Mapping NaTech Research Gaps: A Systematic Review of Reviews

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.