Mapping NaTech Research Gaps: A Systematic Review of Reviews

Elliot Quiriconi (), Anouck Adrot () and Chabane Mazri ()
Additional contact information
Elliot Quiriconi: DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, INERIS - Institut National de l'Environnement Industriel et des Risques
Anouck Adrot: Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres
Chabane Mazri: INERIS - Institut National de l'Environnement Industriel et des Risques

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: NaTech events or risks, defined as technological accidents triggered by natural hazards, have become increasingly important in contemporary risk management. The growing frequency of disasters and intensification of natural hazards generate an urgent need for comprehensive understanding of this complex type of risk. The current literature on NaTech risks is fragmented across multiple fields and disciplines due to the transdisciplinary nature of these risks, as evidenced by the proliferation of existing literature reviews. This first version paper presents an exploratory and original systematic review of the literature that identifies and categorizes the research gaps documented in existing NaTech reviews. Using a two-dimension coding method, we identify, categorize, map and then analyze the research gaps in these reviews. The first dimension draws on the research gap typology developed by Müller-Bloch and Kranz (2014) (deductive coding). The second dimension (inductive coding) proceeds by extracting themes from the gaps. Research progress documented in these reviews is also coded using the same epistemic categories, enabling a parallel analysis of both gaps and advances. The intersection of these coding dimensions produces a bidimensional matrix (epistemic nature of the gap; thematic content). This enables us to study the evolution of these gaps through parallel documentation of both identified gaps and research progress, determining which gaps have been addressed, which persist, and which are emerging. Based on these results, we identify unidentified gaps: as a lack of ontological and epistemological questioning, a need to shift from site-centric to systemic conceptualizations, and a gap about warning and alert processes in multi-risk contexts. These gaps, complementing those already identified, may form a new research agenda for future cross-disciplinary research.

Keywords: Natural hazards; Industrial hazards; Review; Research gap; NaTech (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05711012v1
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in ESREL 2026, 2026, Braga, Portugal. ⟨10.3850/ESREL2026061419_esrel26-p26321-cd⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-05711012v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05711012

DOI: 10.3850/ESREL2026061419_esrel26-p26321-cd

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().