Search results

This chapter reviews and compares Southeast Asia country practices on global, regional, and local practices for disaster risk assessment (DRA). DRA research and practices include and create a disaster risk management (DRM) solution. There are 11 countries in Southeast Asia, but only 10 countries are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), except Timor-Leste. The key objective of ASEAN’s formation is cooperation in economic growth, social, regional peace and cultural development, disaster management cooperation, and humanitarian assistance at the regional level. The DRM system practiced in ASEAN member countries is discussed in this chapter. Furthermore, the system and findings of DRAs are also addressed. Globally, two DRA structures are discussed and compared, namely Index of Risk Management (INFORM) and World Risk Index (WRI). In addition, regional vulnerability assessment guidelines for regional and national levels are discussed. However, several selected studies and practices such as the Indonesian Risk Index (InaRISK) are being discussed at the local level. Overall, there is space for improvement of coordination in terms of data and technology sharing for DRM, especially for assessment. The finding of this review highlighted the complexity of DRA at the global and regional levels and encouraging community DRA among the ASEAN members.

Nowadays, under climate change contexts, natural disasters are becoming stronger in intensity and probability. The impacts of natural disasters on people and the environment are also getting worse. The purpose of this study was conducted to provide a method of assessing disaster risks, in particular, floods for human life in Mid Central Vietnam.

The pre-disaster assessment method was used based on the analysis of hazard factors (Hazard-H), exposure to hazards (Exposure-E) and vulnerability (Vulnerability-V).

Flood disaster risks in the area are assessed and displayed on spatial maps. The districts in coastal plains of Quang Ngai and Thua Thien Hue provinces have the highest levels of risk. These assessments will play an important role in supporting flood prevention and mitigation in the region.

According to the authors, this is the first study assessing the flood risk in Vietnam on the pre-disaster perspective. The assessment provides a plain point of view on natural disaster impacts that supporting disaster prevention services.

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 purpose of the paper is to provide a robust and simple methodology for disaster risk management officials to assess the total disaster risk posed by dolomite in urban areas of South Africa.

In order to develop the methodology the basic principles of disaster risk assessment, incapsulated in the notation R=H×V, was applied to provide a vehicle to quantify hazard and vulnerability aspects related to dolomite risk. Specifically existing knowledge on inherent dolomite risk classes (hazard component) was aligned to issues of vulnerability (in this case ageing water infrastructure) to attain a total dolomite disaster risk score for a specific area.

The results from the practical application of the method indicated that the proposed dolomite risk assessment methodology is not only robust but easy to comprehend and to apply. The simplicity of the method also allows for easy integration into existing urban planning and integrated development planning process.

The creation of the method not only provides a much-needed tool for assessing the total disaster risk posed by dolomite in urban areas but also adds value to the entire urban and community development process.

Risk assessments are the very basis on which planning and implementation are carried out. In the context of urban risk management, the assessment processes are complex to understand as they involve multi-sectoral parameters. Many of the issues involved are of technical nature, but this also requires focus on the principles behind the assessment process including participatory assessment tools.

Action planning is a participatory, short-term, visible, output-oriented process that enables urban community groups to plan the development of risk reduction actions in their locality and to lead the implementation of the action plans.

There are three kinds of actions that emerge from an action planning process: (i) those that can be implemented by the community groups themselves, (ii) those that need some external help for implementation, and (iii) those that can only be implemented by specialized agencies from outside the community. Implementation management processes thus need to look at how internal systems can be established to operationalize self-action, and to coordinate external interventions.

Capacity assessment is increasingly identified as a vital tool for effective capacity development for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. However, most internationally supported capacity assessments focus mainly on one administrative level in their attempts to understand the current capacities and capacity needs of the system under study. This article aims to investigate the potential for discrepancies between what stakeholders on different administrative levels in Fiji express when explaining how their system for managing risk and disaster situations functions.

The study includes semi‐structured interviews with involved stakeholders from all administrative levels in Fiji, who are asked to describe what information and assistance is given or requested between administrative levels, in everyday circumstances and in disaster situations. The data were then analysed to identify similarities and differences in descriptions.

The study illustrates that there may be substantial discrepancies between accounts on different administrative levels concerning key functions of their system.

The study is not claiming that this always is the case, only that there may be a possibility for it. Potentially undermining the effectiveness of ensuing capacity development activities.

Given that capacity assessment is to create a coherent foundation for capacity development, the study indicates that it would beneficial to include a wider range of administrative levels in attempting to construct one comprehensive view of the current capacities and future capacity needs.

The research topic is novel and valuable for stakeholders in the international community active in capacity development.

The rapid deterioration of the earth’s natural ecosystems are increasing the risk of human morbidity and mortality worldwide. Hydrometeorological hazards are concentrating contaminants from the damaged environment and exposing large vulnerable populations to life threating illnesses and death. This study performed a retrospective health risk assessment on two recent events where such impacts unfolded, namely, the 2015 south east Equatorial Asia smoke haze disaster and the 2016 Melbourne thunderstorm asthma epidemic. The purpose of this paper is to test if the characterisation of health risk warranted earlier and more effective risk reduction activities prior to the disasters occurring.

A retrospective health risk characterisation assessment was performed combing United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Health Aspect in Disaster Risk Assessment (2017) framework with a thematic and targeted word literature review to identify the level of risk knowledge prior to each event. A risk characterisation matrix was then created to characterise the health risk of each hazard event.

The 2015 south east Equatorial Asia smoke haze disaster risk assessment was characterised as “extreme” health risk and the 2016 Melbourne thunderstorm asthma epidemic was characterised as “high” health risk.

Reaching the goals of the Sendai Framework require strategies and plans which urgently address the catastrophic level of mortality risk posed by exposure to environmental contaminants.

Innovative approaches and partnerships are necessary to mitigate the risk from the deteriorating health of the environment and natural ecosystems, along with disaster response initiatives that reduce exposure of vulnerable people on a large scale.

Surging global natural disasters provide incentive for risk-reducing policies and strategies. In this light, the African Union (AU) engaged a multi-stakeholder policy formulation process between 2002 and 2006, to develop a continent-wide disaster risk reduction (DRR) strategy. Drawing from secondary data, this chapter assesses the process and applies qualitative analysis instruments to critically assess the AU’s disaster policy. Linkages to the 2005 international Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) are also highlighted. The analysis reveals that Africa’s policy formulation process was belated for over a decade, with respect to international expectations. The formulation process was however largely African owned and led, culminating in a strategy document that reflected African contextual reality at the time, and aligned well with HFA fundamental goals. The applied multi-stakeholder approach enhanced a spirit of participation across levels and was central to the largely successful policy formulation process. However, targeted policy outcomes were not explicit, and poorly formulated indicators marred short- and long-term policy evaluation. Based on these results, we conclude that the African-wide DRR policy formulation processes were belated but participatory, systematic and very successful. Belated policy formulation reflects an initial inertia on the African continent, justified by past negative policy experiences and the desire to succeed. A replication of this policy formulation approach in Africa is recommended, albeit exercising more caution on policy timing, the elaboration of better monitoring and evaluation instruments and criteria. Participation should further embrace modern, risk-free (anti-COVID-19-friendly) information and communication technologies.

Disaster risk and vulnerability assessment depends on various factors such as appropriate theoretical concepts and quality and adequacy of information gathered. Accounting for people's perception and partnering with them in the process leads to deeper understanding of community vulnerability, which in turn provides better assessment of disaster risk. The purpose of this paper is to offer an integrated approach for risk and vulnerability assessment that includes theoretical concept, quantitative risk assessment method, and a component representing people's perception.

The Pressure and Release (PAR) model framework is used for basic understanding of the progression of vulnerability through identification of root causes such as: limited access to power and resources; dynamic pressures – lack of education, urbanization and demographics; and unsafe conditions such as dangerous locations. To complement PAR, the Access to Resources (ATR) model is used that expands upon the dynamics of changing decisions, options, livelihood opportunities, available resources, and choices made by the population that is impacted by disaster(s) – in time and space. Conventional risk equation: R=H x V provides community risk profile.

Using a working example, it is demonstrated that risk assessment can have significant influence by introducing an additional component to represent “community perception” in the fundamental risk equation.

The proposed approach: Risk (R) = Hazard (H) x Vulnerability (V) x Community Perception (cp), provides a unique and comprehensive approach to evaluate disaster risk by taking people's perception into account.