Search results

Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) was established in 1986. It was restructured in July 2003 to focus on specific technical areas: climate variability and change management, urban disaster risk management, public health in emergencies, building national and provincial disaster management systems, and community based disaster risk management (CBDRM), promoting regional cooperation, identifying disaster risk management (DRM) needs in the region and developing strategic solutions. The consolidation enables ADPC's teams to work more effectively with stakeholders and build cross-team inputs into their work. Multiple hazards under this new thematic approach are a key concept along with new areas of importance to DRM that include chemical, biological and radio-nuclear risks, heritage and disaster mitigation, and the role of domestic capital markets in financing improvements in the built environment to create a safer, more disaster-resilient world.

The terms “risk management”, “risk reduction”, “vulnerability reduction”, “capacity building” and “mitigation” began replacing the reactive term “disaster management”, thus making pro-active DRM in Asia part of the development agenda that must deal with the growing variety and intensity of hazards. It was a shift from short-term, reactive, charity-driven responses to long-term, proactive, development initiatives.

Making the right development choices requires coordinated efforts by committed leaders who have the political will and determination to include risk reduction measures in their policies and plans; a corporate sector that will prioritise risk issues and include them into their business plans; scientists who will provide the knowledge and understanding of current and new areas of risk reduction; committed non-government agencies that advocate for risk reduction; educators who are responsible for shaping the awareness of future generations; a mass media that has the power to influence and change behaviour; and informed citizens who make choices about the risks in their lives.

Reality suggests that the whole world is currently facing an unprecedented scale of natural disasters. Sri Lanka fell into this category after being one of the hardest hit countries of tsunami 2004. Irrespective of the major losses that tsunami 2004 resulted in, Sri Lanka is prone to certain natural disasters such as floods, landslides, etc., which frequently bring in severe damage throughout the country. Within the context of continuous occurrence of hazards and growing vulnerability, risk reduction has become one of the important solutions to mitigate disasters and for speedy recovery after a disaster. Disaster risk reduction entails measures to curb disaster losses by addressing hazards and the vulnerability of people, to them. Disaster risk reduction measures can be categorised in various ways. From another perspective, achieving best quality through reconstruction has shown poor results. However, there is a clear two‐way relationship between the concept of disaster risk reduction and quality of infrastructure, but it is not well explored. This paper aims to explore this issue.

Research on which this paper is based focuses on the need for investigating and exploring the relationship between disaster risk reduction and quality of infrastructure. Accordingly, this paper presents the background of the study based on a critical literature review, mainly the rationale behind selection of this particular research and the expected research approach to be adopted.

The findings suggest the notion that disaster risk reduction has an ability to influence the ultimate quality of a construction project, ultimately the success of the project.

There is a clear two‐way relationship between the concept of disaster risk reduction and quality of infrastructure, which is not yet well explored. This research will be further extended towards investigating this two‐way relationship.

Community perception of climate change is a factor in increasing local awareness of climate disaster risk. This encourages more disaster risk reduction actions by the communities themselves, and thus, provides a driver for sustainable community disaster risk management (DRM) initiatives. Using these hypotheses, this chapter assesses whether the communities’ climate change perceptions, awareness of climate hazardous risk, and subsequent actions on DRR enable local DRM capacity to reduce the increasing climate disaster risk. The study conducts household surveys with an original questionnaire in four communities in Cartago City, Costa Rica.

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.

The interview traces the early discussions in the context of disasters as developmental failures.

The transcript and video was developed in the context of a United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) project on the history of DRR.

The interview traces the development of disaster risk reduction discussions in different contexts such as “LA RED” network in Latin America.

The interview clearly highlights the need to not forget the early thoughts on vulnerability and disaster risk.

The pace of urbanization in the developing world is led by Asia. Over the next 25 years, Asia's urban population will grow by around 70% to more than 2.6 billion people. An additional billion people will have urban habitats (ADB, 2006).

The “Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and communities to disasters” (HFA) was adopted at the UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction (January 2005, Kobe, Japan). The HFA specifies that disaster risk is compounded by increasing vulnerabilities related to various elements including unplanned urbanization. Across the HFA, important elements on urban risk reduction are mentioned as one of crucial areas of work to implement the HFA. In particular incorporating disaster risk reduction into urban planning is specified to reduce the underlying risk factors (Priority 4).

Since the late 1980s, social theorists championed for the birth of a new era, in which societies were increasingly exposed to growing global risks. The presence of increasing risks including natural disasters, technological errors, terrorist attacks, nuclear wars and environmental degradation suggests that human beings are becoming increasingly vulnerable. Therefore, an understanding of vulnerability is crucial. Vulnerability is often considered as the potential to suffer from physical attacks. This approach, however, has limited capacity to explain many forms of suffering including not only physical aspects, but also mental, social, economic, political and social dimensions. This chapter draws on the vulnerability literature to present an overarching framework for the book. It starts with an outline of the concept origins, then discusses its relationship with the risk society thesis before forming conceptualisation. The chapter then points out the key similarities and differences between vulnerability and other concepts such as risk, disaster, poverty, security and resilience. The authors rework an existing “security” framework to develop a new definition of the concept of vulnerability. Finally, the authors look into the root causes and the formation of vulnerability within social systems.

Surging natural disasters globally has precipitated renewed interests in disaster risk management. Though several global and regional disaster risk management policy frameworks have been put in place, it is necessary to evaluate their successes and capacities to deliver. This chapter reviews key disaster management frameworks, particularly the Yokohama Strategy, the Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. It examines the extent to which these policies shaped Africa’s regional disaster risk management processes, with an emphasis on sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Through documentary analysis and scientific literature review, this chapter identifies key parameters that shaped SSA’s disaster risk reduction (DRR) processes and their implications for DRR policy instruments and impact studies. The analysis reveals a number of findings. First, the roll-out process of global disaster reduction and management policy processes and instruments is yet to optimally impact SSA, in terms of effective disaster management. Second, a more comprehensive understanding of the magnitude and severity of natural disasters could contribute to stem the damages linked to their occurrence. This is yet to be achieved. Third, paradigm shifts towards fully appreciating underlying disaster risk factors and manifestations could potentially support the practical drift from disaster coping and management towards risk identification, reduction and resilience building in SSA. Finally, instruments that prioritise capacity building (such as extension services training, research and development, information and communication), organisational governance, sustainable financing and technology, still relatively weak in SSA, should be stepped up to promote DRR capacities and strategies.

The 2030 agenda for sustainable development and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) constitute an overarching global milestone for creating a better sustainable future worldwide. The risk component of the agenda under the SFDRR must be better embedded into the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and integrating disaster risk management policy with broader development objectives at national and subnational levels in many countries is still a work in progress. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the progress between the SDGs and the SFDRR in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and its complementary features

Comprehensive and contextualized analyses of the progress of SFDRR and SDGs related to the LAC region need to be fully addressed to examine synergies and trade-offs with the two global agendas. Based on empirical evidence from United Nations global reports, a literature review of DRR and DRM, as well as development planning evidence, this paper addresses the implications of building coherence between the SDGs and the SFDRR in the region.

Interplay and connections of the two agendas are highlighted together with an analysis of coherence among indicators. Despite the richness of several indicators, the examined evidence suggests that derived from the current progress, indicators are unable to completely reflect the dynamics among disaster risk drivers for both the SFDRR and the SDGs in the region.

Data availability at UNIDSR as well as at the regional level can limit the scope of the research. When comparing and matching the agendas, results could be further improved upon new releases of data. SFDRR and SDGs have also ground for improvement and countries are doing well but still slow.

The paper offers new insights and findings for decision/policy makers in Latina America and the Caribbean.

The paper offers an overall understanding of the progress and coherence among SFDRR and SDGs global frameworks and provides insights to identify the gaps and opportunities that need to be addressed to integrate disaster risk reduction into sustainable development planning at national and regional scales in LAC.