One Hundred Years of Certitude? Disaster Response and Recovery since the Halifax Explosion

In 1917, a collision between two ships in Halifax Harbor resulted in the largest human-made explosion before the bombing of Hiroshima. SS Mont Blanc was loaded with munitions, and when the Imo collided with it, the resulting explosion destroyed 22 percent of the city, killed 1,963 people, and injured 9,000.1 In 1920, Samuel Prince published a sociological analysis of the response. His was one of the first explorations of disaster and community recovery and set the tone for the modernist view of disaster response, relief, and recovery.2 The Halifax Explosion was a maritime disaster that devastated a coastal community, and on the 100th anniversary this essay takes stock of the prevailing and emergent views of disaster response, relief, and recovery. It is variously claimed that the frequency of disasters is increasing, that this is happening naturally, or that there is some inherent process of disaster creation that is rapidly accelerating.3 Alarming suggestions are made that rapid technological revolution, globalization with attendant interconnectedness of events, increasing terrorist and subversive activities, climate change causing new weather patterns, increasing mobility of humans heightening the risk of mass epidemics, and exponential population growth resulting in use of marginal land have all contributed to the growing number of disasters and crises.4 No longer, it is claimed, can organizations and governments hope for stable and predictable patterns of continuity.5 These claims often begin arguments for an increased need for organizations and experts able to understand and manage these events. In other words,