Search results

The involvement of the public in the decision-making process is essential, especially in the early stages of a design process. This study aims to achieve the development of an architectural program for a memorial public project, using the outcomes of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) based on public opinion. It employs a novel approach that sharply focuses on public involvement in the design process, using a quantitative methodology for the development of a suitable building program and selecting a memorial form that meets the public's needs in a practical way. The study drew on data from various memorial projects to identify possible spaces and their selection criteria. A written questionnaire was distributed to a sample of 105 members of the public, to narrow down the number of spaces according to public response. Then, a hearing (spoken) questionnaire was conducted on a sample of 20 to produce the program for development by generating the most strongly preferred form of memorial. The results contradicted the existing norm for a memorial as a sculpture; it was revealed that most of the public preferred memorial landscapes to buildings and great structures. The study concluded that AHP could be used to further involve the relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process of the design of a public project.

Despite increased attention to, and investment in, scaling up of disaster risk reduction (DRR), there has been little detailed discussion of scalability. The purpose of this paper is to respond to this critical gap by proposing a definition of scaling up for DRR, what effective scaling up entails, and how to measure and plan for scalability.

A literature review of debates, case studies and good practices in DRR and parallel sectors (i.e. education, health and the wider development field) unveiled and enabled the weighting of key concepts that inform scalability. The mixed methods research then developed, validated and employed a scalability assessment framework to examine 20 DRR and five non-DRR initiatives for which a minimum set of evidence was accessible.

Support from national, regional and/or local authorities strongly influenced the scalability of all initiatives assessed. Currently, insufficient to support effective scaling up, monitoring and evaluation were also found to be critical to both identify potential for and measure scalability.

The paper ends with a scalability assessment and planning tool to measure and monitor the scalability potential of DRR initiatives, highlighting areas for corrective action that can improve the quality and effectiveness of DRR interventions.