Search results

The present study proposes the analysis of DRM strategies that had been implemented into subnational development plans and public policy instruments in the States of Chiapas and Tabasco, located in Southeast Mexico. It describes the methodological phases for the implementation of those strategies and the participatory process, with a multi-level approach, carried out with multiple stakeholders and UNDP advisory.

For this research, two case studies were developed to highlight the factors which make successful DRM in development plans and policies. It included the compilation and review of documents generated by UNDP-PMR program on the mainstreaming process in the past four years, interviews with key actors in the states of Chiapas and Tabasco, such as governmental officers, national and international ONG's, UN agencies and rural communities' leaders.

The review of these case studies demonstrate that for developing countries like Mexico, the process to strengthening institutions setting, needs being present in the field and creating alliances and synergies to generate advocacy processes from a capacity development approach. Having not only an output approach in projects but also mainly an impact strategy, both at the local and the sectoral levels, along with a mid-term timeline and budget, are some of the hallmarks of UNDP-PMR program work.

This study showed two original experiences of mainstreaming DRM into subnational development policies in high risk contexts. These experiences had the participation of multiple stakeholders from local governments and communities. Nowadays, these two experiences are being implemented in the territories despite political administration changes in the last years.

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.

Professions involved with the construction industry need to become more aware of disaster risk management (DRM) activities if lessons are to be learned from the past and a resilient built environment attained in the future. This study aims to focus on identifying which construction‐associated stakeholders should be involved with DRM initiatives in the UK, and when these stakeholders should be involved. This research is thereby unique and a key step in the longer‐term aim of identifying how stakeholders should be involved and what issues they need to address regarding the integration of DRM into construction decision making.

This paper presents the findings of a UK‐wide questionnaire survey, semi‐structured interviews and a validation exercise involving a range of professionals from construction, planning, insurance, emergency management and local/national government agencies.

This research identifies the key construction stakeholders that should be responsible for ensuring that resilience issues become integrated and ensuring the key stages of the design‐construction‐operation process where their inputs are required.

The finding presented are an important and logical step in the longer term aim of identifying how stakeholders should be better involved and what issues they need to address regarding the integration of DRM into construction decision making.

There is a need to proactively address strategic weaknesses in protecting the built environment from a range of hazards. This paper seeks to focus on the mitigation for flood hazards in the UK; particularly in understanding the extent of the problem, collating key guidance and legislation related to flood hazard mitigation, identifying who the key construction decision makers are and the most opportune stages of the Design‐Construction‐Operation Process when they need to make their key decisions.

A pluralistic research design was adopted for the study, which included a UK‐wide questionnaire survey and a set of semi‐structured interviews involving a range of professionals from construction, planning, insurance, emergency management and local/national government agencies was undertaken.

Despite the publication of a range of guidance on flood hazard mitigation in the UK there is still insufficient evidence that key construction stakeholders are playing an active role in mitigating flood risk. The pre‐construction phase of a building's life cycle is identified as is the most critical stage when key stakeholders need to adopt flood hazard mitigation strategies. The socio‐institutional constraints to the proactive attainment of built‐in resilience are highlighted as are recommendations as to how these constraints can be addressed.

The paper reports on the provisional findings of an ongoing project but these findings nonetheless provide essential foundations for the latter development of the PRE‐EMPT toolkit and also raise some important considerations about flood resilience in the UK.

The findings presented reveal how stakeholders should be better involved, and what issues they need to address, regarding the integration of built‐in resilience into construction decision making.

The paper seeks to assess the influence and effectiveness of non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) in targeting and aiding “communities” to reduce their socio‐economic vulnerability to infrequent large‐scale and common everyday crises in coastal Andhra Pradesh.

Data collection included 342 questionnaires with village inhabitants, local and regional government officials and personnel managing and working for local NGOs. To add qualitative detail to the quantitative data that were collected, 308 “everyday” sociograms, 294 “crisis” sociograms, and 34 semi‐structured interviews were also conducted.

The research identifies that NGOs in the study areas do not operate in multi‐caste villages, apparently because they prefer to operate in relatively homogeneous single‐caste villages. The implications are that some of the most vulnerable members of society, such as the marginalised “communities” that partially constitute multi‐caste villages, do not receive the support they need.

This study focuses on a specific region of Andhra Pradesh with the consequence that the findings are potentially very context‐specific. Nonetheless, the findings highlight a fundamental flaw in the way many NGOs operate in this region, through the targeting of perceived “easy cases”, and this is a matter that development agencies should consider and further investigate.

This paper will be of value to researchers and practitioners seeking to gain a better understanding of NGOs and the way some of them operate. The paper recommends a number of ways that the observed inefficiencies could be addressed.

A new framework to support the national and local capacity building plan for disaster risk management (DRM) in Cameroon is presented. For the past 30 years, after the general re-organisation of the civil protection department, capacity building programmes for DRM has been solely carried out for and by the Ministry of Territorial Administration and the Department of Civil Protection. The exclusion of businesses, civil society and community participation, among others, has been the main obstacle to capacity building programmes undertaken for DRM. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Based on interviews conducted among 200 informants by means of a process of participatory monitoring and evaluation as well as a duo capacity building workshop for DRM held in August 2017 in Yaoundé, this paper evaluated existing capacity building programmes for DRM in Cameroon.

Findings show that the greater portion of government representatives within the public administration lack capacity to address DRM initiatives at the local and national levels of governance. While recommending DRM programmes as a necessity for integration within civil administrative curriculum, this paper proposes six elements to address capacity building gaps for DRM in Cameroon.

The results demonstrate critical gaps in capacity building aimed at DRM, especially where single ministry or department monopolises DRM. The findings provide the government with a useful tool to review its national strategy for a disaster reduction policy and the drawing up of a national intervention plan.

A series of “learning lab” projects on disaster risk management for sustainable development (DRM-SD) have been accomplished from 2014 to 2016 in Malaysia, Vietnam, Lao PDR and Cambodia by the Centre for Global Sustainability Studies. The project is designed for professionals from the disaster risk management field to encourage integration of sustainable development (SD) concerns into the larger planning framework for DRM. As a case study for capacity building (CB) evaluation, the central purpose of this study is to explore the approaches, feedbacks and implications of the DRM-SD CB project that have been developed and carried out.

Three methods have been used which are participation observations, surveys and document analysis. The results show that the project had successfully applied seven different tools to enhance analytical skills and professional knowledge of development practitioners in specific areas of DRM-SD.

Based on the survey, the project received positive response and valuable information from participants for future project development. Regarding the perspective of outcomes, the result indicates that south–south, ASEAN regional and triangular cooperation and role of higher education in DRM-SD are significant impacts from this project which can bring several benefits and should be promoted as an approach for the DRM-CB project as a whole.

It is hoped that this study will serve as a transfer learning initiative to provide approach guidelines and innovative mechanisms for DRM practitioners who will have the know-how and potential for leadership in DRM-SD.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the role of institutions dealing with disaster risk in Delhi and propose possible solutions for disaster risk reduction.

The approach to assess the role of institutions is based on the Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) questionnaire survey. It evaluates roles based on variables such as mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, effectiveness of crisis management framework, knowledge dissemination and management, institutional collaboration with other stakeholders, and good governance.

The findings show the institution's limitations and strengths to face hydro‐meteorological disaster risk in Delhi. It further identifies possible areas for disaster risk reduction.

The methodology is new and it only incorporates disasters that are hydro‐meteorological. The study does not include man‐made, geological, and biological disasters.

The paper is unique in its approach to identify gaps in the current approach in managing disaster risk in Delhi and puts forward the possible ways to deal with disaster risk. Moreover, very few studies have been done in this area.

The purpose of this paper is to study an articulated warning system that provides information about the heritage at risk and encourages a dialogue between the heritage sector, civil defense agencies and local communities.

The databases from the National Heritage Institute, National Civil Defense, National Geological Service and National Early Warning System were investigated and the local community provided input which helped form a participatory risk mapping strategy for a warning system in the heritage sector.

There is little knowledge of the Brazilian heritage that is at risk and a lack of coordination between the cultural heritage and DRR sectors. This means that there is a need to organize the geo-referenced databases so that information can be shared and the public provided with broader access. As a result, there can be a greater production, dissemination and application of knowledge to help protect the cultural heritage.

The findings can be included in the debate about the importance of framing disaster risk management (DRM) policies in the Brazilian heritage sector.

The findings and maps of the case study in the town of São Luiz do Paraitinga involve the heritage sector, civil defense agencies and local people and can be used for disaster risk preparedness.

A DRM program is being formulated in Brazil. However, the kind of strategy needed to incorporate the heritage sector in this program stills needs to be planned, and the knowledge of the cultural heritage at risk is a key factor when faced with this new social and scientific challenge.

Cultural heritage is about people, their history and their identity. Protecting cultural heritage from natural hazards by connecting it with disaster risk management (DRM) directly benefits local communities. Cultural heritage also has a global dimension, and collaboration and support from the international community to protect it is vital. Culture and heritage differ among countries, as do natural hazards, but practitioners face some common challenges, such as the need to create awareness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper presents: a brief overview of the current connection between DRM and cultural heritage in the global context; an analysis of how international knowledge-exchange initiatives can help countries improve the resilience of their heritage sites, using Bhutan as an example; and a proposal to keep this topic moving forward in both the international and national agendas for sustainable development and resilience.

International knowledge exchanges may help to find solutions, and Bhutan is a good example. This small, hazard-prone country in the Himalayas, has strong traditions and heritage, and is aware of its vulnerabilities and risks. Learning from Japan’s extensive experience, Bhutan has been working with international experts to improve the resilience of its cultural heritage sites.

The ultimate aim is that this paper serves as an inspiration for other countries, as well as international organizations such as the World Bank, to keep strengthening ties between DRM and cultural heritage.