Search results

Stories of disasters in Africa conjure up images of the helpless hordes, in peril and in need of outside assistance. Most of the major disasters in Africa since the 1970s have a significant food crisis and famine component. These could be linked to failed states and complex emergencies such as inter-, intra-state conflict, and civil unrest. However, the domain of disaster risk reduction (DRR) in Africa has progressed significantly in the last decade. Moreover, we find that African states are celebrating democracy through third and fourth rounds of democratic elections. With the exception of a few, the “old men” of Africa are stepping down after years of Presidency and allowing the democratic wheel to turn. DRR in Africa has not been immune to these changes. Moreover, one finds exceptional examples of political will toward DRR and multi-sectoral approaches toward solving DRR problematic. One such approach that has enjoyed heightened attention is community-based actions and involvement.

Disasters being common in Indian cities, communities have created and utilized their own coping mechanism to deal with such situations and strengthen their resilience by adopting methods to adjust to the risk situation. For example, during the Mumbai Floods in 2005, slum communities, with the support of social organizations, were able to adopt ways to cope well with the risk situation (Chatterjee, 2010). This chapter particularly focuses on community-based approaches in urban India.

This chapter illustrates local responses to disaster and highlights the potential role of three community-based society organizations (CBSOs) – women’s groups, youth groups, and religious groups – as risk communicators in Bandung, Indonesia. A framework is modeled for CBSOs’ risk communication process in bridging the gap between the local government and the community. A set of indicators in social, economic, and institutional resilience activities (SIERA), with a scope of 45 disaster risk reduction (DRR) activities covering three different disaster periods was developed to characterize the process of the delivery of risk information by these CBSOs through their activities at subdistrict and ward levels. The data were collected through a questionnaire survey method using the SIERA approach. Each CBSO leader in a ward was surveyed about their perceptions of these 45 ongoing SIERA activities and their risk information source and dissemination process. Statistical analysis was applied to determine the relationship between variables such as periods of disaster and types of SIERA activities and its attributing factors (location, population, and dynamic of organizations in their locale) in finding variations of risk communication activity that may function for communities. Five risk communication processes of the CBSOs are identified; when their perceptions and ongoing activities are compared, activities such as dissemination of disaster risk information, conveying early warnings to their peers, and involvement of the local government have been carried out by these CBSOs. This indicates that CBSOs’ activities already have a certain degree of risk communication embedded in the communities. The results confirm that these CBSOs, through their social networks, can become active agents of change and bridge the communication gap between government and community. Thus, CBSOs’ risk communication provides the opportunity to contribute to the overall resilience-building and disaster risk reduction as part of people-centered actions and local responses to disasters.

The community plays a crucial role in disaster risk reduction (DRR). The Hyogo Declaration adopted at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction held in Kobe in 2005 stresses that strengthening community-level capacities to reduce disaster risk at the local level is especially needed (UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction [UNISDR], 2005). Following the Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, 2011 in Japan, community-based organizations (CBOs) have conducted various activities, such as searching and rescuing victims, closing gates, monitoring tsunamis, assisting evacuation, firefighting, and operating evacuation shelters at the risk of their staff's lives, while local governments lost their staff and facilities in the functions of disaster management. Some 250 volunteer members of firefighting CBOs were dead or are still missing.

Risk reduction in cities of fast developing nations is both an opportunity and a big challenge. It is an opportunity because cities are considered efficient spatial forms of human habitation where smart interventions can be optimized. However, involvement and ownership of urban society is a big challenge. This paper illustrates these challenges and opportunities with an example of India's largest city – Mumbai. It discusses Mumbai's key drivers of risk, contributing factors to vulnerabilities and places it in the context of the 2005 flood – a disaster of a scale never experienced before. Citizen–government partnerships emanating from community-based small-scale initiatives for improving neighborhood's environment are analyzed. The paper concludes that there are enormous benefits in scaling up the participatory approaches, which result in reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing resilience of cities. Urban risk reduction will remain a daunting task if not built around these existing strengths of cities and their citizens.

Communities are at the core of the risk reduction initiatives, since it is related to their lives and properties. There are different ways of putting the term, community based, community centered, community owned, etc. Needless to say, risk reduction initiatives started at the community level. Even before the existence of the states, the communities were the managers and solution providers. They used to take care of themselves individually or collectively. That time, it was not called “community based,” since it was the only option available. After the establishment of the state, the government took the control of disaster risk reduction and failed in several cases. Thus, over the past 30–40 years, the concept of community based or community centered has emerged once again, is now gaining momentum. This means, we are going back to the basics.

The impact of climate disasters (e.g., floods, storms, or landslides), which are generally of low intensity and high frequency, should not be overlooked in developing countries. Global experiences related to the damage due to these disasters indicate that such events can be devastating in communities that are vulnerable to hazardous impacts. Cumulative effects of climate disasters are a sign of a potential catastrophe. Moreover, the recent increase in these events poses additional issues that increase the cost of local public administration, including emergency operation and infrastructure recovery. This chapter explains key problems related to climate disasters that are increasing, particularly in the local area of developing countries, and clarifies the need to incorporate climate disaster risk reduction into public development planning and practice. The chapter also provides descriptions of the research location, approaches of the study, and the structure of this book.

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.

Based on the case study examples described in the book, this chapter focuses on key issues and future perspectives of the CBDRR.