The importance of local communities and informal networks for household capacities to deal with electricity and ICT breakdowns in crisis and disasters Nina Heidenstrom, National Institute for Consumer Research (SIFO), Norway Linda Kvarnlf, Risk and Crisis Research Centre, Mid Sweden University INTRODUCTION Project funded by the Norwegian Research Council: HOMERISK: Risk management strategies when households face collapsing electricity and digital infrastructure ( ). Project owner: SIFO, Norway. Partners: Mid Sweden University (RCR), Iceland University, Norweigan Museum of Science and Technology The project aims include: Focusing on the household as the primary unit of analysis (and thus everyday life) Study the everyday social practices in relation to preparedness for electricity and ICT breakdowns Study the changes in social and material networks during a disaster Comparing the role of households in national emergency management plans to their role in actual disasters AIM OF THE PAPER The aim of this paper is to investigate the importance of local communities and informal networks when it comes to household capacities to deal with electricity and ICT breakdowns in crisis situations Focus on three types of communities/informal networks: Household Neighborhood Workplace Offers both social and material support to those affected by the crisis A SOCIAL PRACTICE PERSPECTIVE Households everyday doings and sayings Analysing practices consisting of: Know-how and embodied habits Institutionalised knowledge and explicit rules Engagements Technologies How these practices are performed by households Which elements and practices becomes important during a electricity and digital infrastructure breakdown caused by a crisis? Can everyday life practices become a resource in a crisis situation? Preparedness practices of everyday life RISK AND EVERYDAY LIFE Sociocultural perspective on risk (management) People make sense of risks by relating them to both social and historical context(s) Risk biographies how social structures such as gender, class, ethnicity intersect with understandings of risks Understandings of risks are dynamic - people make sense of, and thus manage, risks in complex and multiple ways METHOD AND CASES The Lrdal fire (Norway) On the evening of 18th January 2014, a fire arose in a residential dwelling in Laerdalsoyir. Due to strong wind and dry season with little snow, it spread rapidly. 0 casualities, 681 people were evacuated Electricity outage: hours Mobile coverage and internet was instable for approx. one week. Tour narratives/go-alongs Household interviews METHOD AND CASES The storm Ivar (Sweden) The storm was categorized as a class 3 warning and affected Jmtland, Vsternorrland and Gvleborgs county on the 12th of December 2013 The affected area suffered from electricity breakdowns and heavy problems in the road and train traffic. The storm caused severe damage on the forest and households were out of electricity. HOUSEHOLD: THE PERFORMANCE OF PREPAREDNESS IN EVERYDAY LIFE The household is resourceful when it comes to both preparedness and management of risks Social resources: roles, relations and responsibilities within the family, Material resources:buckets, hoses, matches, candles, power aggregates, wood stoves A large part of the preparedness activities are a part of the households everyday practices (e.g. keeping fire wood, matches and candles at home) NEIGHBORHOOD: SOCIAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL BELONGINGNESS Many of our interviewees found both social and material support through their neighbors Social resources: Information and emotional/social support from neighbors Material resources: water, power aggregate, chain saw. The interviewees refer to the history and living conditions that they share with their neighbors and local community as a form of preparedness And when we came home, we hade been visiting my mother earlier that evening, there were two large buckets with water on our door step. They [the neighbors] knew we were out of water. But we hadnt asked for it or anything. It just becomes the right thing to do in situations like this. To help each other out. (Ivar, Household 1) Living up here, you have to be prepared. (Ivar, Household 2) I think people here are used to help each other out, since there is no one else to turn to. (Ivar, Household 2) WORKPLACE: THE CENTRAL POINT OF GATHERING I managed just fine. I mean, I spent a lot of hours at work during those days. It was probably worse for Sam [wife], who was at home. (Ivar, Household 2) I had to go to work that evening since I was on call. So the preparations I did, I did there. Plugged in the power aggregates, cleaned up outside so things wouldnt blow away. Stuff like that. But at home. There wasnt much I could do there. (Ivar, Household 3) For me, it was a big relief when I was at work. There I could take a shower, charge my phone. You know, normal stuff I couldnt do at home. (Ivar, Household 5) Many of our interviewees turn to their place of work for both social and material support as well as for offering their own support Social resources: information and communication, social support, professional knowledges Material resources: water, electricity, power aggregate Private and professional roles intersect with each other CONCLUDING REMARKS From a household perspective, the home is described as on the one hand being a resourceful and safe place, and on the other hand a place associated with risk and danger. It is through everyday practices and knowledges (both private and professional) that household preparedness is performed. What can a nordic comparison offer? Analyzing differences in geographical context and social structures Different events, different consequences Thank you for listening! Please visit our project website: