Search results

This study investigated pre-evacuation times and evacuation behaviors of vulnerable people during the 2018 flooding in Shimobara, Okayama, Japan, and the flood-triggered factory explosion, a natural hazard-triggered technological accident known as a natural-hazard-triggered technological accidents (Natech). This study examined factors that affected evacuation decisions and pre-evacuation time, estimated the evacuation time in case of no explosion and identified community disaster prevention organization response efforts for vulnerable people.

Interviews with all 18 vulnerable people who experienced the event were conducted. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the effect of six factors on evacuation time and reasons for delayed evacuation.

Factors affecting evacuation decisions included the sound of the explosion, followed by recommendations from relatives and the community disaster prevention organization. Explosion-related injuries delayed early evacuation, but experience of previous disasters and damage had a positive effect on early evacuation. The explosion sound accelerated evacuation of non-injured people; however, explosion-related injuries significantly delayed evacuation of injured individuals. The Shimobara community disaster prevention organization’s disaster response included a vulnerable people registry, visits to all local households and a multilayered approach that enabled monitoring of all households.

This is the first study to examine the evacuation behavior of vulnerable people and community responses during a Natech event.

This paper aims to synchronize the various constitutional regulations that regulate the natural disaster management in Indonesia, especially those which apply in the Yogyakarta Special Territory after disaster through a legal interpretation and construction method to find a community empowerment-based disaster management model, which suits the Indonesian ideals of law.

This research is carried out in the Yogyakarta Special Territory province; this research uses the juridical normative method or the method with the doctrinal or the juridical normative approach. The approaches used in this research are the conceptual approach, statute approach and the sociological approach.

The numerous constitutional regulations that are formed and implemented to regulate the disaster management in Yogyakarta Special Territory cannot yet run its function as an integrating mechanism efficiently. This is mainly because the handling of disasters is usually responsive, without clear planning.

In numerous constitutional regulations, there is a synchronization between the regulations on the society’s rights and responsibilities in disaster management. The point of these regulations is that they state that every citizen has the right to obtain social protection and a sense of safety. They have the right to obtain education, trainings and skills in the establishment of disaster management. Also, they have the right to participate in policies, in accessing information on disaster prevention policies.

Efforts of response toward a disaster should be neither exclusive nor partial. A condition of disaster is a complex condition, which usually asks for a holistic response from various perspectives and experiences. It needs effective teamwork between various institutional groups. Basically, it will not be effective if it is run by a single agency exclusively. Indonesia needs a clear disaster management and needs to synchronize the law for disaster mitigation for minimize the natural disaster impact.

Various constitutional regulations made and applied to regulate disaster management in the Yogyakarta cannot yet run its function as an efficient integrating mechanism, as the law cannot yet undergo the rearrangement of the productive process in the society optimally. The goals determined in the execution of the disaster management are often not legitimized by the society, and they do not yet give a full sense of justice to them. Recovery after Yogyakarta earthquake is a slow process.

This is a relatively new research, as other researches focused on the disastrous impacts of the Yogyakarta earthquake. The disaster management system must consider and must be responsive toward diversity, differences and competition, which may arise due to social, economic, political, community and even religious factors. These differences often create a dynamic and complex relation. A wrong manner in handling this may cause horizontal conflicts.

The current pandemic and ongoing climate risks highlight the limited capacity of various systems, including health and social ones, to respond to population-scale and long-term threats. Practices to reduce the impacts on the health and well-being of populations must evolve from a reactive mode to preventive, proactive and concerted actions beginning at individual and community levels. Experiences and lessons learned from the pandemic will help to better prevent and reduce the psychosocial impacts of floods, or other hydroclimatic risks, in a climate change context.

The present paper first describes the complexity and the challenges associated with climate change and systemic risks. It also presents some systemic frameworks of mental health determinants, and provides an overview of the different types of psychosocial impacts of disasters. Through various Quebec case studies and using lessons learned from past and recent flood-related events, recommendations are made on how to better integrate individual and community factors in disaster response.

Results highlight the fact that people who have been affected by the events are significantly more likely to have mental health problems than those not exposed to flooding. They further demonstrate the adverse and long-term effects of floods on psychological health, notably stemming from indirect stressors at the community and institutional levels. Different strategies are proposed from individual-centered to systemic approaches, in putting forward the advantages from intersectoral and multirisk researches and interventions.

The establishment of an intersectoral flood network, namely the InterSectoral Flood Network of Québec (RIISQ), is presented as an interesting avenue to foster interdisciplinary collaboration and a systemic view of flood risks. Intersectoral work is proving to be a major issue in the management of systemic risks, and should concern communities, health and mental health professionals, and the various levels of governance. As climate change is called upon to lead to more and more systemic risks, close collaboration between all the areas concerned with the management of the factors of vulnerability and exposure of populations will be necessary to respond effectively to damages and impacts (direct and indirect) linked to new meteorological and compound hazards. This means as well to better integrate the communication managers into the risk management team.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on what can be learned about disaster risk reduction (DRR) from the L’Aquila trial of scientists. The court case was initiated because of a controversial meeting on 31 March 2009 of the Major Risks Committee (MRC), held under the auspices of the Italian Department of Civil Protection. The purpose of the meeting was to consider (prior to the fatal earthquake of 6 April 2009) disaster risk in the L’Aquila area, which was being affected by an earthquake swarm since October 2008.

The authors undertook a document analysis of trial materials, and a review of academic and media commentary about the trial.

The legal process revealed that disaster governance was inadequate and not informed by the DRR paradigm or international guidelines. Risk assessment was carried out only in a techno-scientific manner, with little acknowledgement of the social issues influencing risks at the local community level. There was no inclusion of local knowledge or engagement of local people in transformative DRR strategies.

Most previous commentary is inadequate in terms of not considering the institutional, scientific and social responsibilities for DRR as exposed by the trial. This paper is unique in that it considers the contents of the MRC meeting as well as all trial documents. It provides a comprehensive reflection on the implications of this case for DRR and the resilience of peoples and places at risk. It highlights that a switch from civil protection to community empowerment is needed to achieve sustainable outcomes at the local level.

Disasters and armed conflict often co-occur, but does that imply that disasters trigger or fuel conflict? In the small but growing body of literature attempting to answer this question, divergent findings indicate the complex and contextual nature of a potential answer to this question. The purpose of this study is to contribute a robust cross-country analysis of the co-occurrence of disaster and conflict, with a particular focus on the potential role played by disaster.

Grounded in a theoretical model of disaster–conflict co-occurrence, this study merges data from 163 countries between 1990 and 2017 on armed conflict, disasters and relevant control variables (low human development, weak democratic institutions, natural resource dependence and large population size/density).

The main results of this study show that, despite a sharp increase in the co-occurrence of disasters and armed conflict over time, disasters do not appear to have a direct statistically significant relation with the occurrence of armed conflict. This result contributes to the understanding of disasters and conflicts as indirectly related via co-creation mechanisms and other factors.

This study is a novel contribution, as it provides a fresh analysis with updated data and includes different control variables that allow for a significant contribution to the field.