Contesting Responsibility in Disaster Governance: Institutional Ambiguity, Crisis Communications and Blame Attribution in Spain´s 2024 DANA catastrophe.
Author
Baviera Gimenez, Claudia
Term
4. semester
Education
Publication year
2025
Abstract
This thesis examines how responsibility was communicated and contested between Spain’s central government and the Valencian regional government during the 2024 DANA catastrophe. Adopting a constructivist lens, it applies Blame Avoidance Theory, Crisis Exploitation Theory, and Entman’s framing theory to a qualitative analysis of official statements and social media posts by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and Regional President Carlos Mazón, complemented by selected media sources and public opinion data. Given DANA’s severe human and economic toll, the case illuminates the interplay of communication, legitimacy, and accountability in a decentralized and politically polarized setting. The findings reveal a fragmented narrative landscape in which solidarity was undermined as actors sought to protect institutional legitimacy, shift blame, and claim moral authority. Contrary to the initial hypothesis that decentralization would enable timelier and more effective crisis response, Spain’s fragmented governance contributed to institutional contestation and a decline in public trust. The study thereby shows framing to be an active component of crisis management rather than a mere reflection of operations. The case is further contextualized through a comparison with Germany’s 2021 floods and the EU’s burden-sharing model to deepen insights into crisis governance in decentralized systems.
Denne afhandling undersøger, hvordan ansvar blev kommunikeret og bestridt mellem Spaniens centrale regering og den valencianske regionsregering under DANA-katastrofen i 2024. Med et konstruktivistisk udgangspunkt anvendes Blame Avoidance Theory og Crisis Exploitation Theory samt Entmans indramningsteori til en kvalitativ analyse af officielle udmeldinger og opslag fra premierminister Pedro Sánchez og regionspræsident Carlos Mazón, suppleret af udvalgte mediekilder og data om offentlig opinion. DANA var et særdeles dødeligt og ødelæggende tilfælde med omfattende skader, hvilket gør det velegnet til at belyse samspillet mellem kommunikation, legitimitet og ansvar i et decentraliseret og politisk polariseret system. Resultaterne viser en fragmenteret fortællingskontekst, hvor solidaritet blev undergravet, og hvor aktører søgte at beskytte institutionel legitimitet, flytte skyld og indtage moralske positioner. I modstrid med den indledende hypotese om, at decentralisering fremmer en hurtigere og mere effektiv krisereaktion, bidrog Spaniens fragmenterede styringsmodel til institutionelle konflikter og faldende offentlig tillid. Afhandlingen peger dermed på, at indramning ikke blot afspejler operationelle indsatser, men udgør et aktivt værktøj i kriseledelse. Endelig sættes casen i perspektiv med en sammenligning af Tysklands oversvømmelser i 2021 og EU’s byrdefordelingsmodel for at uddybe forståelsen af kriseledelse i decentraliserede systemer.
[This apstract has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project full text]