Search results

Despite Bangladesh's great strides in formulating disaster management policies following the principles of good governance, the degree to which these policies have successfully been implemented at the local level remains largely unknown. The objectives of this study were two-fold: (1) to examine the roles and effectiveness of local-level governance and disaster management institutions, and (2) to identify barriers to the implementation of national policies and Disaster-Risk-Reduction (DRR) guidelines at the local community level.

Between January 2014 and June 2015 we carried out an empirical investigation in two coastal communities in Bangladesh. We employed a qualitative research and Case Study approach, using techniques from the Participatory Rural Appraisal toolbox to collect data from local community members as well as government and NGO officials.

Our study revealed that interactive disaster governance, decentralization of disaster management, and compliance by local-level institutions with good governance principles and national policy guidelines can be extremely effective in reducing disaster-loss and damages. According to coastal community members, the local governments have generally failed to uphold good governance principles, and triangulated data confirm that the region at large suffers from rampant corruption, political favoritism, lack of transparency and accountability and minimal inclusion of local inhabitants in decision-making – all of which have severely impeded the successful implementation of national disaster-management policies.

While considerable research on good governance has been pursued, our understanding of good disaster governance and their criteria is still poor. In addition, although numerous national disaster management policy and good governance initiatives have been taken in Bangladesh, like many other developing countries, the nature and extent of their local level implementation are not well known. This study contributes to these research gaps, with identification of further research agenda in these areas.

The study focuses on good disaster governance and management issues and practices, their strengths and limitations in the context of cyclone and storm surges along coastal Bangladesh. It offers specific good disaster governance criteria for improving multi-level successful implementation. The paper deals with International Sendai Framework that called for enhancement of local level community resilience to disasters. Thus, it contributes to numerous policy and practice areas relating to good disaster governance.

Good disaster governance would benefit not only from future disaster losses but also from improved prevention and mitigation of natural hazards impact, benefiting society at large. Improvement in knowledge and practice in disaster-risk-reduction through good governance and effective management would ensure local community development and human wellbeing at the national level.

The failure of local-level government institutions to effectively implement national disaster management and resilience-building policies is largely attributable to a lack of financial and human resources, rampant corruption, a lack of accountability and transparency and the exclusion of local inhabitants from decision-making processes. Our study identified the specific manifestations of these failures in coastal communities in Bangladesh. These results underscore the vital need to address the wide gap between national DRR goals and the on-the-ground realities of policy implementation to successfully enhance the country's resilience to climate change-induced disasters.

In recent years, there have been calls on African countries to develop disaster governance system that recognises the complex nature of disaster events and reflects how their impact can prevent governments from achieving their development objectives. This chapter examines Ghana’s response to the calls by exhuming disaster management policies and the missing links in their implementation. This research was approached by comprehensively reviewing literature related to the subject. The review was supported by field-based interviews involving key stakeholders, some of whom are directly involved with disaster policy planning and implementation. The results show that even though there are several disaster management policies, they are fragmented and found within several institutions, a situation that has created some missing links in their implementation. For instance, poor collaboration and coordination among disaster management institutions hampered efforts towards disaster risk prevention, preparedness and mitigation which are viewed as cross-cutting themes in disaster management. Even more intriguing, critical stakeholders such as community groups who often play important roles in rescue and recovery operations and continue to render humanitarian services after official operations have ended are excluded from the everyday decision-making processes. Empirically, this chapter draws attention to how endogenous interventions that are deeply rooted in the culture of the people that could support well-crafted disaster legislations are often ignored. This chapter concludes that these missing links need to be addressed in order to make Ghana resilient to disaster.

The paper illustrates how accountability of collaborative governance was constituted in the context of disaster managerial work carried out by the Government, local authorities, and Maori community organisations, after the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand.

A case study detailing the communitarian approach to disaster recovery management by a nationalised Maori earthquake response network is contrasted with the formal emergency management infrastructure's response to the Canterbury earthquakes.

Critical analysis of the effectiveness and failures of these approaches highlights the institutional and cultural political issues that hinder the institutionalization of collaborative and accountable governance in the fields of disaster risk reduction and emergency management.

The paper contributes to the accountability research and practice in general and disaster accountability in particular by addressing a more multifaceted model of ‘accountability combined with collaborative governance’ as a way to build on and critique some of the seemingly more narrow views of accountability.

The study presents rare insights on the interactions between formal and community level accountability and collaborative governance in the context of New Public Governance (NPG).

This study explores the relationships between governance quality and disaster risk in respect to the pillar values of public administration. The objective is to strengthen the focus and resolve of bureaucratic institutions to engage with disaster risk management (DRM) as a core function.

Multiple correlation analysis is conducted using data from global indices of disaster risk and governance quality. This is situated in the argument for the importance of public administration to conduct DRM under the auspices of core values for governance.

There are strong relationships between measures of disaster risk and various qualities of governance that adhere to the administrative theories of public welfare management, particularly through measures for mitigation and preparedness.

This study is conducted at the national level and may obscure regional effects of governance quality and disaster risk that occur in larger and environmentally diverse countries.

There are few studies that champion the value of public administration's qualities and values in the efforts of DRM. This research provides support for such a position by connecting governance quality to disaster risk and overlaying the influence of the core administrative values of efficiency, effectiveness, the economy and equity.

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.

This paper aims to identify key factors for a contextualised Systemic Risk Governance (SRG) framework and subsequently explore how systemic risks can be managed and how local institutional mechanisms can be tweaked to deal with the complex Indonesian risk landscape.

Using a case study from Palu triple-disasters in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, the authors demonstrate how inland earthquakes in 2018 created cascading secondary hazards, namely tsunamis, liquefactions and landslides, caused unprecedented disasters for the communities and the nation. A qualitative analysis was conducted using the data collected through a long-term observation since 2002.

The authors argue that Indonesia has yet to incorporate an SRG approach in its responses to the Palu triple-disasters. Political will is required to adopt more appropriate risk governance modes that promote the systemic risk paradigm. Change needs to occur incrementally through hybrid governance arrangements ranging from formal/informal methods to self- and horizontal and vertical modes of governance deemed more realistic and feasible. The authors recommend that this be done by focusing on productive transition and local transformation.

There is growing awareness and recognition of the importance of systemic and cascading risks in disaster risk studies. However, there are still gaps between research, policy and practice. The current progress of disaster risk governance is not sufficient to achieve the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030) unless there is an effective governing system in place at the local level that allow actors and institutions to simultaneously manage the interplays of multi-hazards, multi-temporal, multi-dimensions of vulnerabilities and residual risks. This paper contributes to these knowledge gaps.

The purpose of this paper is to identify how governance and accountability have been addressed in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030.

The research is mainly based on the analysis of the SFDRR; scientific literature, particularly recent publications covering the SFDRR. The paper also takes into account grey literature.

The SFDRR does address issues of governance and accountability in disasters. However, more needs to be done to translate it into practice – particularly with regard to accountability.

The paper covers a topic that has not attracted considerable academic attention, despite the fact that the need to address accountability in disaster risk management, notably in DRR, has been generally acknowledged. By addressing governance and accountability in the most recent international DRR framework the paper adds value to the literature.

Policy is key for effective displacement governance in times of crises and in response and recovery. Therefore, this study assessed if Australian climate, disaster and emergency management policies provide effective mechanisms for governing displacement crises and areas where current approaches could be improved.

This study assessed 18 national and state-level disaster, emergency and climate change management frameworks to determine if best practice displacement governance themes were reflected in policy documents. Deductive thematic analysis was undertaken using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase method.

Issues of displacement are reflected in policies analysed in this study. However, current policy frameworks need to be equipped to comprehensively address the housing requirements of displaced people or provide long-term initiatives. Approaches are focused on crisis management rather than pre-emptively planning for displacement response and recovery. Therefore, Australia has not exercised national responsibility for displaced people appropriately.

Disaster displacement is an under-researched area of Australian scholarship and disaster management policy and practice. Therefore, this paper has practical implications in so far as it draws attention to the issue of displacement in Australia. A limitation of this paper is that it only analysed policy frameworks specific to disasters. While broader engagement was outside the scope of this study, this limitation provides opportunities for further research from disciplinary perspectives of public housing and homelessness to examine displacement policy challenges in these fields. Furthermore, this study is limited to a theoretical inquiry into this topic through a desktop review of policy documents. While this is a necessary first step, empirical studies are required to determine accurate displacement rates, drivers and people’s experience of being displaced.

This research aims to inform policy by presenting recommendations for policy interventions for disaster displacement governance. Therefore, this research has practical implications as policy and disaster risk reduction (DRR) professionals can draw from the findings of this research when planning and initiating disaster response for displaced persons.

This research draws attention to an area of disaster management practice and policy that has not been adequately accounted for. Highlighting gaps in current policy can assist in developing targeted strategies and solutions for internally displaced people, which protect their rights and meet their needs.

Displacement is a growing climate change issue. This research aims to help address this problem by drawing attention to areas where Australian disaster management approaches fail to account for displaced populations. Therefore, this research has practical implications for addressing future issues of disaster injustice that may arise if displacement continues, unacknowledged in disaster management.

Research has demonstrated that governance of disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) have evolved largely in isolation from each other – through different conceptual and institutional frameworks, response strategies and plans, at both international, national and subnational levels. As a result, the management of disaster risk through DRR and CCA is highly fragmented. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the set of actors and their location in government that create and shape governance in DRR and CCA integration within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states.

The study draws upon a range of data collection techniques including a comprehensive literature review relating to DRR and CCA in general and in the SADC member states, face-to-face interviews and an online survey. A mixed method research design was applied to the study with a total of 35 respondents from Botswana, Madagascar, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe participating in the face-to-face interviews and an online survey.

The analysis shows that DRR and CCA are carried out by different departments, agencies and/or ministries in all but three SADC member states, namely, Mozambique, Mauritius and the Seychelles. Participants were able to highlight the different ways in which integration should unfold. In light of this, the paper proposes a normative model to integrate government organisations for DRR and CCA within SADC member states.

The implementation of the model has the potential to accelerate the integration of organisations for DRR and CCA, with the resultant improvement in the implementation of risk reduction strategies and efficient use of resources.

Using critical disaster studies and state theory, we assess the disaster aid platform named Lebanon Reconstruction, Reform and Recovery Framework (3RF) that was put in place by international donors in the aftermath of the Beirut Port Blast in August 2020, in order to examine the effectiveness of its inclusive decision-making architecture, as well as its institutional building and legislative reform efforts.

The paper uses the case study approaach and relies on two original data sets compiled by authors, using desk reviews of academic literature and secondary data, in addition to 24 semi-structured expert interviews and participant observation for two years.

The aid platform appears innovative, participatory and effectively functioning toward recovery and reform. However, in practice, the government dismisses CSOs, undermines reforms and dodges state building, whereas the 3RF is structured in incoherent ways and operates according to conflicting logics, generating inertia and pitfalls that hinder effective participatory governance, prevent institutional building, and delay the making of projects.

The research contributes to critical scholarship as it addresses an important research gap concerning disaster aid platforms’ institutional design and governance that are under-studied in critical disaster studies and political studies. It also highlights the need for critical disaster studies to engage with state theory and vice-versa.

The research contributes to evaluations of disaster recovery processes and outcomes. It highlights the limits of disaster aid platforms’ claims for participatory decision-making, institutional-building and reforms.

The paper amplifies critical disaster studies, through the reflexive analysis of a case-study of an aid platform.