Understanding the Warning Process Through the Lens of Practice: Emancipation as a Condition of Action–Some Lessons from France - Reducing Disaster: Early Warning Systems for Climate Change - page 214

Chapter 12
Understanding the Warning Process Through
the Lens of Practice: Emancipation as
a Condition of Action-Some Lessons
from France

Laurence Créton-Cazanave

Abstract Above and beyond the instruments, technical and procedural, which can
be implemented to plan an EWS, it is useful to consider warning as an action
process from the perspective of its practical implementation by the actors on the
ground. In this case, it appears that the actors - however well-intentioned - often
encounter a problem that seems insuperable: in risk situations, they have to manage
and consider an ever-growing number of 'things' (or entities) that can literally
'paralyse' action. The number of entities to take into account in fact proves much
larger than just the components of the EWS and represents a real headache for the
people involved. Through an in-depth analysis of the practices of the actors in the
fl ash fl ood warning process in the Vidourle catchment, this chapter identifi es a
strategy for managing this - the detour - which illustrates 'emancipation' practices.

12.1 Introduction

The likelihood of disturbance, or even a rise, in extreme weather events due to climate
change and the associated growing uncertainty about the tools we use to analyse these
phenomena are exacerbating the risks of weather-induced disasters (e.g. Dankers and
Feyen 2008 ; Field et al. 2012 ). Apart from measures to reduce long-term vulnerabil-
ity, advance warning remains an essential means of mitigating these climate risks.
Warning does not help to prevent hazards or change how they evolve. On the
other hand, it does help us adjust our responses to the situation, and adapt the ways
we coexist with our environment at a given moment. Above all, warning enables
us to retain our capacity to act. It is therefore an activity that works not against