“How Do We Actually Do Convergence”for Disaster Resilience?Cases from Australia and the United States

In recent years there has been an increasing emphasis on achieving convergence in disaster research,policy,and programs to reduce disaster losses and enhance social well-being.However,there remain considerable gaps in understanding"how do we actually do convergence?"In this article,we present three case studies from across geographies—New South Wales in Australia,and North Carolina and Oregon in the United States;and sectors of work—community,environmental,and urban resilience,to critically examine what convergence entails and how it can enable diverse disciplines,people,and institutions to reduce vulnerability to systemic risks in the twenty-first century.We identify key successes,challenges,and barriers to convergence.We build on current discussions around the need for convergence research to be problem-focused and solutions-based,by also considering the need to approach convergence as ethic,method,and outcome.We reflect on how convergence can be approached as an ethic that motivates a higher order alignment on"why"we come together;as a method that foregrounds"how"we come together in inclusive ways;and as an outcome that highlights"what"must be done to successfully translate research findings into the policy and public domains.