The Social Science Extreme Events Research (SSEER) Network
Connecting social science hazards and disaster researchers
About SSEER
The Social Science Extreme Events Research (SSEER) network is a National Science Foundation-supported platform for social science hazards and disaster researchers. SSEER is an initiative of the Natural Hazards Engineering Research Infrastructure (NHERI) CONVERGE facility, which is headquartered at the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado Boulder.
The mission of SSEER is to identify social science researchers and help them build connections—to one another, to interdisciplinary teams, and to communities affected by disaster and disaster risk. SSEER is designed to amplify and advance social science hazards and disaster research. SSEER is the first attempt to generate a census, or an official count, of social scientists who study hazards and disasters. The network will help answer some of the questions raised in the landmark 2006 National Research Council consensus study Facing Hazards and Disasters: Understanding Human Dimensions .
Meet the SSEER Team!
From left to right:
- Lori Peek, Principal Investigator and SSEER Leader (2017 to present)
- Jessica Austin, SSEER Data and Map Manager (2020 to 2023)
- Heather Champeau, SSEER Data Analyst (2020 to 2023)
- Brigid Mark, SSEER Data and Map Manager (2024 to present)
- Mason Mathews, SSEER Map Creator and Data Analyst (2018 to 2019)
- Haorui Wu, SSEER Data Manager (2018 to 2019)
The SSEER Team
What Do SSEER Researchers Study?
SSEER researchers study all phases of the disaster cycle, from mitigation to long-term recovery. SSEER members also study all types of hazards and disasters, including natural hazards, technological hazards, and terrorist attacks or other intentional acts of violence.
Hazard Types and Subtypes
The following charts depict the number of SSEER researchers who report studying each of the three main types of hazards, along with natural and technological hazard subtypes.
According to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, "Natural hazards are predominantly associated with natural processes and phenomena." Technological hazards, on the other hand, "originate from technological or industrial conditions, dangerous procedures, infrastructure failures or specific human activities." 1 The Natural Hazards Center created a third category, Terrorist Attacks and Other Acts of Intentional Violence, to describe events initiated by human action and intended to inflict mass harm, such as bombings, shootings, and biochemical attacks.
Natural hazard subtypes include meteorological (e.g., hurricane, extreme temperatures), hydrological (e.g., flood, landslide), climatological (e.g., drought, wildfire), geophysical (e.g., earthquake, volcanic activity), biological (e.g., epidemic, insect infestation), and extraterrestrial (e.g., meteor impact, space weather).
Technological hazard subtypes include industrial accidents (e.g., oil spill, radiation leak), transport accidents (e.g., airline crash, sea vessel sinking), and incidents of toxic exposure/environmental injustice.
The vast majority of SSEER members study natural hazards.
Specific Disasters Studied
SSEER researchers worldwide have studied a variety of hazards and disasters. Five of the most frequently studied disasters are US-based hurricanes. Other frequently studied events include the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks of 2001; the Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami of 2004; the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami of 2011; the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill of 2010; and, most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, which became one of the most studied events upon its emergence in 2020.
This interactive map tour presents research highlights from the top ten most studied events in the SSEER dataset.
Terri Adams-Fuller, PhD
Hurricane Katrina, 2005
Dr. Adams-Fuller and her co-author, Dr. Larry Stewart, examined the organizational functions of the New Orleans Police Department during Hurricane Katrina, using chaos theory as a focusing tool. The authors describe how the storm’s destruction and the uncertainty of the unfolding events led to impaired communication, command structure, and sense-making among police officials, as well as how lessons learned resulted in change.
Kevin Smiley, PhD
Hurricane Harvey, 2017
Dr. Smiley and colleagues used socioeconomic data along with hydrological flood models in Harris County, Texas to evaluate the socio-spatial characteristics persons living on properties affected by climate change-attributed flooding. The authors found that climate change impacts were disproportionately borne by Latina/o neighborhoods, and especially those that were low-income and/or located outside FEMA’s 100-year floodplain.
Yadira Nieves-Pizarro, PhD
Hurricane Maria, 2017
Dr. Nieves-Pizzaro and colleagues explored the informational and other roles of Puerto Rican AM radio journalists during Hurricane Maria. Through in-depth interviews, the researchers found that the broadcasters displayed great adaptability in the face of inadequate preparedness; acted as first responders; and remained dedicated to reporting, even while fearing for their own and their families’ safety.
Yaira Hamama-Raz, PhD and Menachem Ben-Ezra, PhD
Hurricane Sandy, 2012
Drs. Hamama-Raz and Ben-Ezra and colleagues examined gender differences between men and women in their psychological responses to Hurricane Sandy. Results indicated that women were more susceptible to post-traumatic stress symptoms when considering fears of future disasters, and that women and men recalled past disaster events differently, demonstrating a need for psychological interventions tailored to gender.
Morufu Olalekan Raimi, PhD
COVID-19, 2020 to Present
Dr. Raimi and colleagues examined COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and barriers among residents of Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Through review of the literature and case studies, the authors found that reasons for vaccine hesitancy included scientific misconceptions, mistrust of healthcare providers, and fear of adverse post-vaccine health effects.
Hans Louis-Charles, PhD
Hurricane Irma, 2017
Dr. Louis-Charles and colleagues investigated the discrepancy between media claims of looting and burglaries and the reality observed by public officials following Hurricanes Irma and Maria in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Contrary to media reports, the authors’ fieldwork revealed substantial community solidarity and pro-social behavior, surmising that a concomitant short-lived rise in burglary levels reflects a need to prioritize humanitarian assistance.
Erica Kuligowski, PhD
9/11 Terrorist Attacks, 2001
Dr. Kuligowski and her co-author, Dennis Mileti, used path analysis via telephone data from survivors in World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 to examine whether community evacuation theories apply to building fires. They found that longer pre-evacuation times were associated with a higher number of environmental cues (i.e., sensory input that indicated an emergency); being on a lower floor; seeking and gathering information about the event; and performing pre-evacuation actions, such as searching for and helping others.
Janki Andharia, PhD
Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami, 2004
Dr. Andharia’s fieldwork with the Nicobarese tribal community of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, an archipelago in the Bay of Bengal, revealed that governments’ universal approach to disaster discourse can further marginalize and harm Indigenous communities. Close attention to cultural differences, power dynamics, social strata, and local knowledge can help to ensure that the recovery process is helpful, not harmful, to these communities.
Tomohide Atsumi, PhD
Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, 2011
Dr. Atsumi investigated a potential “pay it forward” network consisting of those who had received aid in previous disasters assisting survivors in the Tohoku region of Japan following the Great East Japan Earthquake. Through a process of sharing their own experiences with current survivors, past survivors were able to extend feelings of post-disaster solidarity and practice reciprocity.
Gabriella Meltzer, PhD
BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, 2010
Dr. Meltzer and colleagues used an environmental justice perspective to examine how children in low-income or racial/ethnic minority groups were affected mentally and physically by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Racial or ethnic minority group status significantly predicted new physical health problems as a result of the disaster, while low-income status significantly predicted new mental health problems.
When Was SSEER Launched?
The SSEER network was funded by the National Science Foundation in 2017 and was formally launched in 2018 when Lori Peek issued " A Call to Social Scientists " to join SSEER. SSEER is one of eight Extreme Events Reconnaissance / Research (EER) networks funded by the National Science Foundation, with supplemental funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The EERs focus on geotechnical engineering, social sciences, structural engineering, nearshore research, operations and systems engineering, sustainable materials management, public health, and interdisciplinary research. This EER ecosystem is designed to help coordinate disciplinary communities, while also encouraging cross-disciplinary data collection, information sharing, and interdisciplinary integration.
CONVERGE Extreme Events Reconnaissance/Research Networks
Where Are SSEER Researchers Located?
SSEER researchers work in 67 countries on 6 continents.
2018
647 researchers from 47 countries joined the SSEER network in the network's first year.
2019
302 social scientists joined the SSEER network, including members from 9 new countries.
2020
322 social scientists joined the SSEER network, including members from 10 new countries.
2021
124 social scientists joined the SSEER network, including members from one new country.
2022
126 social scientists joined the SSEER network.
At the end of 2022, there were 1,521 researchers in the SSEER network.
Who Are SSEER Researchers?
SSEER includes self-identified social scientists who study hazards and/or disasters. This includes academic researchers, students, and applied and professional researchers in government, industry, and private and not-for-profit sectors. Those interested in joining the network fill out a brief membership form with information about their affiliations, research, and demographics.
Level of Involvement
The SSEER team published an expanded typology of four levels of involvement in the hazards and disaster field (see Peek, Champeau, Austin, et al. 2020 ). We use that typology in the SSEER membership survey and ask each respondent to select which best describes their status as a hazards and disaster researcher: core, emerging, periodic, or situational researcher.
The map below identifies SSEER researchers grouped by their level of involvement. Click on any cluster, then "Browse Features" to view individual researcher details. As you zoom in and out, the clusters shift color to reflect the level of involvement most prevalent in that area.
Professional Status
SSEER researchers are asked to indicate which professional status most closely aligns with their professional identity: academic researcher, government researcher, independent researcher, non-profit researcher, private-sector researcher, retired, or student.
Demographics
SSEER researchers are asked to answer a series of demographic questions. These statistics are reported below in aggregate.
How Do SSEER Members Study Hazards and Disasters?
SSEER members represent a variety of disciplines under the social sciences umbrella, and use a number of analytical frameworks and methods to perform their research.
Discipline
The SSEER membership survey asks researchers to identify their disciplinary background(s) from a list of 20 social science fields. Members are allowed to select more than one discipline and write in other disciplines, and many choose to do so.
This interactive map allows you to display researchers by discipline.
Of the 20 disciplines offered on the SSEER survey, most members identified with Disaster Science.
Methods
The SSEER membership survey asks researchers to identify the research method(s) they use from a list of 21 commonly-used social science methods, both quantitative and qualitative. Members are allowed to select more than one method and write in other methods, and many choose to do so.
This interactive map allows you to display researchers by method.
The most frequently reported methodological approaches used by SSEER researchers include survey research, in-depth interviews, and case studies.
SSEER Products
The SSEER team releases an annual census report on the status of the research workforce. Annual reports are available in color and black and white and are free to download.
SSEER Annual Census Reports, 2018-2022
In addition to the annual census, de-identified SSEER data are published on DesignSafe each year. The data provide unprecedented access to information about the workforce of social science hazards and disaster researchers, including longitudinal data for a subset of members who have updated their profile.
SSEER Annual Data Releases
Join SSEER
The SSEER network is a diverse community of social scientists who work across the globe on today's most pressing questions concerning hazards and disasters. If you are a social or behavioral scientist who studies hazards and disasters, you are invited to join the Social Science Extreme Events Research (SSEER) network. Please complete the sign-up survey , and if you know other social scientists who study hazards and disasters who might want to participate in SSEER, please pass this information along. Our goal is to generate a complete census of the social science hazards and disaster research community, and we look forward to continuing our mission of amplifying the critical insights generated by these scholars.
If you have any questions about SSEER, please contact us at sseer@colorado.edu .