groups of 6 people. The

FGDs were recorded by the voice recorder app on the phone, and a laptop was used to transcribe

the proceedings. The FGDs were conducted within different rooms: one was an empty, quiet

hall, another in an empty stairwell, and another in an airconditioned, enclosed section of the

room. Only the dialogue was included in the transcription. Before initiating the FGD, the

participants were assured of the confidentiality of the discussion. There was also a segment for

introductions done in rounds. After that, the data gatherers asked a series of questions following

an interview schedule which was specifically designed to elicit information pertaining to the

experience of the fire, observed leadership during and after the crisis, and aid obtained by the

community folk. Rapport-building was done during the seminar. Throughout both seminar and

FGDs, the Filipino language was used.

Data Analysis

The six steps of Foucauldian Discourse Analysis as proposed by Carla Willig (2008), was

used to analyze the information that was gathered in this study. To begin, Willig proposes that

the first step of analysis would be to determine the different discursive constructions surrounding

the incident. With regard to the study, the researchers were able to identify 38 constructions of

disaster response within urban poor residential areas affected by fire, which later on was stripped

into 4 major constructions: disaster response of taga-rito is cohesive; disaster response of taga-

roon is disruptive; disaster response is preferential; those being responded need access to

financial support.
 Discourses of Disaster Response 11

Following this, Willigs next step was to situate these constructions within a wider

discourse by understanding the similarities or differences between each construction. Initially,

these four constructions were thought to have been under four different discourses: discourse of

Bayanihan, discourse of bantay-salakay, discourse of para sa pamilya and discourse of disaster

response as commodity. These four discourses were further fine-tuned, being grouped into two,

and then relabelled. The new discourses were then: discourse of corruption, and discourse of

pagkakaisa. These discourses were identified following the definitions used by Savage, Jackollie,

Kumeh, and Dorbor ( 2007) and by Ang (1979) that corruption is the misuse of entrusted power

for private gain, and pagkakaisa, respectively, as an experience of bayanihan and mutual

concern for fellow Filipinos and families. Pagkakaisa was also a word that participants of the

FGD used when describing the response their community members had.

The discourse of corruption accounted for the constructions of disaster response as

needing financial means and disaster response as disruptive. The discourse of pagkakaisa

involved the constructions of disaster response as para sa pamilya and as Bayanihan. The third

step involves determining the action orientation of the discourses, or what one hopes to achieve

when using that particular discourse.

The fourth step involves positioning: situating the utterer within a social space relative to

whomever it is they are addressing. The position is dependent on the discourse being used, and

comes attached to particular rights or duties. When the discourse changes, so too the positions

being occupied. And as discourse is a function of language which constitutes reality, the kind of

discourse in circulation can promote and limit certain ways of being. This now makes

positioning a fluid element that shifts according to the tides of power within a social relationship.

The fifth step identifies the social practices that such discourses allow. Some practices
 Discourses of Disaster Response 12

can be social rituals institutionalized by the beliefs people have about the world and normalized

through conversation.

Subjectivity, being the last step, pertains to the thoughts and emotions surrounding the

experiences of individuals positioned a certain way.

Results

In the conducted study, two major discourses were found: Pagkakaisa and Korupsyon.

The two function differently. Discursive constructions under pagkakaisa have a unifying effect

among people, while those under korupsyon divided them. Under pagkakaisa, the discursive

construction of disaster response as bayanihan emerged. Under korupsyon, disaster response as

bantay-salakay and as a commodified right emerged. The last discursive construction, disaster

response as para sa pamilya was found to be both unifying and divisive.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 13

Unifying Discourse: Discourse of Pagkakaisa

Disaster response as experience of Bayanihan between fellow survivors

Action Orientation Positioning Practices Subjectivity

-Uplifts and empowers members Kami / ka- -Concern for neighbors Solidarity
-Reinforces trust and confidence in area who experienced Trust / Mistrust
others disaster Belongingness
-Implies help is genuine Iba / taga- -Neighbors putting out Security /
-Creates shared identity Area __ na fires together, Skepticism
-Excludes non-members yan evacuating together, or Initiative to
-Downplays capacity of non- repairing houses help
members

Imposible magkaroon kami. May sunog man, naaapula agad kasi may

pagkakaisa kami.

Invoking this discourse emphasizes the cohesiveness of a given group, the kami, and

uplifts and empowers them. It also reinforces the groups sense of self efficacy, fostering trust

and confidence in their ka-area. It also identifies members, and creates a sense of shared identity.

Those belonging within the kami or ka-area have a sense of belongingness, and are in solidarity

with their fellows.

Ang mga lalaking ka-area namin, pupunta yun sa apoy, hahanapin nila. Pag

'yung matibay yung ano mo, gigibain nila yung bintana ng bahay mo,

papasukin nila yan. E ganyan silang mga lalaki doon banda sa amin. Pintuan

mo, wawasakin nila yan mapatay lang yung apoy.

There is also a sense of security with knowing that others are there and are ready to help,

suggesting that invoking this discourse of Bayanihan also creates feelings of safety.

Kasi ugali kasi ng iba, ng ibang mga taga-Area, kanya-kanya sila. Hindi sila

nagkaka-- oo, nadamay lang kami.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 14

Meanwhile, those who are identified as iba or taga-Area __ na yan are denied this shared

identity. Those kami are even skeptical of the capacity of those who dont belong, downplaying

the ability of the iba by describing them as being kanya-kanya and unable to help one another.

Because there is a notion of a group identity as kami and of each member as ka-area, it

also creates mistrust and skepticism of those who are iba or are taga-Area na yan. It is within

this mistrust that the idea of bantay-salakay may emerge.

Social practices that have been institutionalized as part of this Bayanihan discourse

during or after a crisis include helping neighbors evacuate, neighbors putting out fires together,

and even having neighbors help one another in rebuilding or repairing houses.

Divisive: Discourses of Corruption

Disaster response as bantay salakay from strangers

Action Orientation Positioning Practices Subjectivity

-Implies distrust among non- Biktima -Pilfering of neighbor- Doubt

members of the community owned items Apprehension
which reinforces the notion of Ibang tao -Skepticism of Desperation
inclusivity community to Helplessness
newcomers
-Being unable to sleep
because of
hypervigilance to thieves

"Yung ibang tao pag nananamantala, nakikita ko sa dalawang mata ko'y

dalawang mismong biktima eh. Sinasalubong ko na yung tao dahil yung gamit

namin nasalubong ko na, akala ko tinutulongan kami, yun pala hindi, eh, tinago

sa malayo. Kaya nung hinanap na ng asawa ko yung mga gamit namin, sabi ko

akala ko dinala na nito sa lugar na, ah, paglilipatan natin. Yung dapat dadalhin
 Discourses of Disaster Response 15

hindi nakarating dun yung mga gamit. Kaso naging biktima rin ako ng yung

mga mapagsamantalang tao."

This discourse construes the ibang taos disaster response as disruptive in the lives of the

survivors of the fire as they are positioned as having power over the biktima. They now have the

right to abuse, and have the means of doing so. During crisis, the ibang tao presents themselves

as part of the bayanihan group, and uses the feelings of shared trust and belongingness that it

evokes as a guise for exploitation. The biktima of the fire then unwittingly relies and depends on

this ibang tao, leaving themselves vulnerable to theft. The idea that these ibang tao will trick

others incites within the Parola folk the need to be protective, vigilant, and to prioritize their self-

preservation.

Hindi porket kalugar namin lahat sila, pagkakatiwalaan na namin.

...Pag hindi niyo kakilala yung ibang tao, merong manununog.

This construction of disaster response furthers the skepticism and distrust for those who

do not belong within their community. It shows itself as wariness and resistance to newcomers,

even when the newcomers are relief operatives, disaster respondents, or government personnel.

The position of biktima mentioned here is twofold: biktima of the fire and biktima of

others exploitative intentions. But just as the discourse sows doubt and wariness within these

people for those who do not belong within their community, it also breeds a kind of deep trust

for their fellows, especially since these are the very people they can count on. It creates the space

now for an experience of Bayanihan.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 16

Disaster response as a Right Commodified

Action Orientation Positioning Practices Subjectivity

-Dictates the impact of Mga tutulong -Asking for monetary Hopelessness

financial capability compensation on Skepticism
-Illustrates that others Mga tinutulungan / supposed "free" services Disappointment
take advantage of the Kawawa Deceit
crisis situation as a -Politicians giving
financial opportunity by money or relief with their
commodifying names on the plastic
supposedly free during electoral
services. campaigns

E panong hindi masusunog? Yung bumbero nga binabayaran. Kawawa

ka kung wala kang pera. Halimbawa, kung ikaw maganda bahay mo, aalukin ka

ng price na ayun yung babantayan nila kumpara sa nakararami.

In this discourse, people are either positioned as mga tutulong, such as the

firemen, or those who are tinutulangan or are in need of help. In this context of help-

giving, there is also a difference in power. The mga tutulong have the advantage as they

already have the skills and the means to save or respond to those in need or deny them

rescue. But because of this, they are also capable of taking advantage of the situation

and now have the right to demand compensation. They are able to commodify the

response, a supposedly free service. Meanwhile the tinutulungan are desperate for

help, and are forced to pay. The tinutulungan then position themselves as kawawa when

they are unable to meet the demands placed upon them by the mga tutulong.

This discourse also demonstrates how financial means affects survival. It also propagates

the suspicions and wariness that people have of services and systems provided by institutions.
 Discourses of Disaster Response 17

The distrust evident within this discourse might even be telling of how the Parola folk see

themselves as being oppressed by other sectors and institutions.

Ang nangyari sa bumbero, narinig kong isyu kasi nila dyan, nagka-

alukan. Halimbawa, kung ikaw maganda bahay mo, aalukin ka ng price na

ayun yung babantayan nila kumpara sa nakararami.

Even the distribution of relief goods was thought to be commodified.

Ililista nila pangalan mo, pero ibibenta rin nila yun. Nalista nga

pangalan ko, wala naman akong natanggap.

As the discourse privileges those with monetary capacity, it incites within the Parola folk

a desire to have better standards of living, not to live luxuriously, but so that they may avail of

these emergency services easily.

Swerte ho kung halimbawa, yung isang bahay mo, eh yung isang bahay

mo ay inalukan nila, susuportahan nila ng tubig, siyempre expect mo yung tubig

- may tubig na ibubuhos na may gamot na yun eh pampaiwas ng sunog.

The price of survival is not only monetary. It can be seen in vote-buying, as votes also

become currency, like when politicians offer relief aid and services, but ensure that their names

and faces are plastered upon the containers or bags they are giving away. This is a practice which

the community expresses disdain for as they know it is not genuine.

Kasi may mga pulitiko sa amin na, para sa kanilang kapakanan,

nagdadala talaga ng bumbero.

Eleksyon na kasi
 Discourses of Disaster Response 18

Positioned as kawawa, the people may feel oppressed by institutions and might account

too resistance against newcomers. They also feel hopelessness as they are unable to secure their

safety.

Unifying and Divisive: Discourse of Familiarism

Disaster response is 'Para sa Pamilya'

Action Orientation Positioning Practices Subjectivity

-Justifies immediate attention Pamilya -Cutting in line for relief Uncertainty

during disasters to family or goods Desperation
"kapamilya," which connotes -Hoarding supplies for family,
kinship even with friends -Self-sacrificing acts to
-Implies disaster response as ensure safety of family
preferential and entitled

The opinions and views of individuals that surround this discourse show that disaster

response is preferential toward ones family and entitles one to act in priority with their interest

than anyone elses.

Ang kahit parehas na tayo, halimbawa, ako nasunugan, ikaw hindi.

Pero nangangarap kang magkaroon ng pabahay. Eh 'di kumuha ka, kumuha ka

ng sarili mo para mapaayos mo yung anak mo. Bakit ko, bakit kita uusigin?

Walang pakialamanan, kasi may pangarap ka para sa pamilya mo.

Such an example shows a deep need to ensure the safety of family and friends which

justifies immediate attention during disasters to family. Such a priority also holds true with

kapamilya, which connotes kinship even with friends and neighbors. This, in effect, positions
 Discourses of Disaster Response 19

the community members to possess the right to choose between who they will extend help to

first.

Kasi minsan magkakamag-anak yan e. Kumbaga didiskarte ka sa dami

ng pipila, sa dami ng gusto kumuha ng relief, kaya lang matatapang sila eh.

This discourse is evident in mothers or father who may put themselves at risk to protect

their children. It is also evident when people cut in line for relief goods or hoard supplies for

their family to secure the familys welfare. It justifies acts that are deemed rash and violent

because it is a necessary doing for ones security and interest. Feelings of desperation resonate

within their discourses because of the helplessness they experience during such times of great

need.

Discussion

Throughout the study, discourses revolved around the perceptions and views of disaster

response. Two discourses, Pagkakaisa and Korupsyon surfaced. These discourses contrast the

perception of disaster response among the victims of fire. For the discourse of pagkakaisa, it

emerges when there is response from the ka-barangays or the kapamilya, meanwhile, the

discourse of korupsyon emerges when the response is from those outside the community. These

discourses stemmed from four discursive constructions that regard Disaster Response as

Bayanihan between Fellow Survivors, Para sa Pamilya, a Right Commodified and Bantay

Salakay from Strangers. The discursive constructions were further clustered as those that unify

or divide the community.

The discourse of pagkakaisa pertained to the perception of the Parola community in

seeing disaster response as a genuine and collaborative act for the common good. It also

promoted mutual cooperation from each member, and generated the expectation that their
 Discourses of Disaster Response 20

fellows would reach out. It coincides with the literature of (Ang, 1979) that pertains to

Bayanihan as a concept that exists among Filipinos engaged in group activities with fellow

Filipinos, wherein each person attempts to provide the needs of their fellows. According to him,

it is a system of mutual help and concern that serves as a backbone for Filipino families. This

was evident in how the individuals in the community talked about fellow members who would

extend their help in putting out fires. They were adamant that there was this experience of

pagkakaisa amongst themselves and between members of their families. In the onset of fire, a

study by Barrameda and Barrameda (2011) would also validate the claims of these families with

regard to unity in times of calamity indicating that Bayanihan is used as a resource to cope

through disasters. The study also claims that Bayanihan is especially visible among those

belonging in low-income communities, where they must rely solely on themselves and each

other for survival and is furthermore consistent with the experience of the members of Parola. In

addition, the cohesion and unity exhibited by fellow community members during this event

further gives credence to the claim that crisis brings together a community as they are facing a

common threat (Carroll et al, 2004).

The discourse of corruption created expectations within the fire victims that disaster

response may have insincere or underlying motives. Ang (1979) posits that corruption is the

misuse of entrusted power for private gain and this has been in tune with the experiences of the

members of the community with individuals that have exploited their dependency in such a time

of disaster. Firefighters, in particular, have been one of the many individuals expressed by the

individuals as main opportunists by taking advantages of such situations for their personal gain.

This discourse challenges the claim that advancing the idea of fire-fighters being reassuring

represents a form of safety authority for victims (Tancogne-Dejean and Laclemence, 2016) by
 Discourses of Disaster Response 21

positioning fire-fighters as oppressors who abuse the leverage they have with the residents.

Rather, a study conducted by Carroll, Cohn, Seesholtz, and Higgins (2004) indicates that

there is a tendency for higher-level responders such as fire-fighters to depersonalize the crisis

event. Victims of disasters are highly sensitive to the experiences of calamities while fire service

providers tend to see it objectively and tend to be uninvolved emotionally all throughout. This

may be why the claims by the International Association of Fire Chiefs (2013) on the end of the

firefighters pertaining to the honesty and integrity in such an institution are scrutinized. Such

scrutiny, according to their claims, creates a divide between us and them. It would be no

surprise then that this discourse creates a fraternity-like atmosphere that divides responders and

the community.

The discourse of corruption highlights the skepticism that individuals in the community

have toward institutions that respond to disasters as they think there is corruption and nepotism

(Duggan, Deeny, Spelman, and Vitale, 2010). Individuals believed that these disasters provide

the opportunity for institutions to advance their agendas. Duggan et al. adds that in times of

disaster, there is poor handling of the situation, wherein those who are must be attended to the

ones disregarded while those without immediate necessity for attention are the ones who acquire

it.

A study conducted by Keane et al (2010) posits that crisis situations, such as a large-scale

fire, generate cohesion and conflict among community members. The study claims that although

crises prompt solidarity from fellow members, it also creates a wedge among people given that

there are blaming behaviors, misattribution of causes, and distorted sense of accountabilities.

Furthermore, it is consistent with the discourses that emerged from the analysis of the victims

experiences pertaining to pagkakaisa but also hypervigilance, skepticism and suspicion among
 Discourses of Disaster Response 22

each other as well.

Implications

The study allowed the researchers to gain insight toward the discourses of disaster

response surrounding fire-related disasters. Such a study allowed the individuals involved to

share their own views and opinions regarding their own individual and unique experiences with

such an event. This insider perspective empowers people through voicing out their own position

toward such matter without it being influenced or filtered by the media, government or other

institutions.

The discourses that emerged were able to allow the researchers to better understand their

experiences but more importantly, how these experiences are constructed and verbalized through

the use of their own language. In addition, the type of analysis used allowed the researchers to

generate and allow a richer acquisition of results through better understanding the realities and

context surrounding these individuals in this experience. Through such an action, language was

able to draw out words, actions and practices that were inherent to culture which were valuable

to the study.

The research was also able to validate and support the claims of other studies with regard

to fire-related disasters. One limitation of the study concerned the lack of literature following

residential fires. Most of the studies about disaster response that were investigated by the

researchers came across involved forest fires and natural disasters. Given that these events occur

frequently in society, it clearly entails that more research should be done with regard to

residential fires as well as disaster response both internationally and in the context of the

Philippines. Moreover, the research also validates and discovers whether all claims of the studies

involved in our investigation hold true in the setting of the Philippines.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 23

References

Ang, G. (1979, March). Bayanihan: Dead or alive? Philippine Quarterly for Culture and

Society, 7(1), 2nd ser., 91-93. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29791626

Asad, A., Sajid, I., & Hussein, B. (2014, January). Disaster relief corruption: A study of

Balakot Town. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 6(1), 193-206.

Barrameda T., & Barrameda S. (2011). Rebuilding communities and lives: the role of

damayan and bayanihan in disaster resiliency. Philippine Journal of Social

Development, 3.

Broad, R. (1995). The political economy of natural resources: Case studies of the Indonesian

and Philippine forest sectors. Journal of Developing Areas, 29(3), 317339.

Carroll, M. S., Cohn, P. J., Seesholtz, D. N., & Higgins, L. L. (2005). Fire as a Galvanizing

and Fragmenting Influence on Communities: The Case of the RodeoChediski Fire.

Society & Natural Resources, 18(4), 301-320. doi:10.1080/08941920590915224

Cox R. (2006). Older persons in emergency and disaster situations: A case study of British

Columbias Firestorm 2003. Prepared for: Winnipeg International Workshop on

Seniors and Emergency Preparedness, Winnipeg, MB, February 6-9, 2007. Contact:

Division of Aging, Public Health Agency of Canada.

De Silva, M.W.A. (2009), Ethnicity, politics and inequality: post-tsunami humanitarian aid

delivery in Ampara District, Sri Lanka, Disasters, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 253-73.

Duggan, S., Deeny, P., Spelman, R., & Vitale, C. T. (2010). Perceptions of older people on
 Discourses of Disaster Response 24

disaster response and preparedness. International Journal of Older People Nursing,

5(1), 71-76. doi:10.1111/j.1748-3743.2009.00203.x

Forjuoh, S. (2006). Burns in low- and middle-income countries: A review of available

literature on descriptive epidemiology, risk factors, treatment, and prevention. Burns,

32(5), 529-537. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2006.04.002

Getachew, G., Tolossa, D., & Gebru, G. (2008). Risk Perception and Coping Strategies

among the Karrayu Pastoralists of Upper Awash Valley, Central Ethiopia. Nomadic

Peoples, 12(1), 93-107. doi:10.3167/np.2008.120106

Granvorka, C. G., & Saffache, P. (2010). Risk Management and Disaster Mitigation: A Case

Study Applied to Haiti. tudes Caribennes, (15).

doi:10.4000/etudescaribeennes.4559

Hall, S. (2001) Foucault: power, knowledge and discourse, in Wetherell, M., Taylor, S. &

Yates, S. (2001) Discourse theory and practice: a reader. London: Sage.

Holloway, I. (1997) Basic concepts for qualitative research. Oxford: Blackwell.

Harr, H. (1995a). Discursive psychology. In J. A. Smith, R. Harr, & L. Van Langenhove,

(Eds.) Rethinking psychology. London: Sage.

Hutchinson, B. (n.d.). Career urban firefighters perceptions of citizen volunteer participation

in disaster-management response. International Fire Service Journal of Leadership

and Management, 8.

International Association of Fire Chiefs. (2013). Taking responsibility for a positive public

perception.
 Discourses of Disaster Response 25

International Civil Defense Organization (2014). Fire. Retrieved December 06, 2016, from

http://www.icdo.org/en/disasters/man-made-disasters/industrial-accidents/fire

Keane, A., Pickett, M., Jepson, C., Mccorkle, R., & Lowery, B. J. (1994). Psychological

distress in survivors of residential fires. Social Science & Medicine, 38(8), 1055-

1060. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90222-4

Makas, T. (2015, March 2). Over 600 fire incidents in Metro Manila from Jan. to Feb. 2015

BFP. GMA News Online. Retrieved December 5, 2016, from

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/445357/news/metro/over-600-fire-

incidents-in-metro-manila-from-jan-to-feb-2015-bfp

Misanya, D., & yhus, A. O. (2014). How communities' perceptions of disasters influence

disaster response: Managing landslides on Mount Elgon, Uganda. Disasters, 39(2),

389-405. doi:10.1111/disa.12099

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan ... (n.d.). Retrieved December 5,

2016, from http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/41/NDRRM_Plan_2011-

2028.pdf

Philippines, Senate, Senate Economic Planning Office. (2013, April). Natural Disasters at a

Glance. Retrieved December 6, 2016, from

https://www.senate.gov.ph/publications/AAG 2013-04 - Natural Disasters_final.pdf

Rosenfeld, M. S. (1989). Occupational Disruption and Adaptation: A Study of House Fire

Victims. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 43(2), 89-96.

 Discourses of Disaster Response 26

doi:10.5014/ajot.43.2.89

Potter, J. (1996b) Discourse analysis and constructionist approaches: theoretical background,

in Richardson, J. (ed) (1996) Handbook of qualitative research methods: for

psychology and the social sciences. Leicester: BPS.

Pulhin, J. M., Shaw, R., & Pereira, J. J. (2010). Climate change adaptation and disaster risk

reduction: Key challenges and ways forward. Community, Environment and Disaster

Risk Management Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction: An

Asian Perspective, 451-476. doi:10.1108/s2040-7262(2010)0000005027

Scharffscher, K. (2011),"Disempowerment through disconnection", Disaster Prevention and

Management: An International Journal, Vol. 20 Iss 1 pp. 63 - 81

Scoones, I. (1995) Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development in

Africa. International Institute for Environment and Development, London.

Seale, C. (1998) (ed) Researching society and culture. London: Sage.

Smith, J. A. (1998). Developing theory from case studies: self-reconstruction and the

transition to motherhood.In N. Hayes (Ed.).Doing qualitative analysis in

psychology.Hove: Psychology Press.

Stefanidou, M., Athanaselis, S., & Spiliopoulou, C. (2008). Health Impacts of Fire Smoke

Inhalation. Inhalation Toxicology, 20(8), 761-766. doi:10.1080/08958370801975311

 Discourses of Disaster Response 27

Stern, P. N., & Kerry, J. (1996). Restructuring Life After Home Loss by Fire. Image: The

Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 28(1), 11-16. doi:10.1111/j.1547-

5069.1996.tb01171.x

Tancogne-Dejean, M., & Laclemence, P. (2016). Fire risk perception and building evacuation

by vulnerable persons: Points of view of laypersons, fire victims and experts. Fire

Sage Journal, 80, 9-19.)

Velasco, Nenita. Epidemiological Assessment of Fires in the Philippines, 2010-2012. 2013-

35. Research, Philippine Institute for Development Studies. Makati: Philippine

Institute of Development Studies, June. 4. Print.

Wallace, R. (1978). Contagion and incubation in New York City structural fires 1964?1976.

Human Ecology, 6(4), 423-433. doi:10.1007/bf00889418

Walsh, F. (2006). Strengthening family resilience. New York: Guilford Press.

Willig, C. (2008) Introducing qualitative research methods in psychology: Adventures in

theory and method. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: McGrawHill/ Open University Press