Search results

This paper aims to explore how different risk perceptions of experts, institutions and laymen have to be taken into consideration if non-governmental organizations and donors want to include the community in disaster risk reduction. Otherwise, community-based disaster risk management will not be community-based.

This research is based on an intensive literature review, as well as a four-month felt study in Kathmandu (November 2011-February 2012). This study explores, from a social constructive point of view, the relationship among international, national and local actors in the effort to conduct disaster risk reduction in Nepal through a community-based approach.

The Kathmandu Valley is at risk of being hit by an earthquake at anytime. If an earthquake hits, it will cause total devastation. Although the Nepalese are aware of the risks of a potential earthquake, very few have begun preparations. The author finds that the lack of preparation is partly caused by different risk perceptions among experts, institutions and laymen.

Involving the community in disaster risk reduction today is widely accepted as the right way to work with disaster risk reduction. But, rarely the question is made: are we really involving the community by taking their risk perception serious, and not just accepting the risk perceptions from experts and institutions of science as being the right way to perceive disaster risk. The author finds that there is a tendency to ignore the community in community-based earthquake preparedness in Nepal.

Understanding bottom-up approaches including local coping mechanisms, recognizing them and strengthening community capacities is important in the process of disaster risk reduction. The purpose of this paper is to address the questions: to what extent existing disaster policies in Nepal support and enable community-based disaster resilience? and what challenges and prospects do the communities have in responding to disaster risk for making communities resilient?

This paper is based on policy and academic literature reviews complimented by field research in two communities, one in Shankhu, Kathmandu district and another in Satthighare, Kavrepalanchowk district in Nepal. The author conducted in-depth interviews and mapped out key disaster-related policies of Nepal to investigate the role of communities in disaster risk management and post-disaster activities and their recognition in disaster-related policies.

The author found that existing literature clearly identifies the importance of the community led initiatives in risks reduction and management. It is evolutionary phenomenon, which has already been piloted in history including in the aftermath of Nepal earthquake 2015 yet existing policies of Nepal do not clearly identify it as an important component by providing details of how communities can be better engaged in the immediate aftermath of disaster occurrence.

The author conducted this research based on data from two earthquake affected areas only. The author believes that this research can still play an important role as representative study.

The practical implication of this research is that communities need to understand about risks society for disaster preparedness, mitigation and timely response in the aftermath of disasters. As they are the first responders against the disasters, they also need trainings such as disaster drills such as earthquakes, floods and fire and mock practice of various early warning systems can be conducted by local governments to prepare these communities better to reduce disaster risk and casualties.

The mantra of community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) is community engagement, which means the involvement of local people to understand and prepare against their local hazards and risks associated with disaster and haphazard development. CBDRM approaches motivate people to work together because they feel a sense of belongingness to their communities and recognize the benefits of their involvement in disaster mitigation and preparedness. Clearly, community engagement for disaster risk reduction and management brings great benefits in terms of ownership and direct savings in losses from disasters because the dynamic process allows community to contribute and interchange ideas and activities for inclusive decision making and problem solving.

This research is based on both primary and secondary data and original in case of its findings and conclusion.

Disaster management agencies are mandated to reduce risk for the populations that they serve. Yet, inequities in how they function may result in their activities creating disaster risk, particularly for already vulnerable and marginalized populations. In this article, how disaster management agencies create disaster risk for vulnerable and marginalized groups is examined, seeking to show the ways existing policies affect communities, and provide recommendations on policy and future research.

The authors undertook a systematic review of the US disaster management agency, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), examining its programs through a lens of equity to understand how they shape disaster risk.

Despite a growing commitment to equity within FEMA, procedural, distributive, and contextual inequities result in interventions that perpetuate and amplify disaster risk for vulnerable and marginalized populations. Some of these inequities could be remediated by shifting toward a more bottom-up approach to disaster management, such as community-based disaster risk reduction approaches.

Disaster management agencies and other organizations can use the results of this study to better understand how to devise interventions in ways that limit risk creation for vulnerable populations, including through community-based approaches.

This study is the first to examine disaster risk creation from an organizational perspective, and the first to focus explicitly on how disaster management agencies can shape risk creation. This helps understand the linkages between disaster risk creation, equity and organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the effectiveness of disaster risk reduction (DRR) projects carried out by a Korean NGO in Ayeyarwaddy, Myanmar. The paper discusses project effectiveness, community participation and sustainability in disaster preparedness as well as the “build back better” concept.

The findings are drawn from a mixed methods approach consisting of focus groups, interviews of key stakeholders and a cross-sectional community household survey comparing project and neighbouring villages.

Project villages were better prepared in terms of increased awareness and participation in DRR activities. However, the qualitative data showed a low level of participation, facilitating limited changes and leaving the element of sustainability in question. Most activities were responsive rather than preventive.

The study faced unavoidable constraints. The author was invited to assess the project only after implementation, precluding a controlled trial. With time at the site limited, an alternative systematic post hoc evaluation strategies were not feasible. The triangulation of data manages these methodological challenges to the extent possible. Still, that the positive findings on preparedness and capacity changes derive from self-assessment should be kept in mind.

Where appropriate, DRR projects should include measurable evaluation tools from the project design stage. DRR as a goal in of itself is not adequate to transform the region. Instead, DRR projects should consider “development-centred disaster resilience” as the ultimate goal to aim toward.

There have been virtually no assessments of regional DRR project effectiveness in Myanmar. The study applies the Sendai Framework as an analytical framework to assess community-based DRR, which could also be applied to other contexts.

The purpose of this study is to identify the preparedness of disaster mitigation agency officers in both urban and rural areas as high vulnerability zones in Aceh, Indonesia, in dealing with disasters.

This cross-sectional study adopted a conceptual framework from the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and United Nations of Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) (LIPI-UNESCO/ISDR, 2006), explaining the study of community preparedness in anticipating earthquake and tsunami disasters. The framework of the study consists of five disaster preparedness parameters, namely, knowledge and attitude to face disasters, policies and guidelines, emergency response plans, disaster early warning systems and mobilization of resources. This conceptual framework was developed after the 2004 tsunami through an analysis study in the three provinces in Indonesia (Aceh, Padang and Bengkulu) experiencing earthquakes and tsunamis. This conceptual framework serves as a guideline and is in line with the objective of the regional disaster management Agency to reduce disaster risk through increasing community preparedness, especially providers or officers in anticipating disasters.

There was a significant difference in disaster preparedness among officers from the urban and rural areas. The area size, location accessibility, the communication network and disaster detection and warning facilities could associate with the results.

The respondents were selected from only two districts in Aceh Province, Indonesia, which are vulnerable to disasters. The study only identifies the disaster preparedness among disaster management agency officers (DMAOs) adopted from LIPI-UNESCO/ISDR about community preparedness in anticipating disasters particularly tsunami and earthquake. Therefore, the results of this study may have limited generalizability to other areas in Indonesia and beyond.

The results of this study could possibly serve as recommendations for policymakers and disaster management agencies, particularly in rural areas to prepare contingency plans that involve both internal and external institutions to arrange the regulations related to community-based emergency response plans and disaster early warning systems. Such programs of education, training and disaster drill needed to be in place and conducted regularly for the officers in a rural area. Finally, the other sub-scales showed no difference in disaster preparedness, however, collaboration and support to each other in disaster risk reduction plan by improving the capacity building, policy enhancement and disaster management guidelines are required. Also, attempts to optimize logistics adequacy, budget allocations and disaster preparedness education and training for both DMAOs are strongly recommended through the lens of the study. The results of the study might useful for further research that could be developed based on this current study.

The emergency response plans and disaster early warning systems were significantly different between the rural and urban officers in disaster preparedness. Attending disaster management programs, experiences in responding to disasters and the availability of facilities and funds could be considered in ascertaining the preparedness of officers to deal with disasters.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how social capital operated in the lives of 15 respondents from Lalitpur following the massive 1934 Kathmandu Valley earthquake. Based on experiences of the survivors, it attempts to understand how individuals and families utilized their social capital in the aftermath of the earthquake, and rebuild their lives and communities.

This is a qualitative study based on non-structured interviews and discussions with disaster victims on their own locality. Following Padgett's (2008) grounded theory approach, flexible method of data collection is adopted through interactions with respondents and following up on important cues or patterns as additional data emerged.

Participants described a process through which they relied on bonding, bridging and linking social capital in different stages of earthquake response and recovery. Close ties or bonding social capital were important for immediate support, but bridging and linking social capital offered pathways to longer term survival and wider neighbourhood and community revitalization. This paper also discusses how social capital inclusion in pre-disaster communities might be helpful to strengthen their response capacity.

As the study participants were less than ten years old when the earthquake happened, they might have omitted or overlooked some important details about the event. The findings are based not only on participant's own memories, but they also shared stories told by their parents which were the indirect experiences.

This study indicates the potential value and need for including bonding, bridging and linking social capital and traditional social networks in disaster planning. A key outcome related to disaster policy would be what institutional condition or combinations of different dimensions of social capital may serve the public for better disaster response and recovery.

This study has paid attention to how social capital might be useful in disaster risk reduction both in post-disaster phase and in pre-disaster condition which may be rare in disaster studies. It also provides an insight into how community-based disaster management can take into account pre-existing social systems and traditional social networks to build local capacities.

The purpose of the paper is to provide a retrospective assessment of progress in disaster risk governance in Africa against the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) since 2000. This assessment of progress achieved in disaster risk governance in Africa aims to identify achievements, good practices, gaps and challenges against selected HFA indicators (in particular Priority 1).

This study mainly followed a qualitative methodology although quantitative data were interpreted to achieve the research objectives. Available literature (scientific articles, research and technical reports) on disaster risk governance was used as primary research data. This research used a selected number of African countries as its basis for analysis (Burundi, Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Swaziland and South Africa). By investigating literature on disaster risk governance an analytical framework was developed which guided the assessment of the achievements, good practices, gaps and challenges in implementing disaster risk governance on the African continent since the inception of the HFA in 2005.

The research found that African countries have been making steady progress in implementing disaster risk governance against theoretical indicators. The continent contains a few international best practices which other nations can learn from. Certain gaps and challenges are, however, still hampering better progress in the reduction of disaster risks. There is the need for multi-layered ownership and understanding of disaster risks and their cross-sectoral nature, with strong community engagement.

An assessment of progress in disaster risk governance in Africa can assist greatly in shaping future international and national policy, legislation and implementation. The research provided input to the Global Assessment Report for 2015 and identified opportunities in disaster risk governance beyond 2015.

The transcript is of one from a number of interviews with disaster risk reduction (DRR) “pioneers” carried out in 2022 as a part of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) project to record the history of the field. It aims to enable one of the “pioneers” to explain his role in the emergence of disaster studies and provide critical commentary on what he considers is wrong with current DRR approaches.

Terry Cannon was interviewed to explain the beginnings of his involvement in disasters research and to comment on his views on progress in the field of disaster risk reduction since his early work in the 1980s. The transcript and video were developed in the context of the UNDRR project on the history of DRR.

The interview provides an account of the origins of the book “At Risk” and why it was considered necessary. This is put into the context of how the field of DRR has emerged since the 1980s. It elicits opinions on what he considers the gaps in both his early work (especially in the book “At Risk” of which he was a co-author) and in the field of DRR recently.

It provides historical context on how early disaster research developed the alternative framework of “social construction” of disasters, in opposition to the idea that they are “natural”. It challenges some of the approaches that have emerged as DRR and has been institutionalised, including its increasing difficulty in supporting the ideas of social construction.

Persuading “urban communities” and “sustaining” environmental risk reduction measures among them, always remains a challenge. Disasters are generally perceived as one‐time, long return period, high impact events. Even in the disaster struck areas, as the time passes, people tend to overlook the miseries of the past and continue to create risk. This paper seeks to examine how neighborhood environmental issues bring communities together and also sustainably reduce risk in Mumbai.

This diagnostic study is based on thorough literature survey backed with field visit to capture viewpoints of communities, local officials, civic society, etc. The urbanization pattern of Mumbai is elaborated with specific focus on city governance and recognizing environmental and disaster vulnerabilities. Recent flood in Mumbai is deconstructed to delve of specific role of communities and other stakeholders. Existing participatory mechanism known as ALM is construed to reflect on its role in risk reduction followed by suggestive course of action.

ALM as “municipal agency‐neighborhood group partnership” has helped people learn caring the areas beyond own housing premises and work together for locality problems. City government boosted this community‐led effort, as it was not only reducing burden on overstressed municipal services and reducing flood risk but also helping to let down epidemics and water‐borne diseases.

This study is based on field study from only one city of India. Inputs from other cities from the developing world may further enrich the research.

It is observed that with due encouragement and support from local government, the voluntary community action towards neighborhood level issues can be well mobilized and sustained for long‐term.

People‐centered approaches transcend across developmental disciplines and significantly contribute towards reduction of environmental and hazard risk.