Search results

Vietnam is historically hit by extensive disasters. However, the most vulnerable populations are far from being backed by national/local programmes to reduce disaster impacts on their well-being. In practice, political and socio-economic top-down organisation, channels efforts and limited resources into wealthier parts of the country. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Learning from 30 years work in Vietnam, this paper presents how “horizontal” solidarity and networking should be promoted and reinforced to really target the needs of vulnerable poor communities. Findings on conditions and challenges are based on practical experience, from family/village level to provincial/national administration, in promoting safe housing and safer communities and in evaluating the barriers for extending and sharing such practices.

Political environments in South East Asian countries become similar to Vietnamese systems, and share a common attitude towards DRR (and CCA): official statements reaffirm the need for DRR at all levels, and the CC threats for local development. But year after year, the situation of marginalised or low-income poor facing disasters does not really see progress.

New data collecting methods and technologies are proposed, resilience is quoted as criteria for development, but the major issue remains: how could communities be “at the frontline” when receiving so little “backline” support and resources, compared to benefits from capitalist development shared by only richer parts of society – not concerned in the same way by disasters? The SFDRR in encouraging non-compulsory Civil Society involvement will remain inadequate faced with the increased vulnerability by Vietnam and South East Asian inhabitants.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the findings from the body of case studies offered in the issue, combined with three external perspectives on local voices and action.

Using as its basis the eight key case studies and three external contributions to the special issue, the paper offers a theoretical framework as a basis for discussion of this material. Through this, it identifies possible modes of action understood through the theoretical framework and elaborated through the specific cases. It concludes with proposals for further work.

The discussion finds that from a local perspective, the ambitions of local populations and local NGOs to achieve emancipatory change depend on the scope for local collaboration and partnerships to exercise influence on underlying risk factors. It resolves the suggested tension between operating within, and outside the system through the concept of “legitimate subversion”.

It is felt that the original recording of case studies of local level action combined with the process of iterative critical reflection on the part of the contributors offers a novel approach to knowledge creation from practice, and offers insights bridging theoretical and practitioner perspectives into means of addressing underlying risk factors affecting local populations.

The purpose of this paper is to individually examine the findings from eight case studies presented in this special issue and comparatively identify the findings regarding local learning and action.

Underlying research questions regarding power and powerlessness in regard to addressing underlying risk factors affecting local populations form the basis for the discussion. Proceedings of a collaborative workshop conducted with the contributing authors are analysed qualitatively to identify learning relating to the research questions emerging from the case studies individually and collectively.

A number of strategies and tactics for addressing underlying risk factors affecting local populations were identified from the case studies, including collaboration and cohesion. Campaigning, lobbying, communications and social mobilisation in an attempt to bridge the gap between local concerns and the decision-making of government and other powerful actors. Innovation and local mobilisation to address shortcomings in government support for disaster reduction and development. Communications as a first base to influence behaviour of both communities and government. Social change through empowerment of women to act in disaster reduction and development.

The outcomes of the action research conducted by the authors individually and collectively highlight the necessity for bridging different scales of action through a range of strategies and tactics to move beyond local self-reliance to influence on underlying risk factors. The action research process employed may have wider applications in gathering and formalising local-level experience and knowledge.

The case studies and their analysis present a range of practical strategies and tactics to strengthen local resilience and address underlying risk factors which are replicable in other contexts.

Practitioners are activists and do not often engage in critical reflection and analysis. The method presented here offers a means of achieving this in order to generate learning from local-level experience. The findings contribute to the consideration of cross-scale action to address underlying risk factors which impact local communities.

Vietnam's economic reforms have helped many poor families to replace fragile shelters with houses built using materials regarded as "solid". This substantial family investment remains at risk of damage or destruction by annual disaster events - storms, floods and typhoons - because basic principles of safe building are not applied, nor is preventive action taken by communities and individual families to safeguard the home and public buildings against unnecessary damage. Failure to do so puts people at much greater risk of loss and injury.

Over two decades, Development Workshop France (DWF) has worked in Viet Nam to promote a culture of preventive action to reduce risk of damage. Based on ten key principles of storm-resistant construction, some of which have been drawn from traditional techniques, DWF trains local builders and technicians and undertakes a wide range of awareness raising actions in and with communities to promote hands on preventive safety in poor villages. Once sceptical, local governments now actively support the programme, which also strengthens local organizational and financial capacity.

This paper reviews the approach and the lessons that can be learnt from the DWF Viet Nam experience and that of similar DWF preventive actions in other disaster contexts. It considers the opportunities and constraints to enable family and community preventive action to become a core and ongoing feature of disaster management practice at community and national level.

Aside from the general anxieties (Vidler, A. 2000) inherent in modern competitive liberal capitalist democracies beset by climate change, war and tsunami, those surrounding the availability of domestic and public space, beset by uncertainty around land, shelter, drinking water and sanitation rights, are some of the most distressing for those affected.