Simon, Gregory L.Gregory L.SimonO'Grady, NathanielNathanielO'GradyGrove, KevinKevinGroveEriksen, ChristineChristineEriksen0000-0002-2906-9680Chmutina, KseniaKseniaChmutinaEmmenegger, RonyRonyEmmeneggerRaju, EmmanuelEmmanuelRajuAy, DenizDenizAy0000-0003-3927-2903Lüthi, SamuelSamuelLüthiPrior, TimothyTimothyPriorUyttewaal, KathleenKathleenUyttewaalZeffiri, FilippoFilippoZeffiri2025-11-252025-11-252025-11-20https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/223803The field of disaster studies remains largely committed to a modernist spatio‐temporal imaginary that persistently emphasises the singularity of a given disaster and often fails to account for the broader set of affairs in which disasters are situated and shaped, in turn leading to circumspect, uninventive and ineffective policy outcomes. In light of these trends, we argue for a paradigm shift in disaster research. In this commentary, we aim to advance studies on the governance and management of disasters by bringing these ongoing perspectives into conversation with recent debates on reparations and reparative thought. A reparative approach to disaster research contains at least three key elements. First, reparative disaster research encourages an explicit focus on relationality that pushes us to consider the intersecting spatial–historical processes and interconnected relationships comprising complex disasters. This relational approach expands our understanding of the dynamics that shape conditions of, and responses to, vulnerability and can engender a more transformative approach that animates and activates the forms of resistance. Second, a reparative approach acknowledges the capacity for disasters to destabilise established forms of disaster planning and infrastructure, thereby creating openings for more just and equitable forms of life in transformed contexts. This approach rejects ‘paranoid’ accounts suggesting that previous disaster outcomes will be automatically reproduced. Instead, it accommodates the possibility of alternative futures that might arise from disruptions in the present. Third, this approach has implications for how we approach disasters methodologically. Specifically, it urges us to reappraise the processes by which we undertake research in terms of fostering consistent and meaningfully collaborative relationships with communities in areas impacted by disasters.endisastersgovernancehazardsreparativesocial justicevulnerability900 - History::910 - Geography & travelarticle10.48620/9251410.1111/geoj.70057