Development in Practice, Volume 9, Number 3, May 1999 Conference Report Hazards, globalisation, and sustainability John Handmer and Ben Wisner Introduction The Flood Hazard Research Centre at Mid- dlesex University held this two-day work- shop on 11±12 October 1997 with the aim of bringing together a variety of perspec- tives on the way that thinking about the globalisation process, sustainable develop- ment, and vulnerability to hazards can enrich one another. While conceived of and organised by hazard researchers, we attempted to reach outside that world to invite reports on recent work in areas far from the conventional core of the study of hazards. Thus human rights entered the mix, as did research into the connections among population, environment, and security. The local politics of implementing the post-Rio Agenda 21 also featured as another element of globalisation, and the challenge of urban health was offered as an extreme case of the `ordinariness’ of the hazards faced by many of the world’s poor. The importance of gender relations in understanding social vul- nerability and the capacity to cope was also a recurring theme. These open-ended discussions began with a review of attempts to embed complex understandings of social vulnerability to hazards into planning and development. The workshop ®nished with a return to vulner- ability by considering its converse, resilience, or the capacity to cope and to recover from hazards. In between we had learned that much that is going on under the name `globalisation’ can either enhance or threaten the ability of particular groups of people to cope with hazards. Likewise, some of what is labelled `development’ actually creates new hazards, shifts risk from one social group to another, and under- mines people’s resilience. An important cross-cutting theme was the importance and limitations of data and evi- dence concerning vulnerability. Several par- ticipants had been involved in longitudinal studies that reveal certain trends. Increasing economic polarisation between rich and poor in most of the world is a feature of the rapid globalisation of markets. While accel- erating in a dramatic fashion, this is by no means a recent turn of events. Since the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank, IMF) after the 1939±1945 war, the practice of `development’ has tended to marginalise the rural poor by undermining the security of their liveli- hoods, forcing millions into squatter settle- ments in cities. The `oil shock’ and `debt crisis’ of the 1970s and 1980s exacerbated the plight of the `poorest of the poor’. Struc- tural adjustment programmes in dozens of countries have pushed urban and rural peo- ple further into poverty. Longitudinal stud- ies provide insight into the connections between such events in the global economy, sustainable livelihood security, and vulner- ability to disasters. However, `data’ and `evidence’ alone are not enough. Many governmental units worldwide are at work at national and sub- national levels, attempting to quantify risk and to model hazard impacts. While this work is important, it is equally important to point out gaps or omissions and limitations. 342 0961±4524/99/030342-05 Ó 1999 Oxfam GB Carfax Publishing