Search results

Coping with and adjusting to disruptive challenges has always been a characteristic of human development. Formalisation of this has led to the emergence of a number approaches addressing disruptive challenges. Often formalised practice has a narrow focus. Increasingly complex challenges require a refocus of formalised approaches. Drawing from these approaches, the purpose of this paper is to posit that a greater focus on preparedness through pre‐disaster planning is needed for a more holistic approach to disaster management.

The paper reviews the evolution of disaster management thinking and practice and proposes that changes are needed to the dominant disaster management model. These changes are drawn from a number of alternative perspectives. Based on the uncertainties surrounding complex or “wicked” problems, for example, climate change and variability, this paper develops a more holistic approach.

Responding to “wicked problems” requires a greater focus on preparedness. In terms of disaster risk reduction a greater emphasis on pre‐disaster planning is needed driven by social learning processes.

Faced with an increasingly uncertain and complex future, current approaches to conceptualising disaster management are inadequate. This paper develops an approach that is likely to be more effective.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a model for developing climate adaptation strategies to reduce climate risk for cultural heritage. Cultural heritage has an important role in human well-being. This paper posits that cultural heritage requires an approach that recognises the uniqueness of cultural heritage. The paper draws from the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Making My City Resilient campaign and the Heart of the City Partnership in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, and proposes a Cultural Heritage Adaptation Forum. The role of the forum is to develop adaptation strategies in a sustainable development context. This is an original attempt to link cultural heritage to climate risk.

The paper draws from two initiatives and uses good practice established from the disaster management and climate communities and proposes a Cultural Heritage Adaptation Forum that can be used to formulate adaptation interventions for cultural heritage. The approach builds on active participation in a global overview of cultural heritage and climate risk led by UNISDR together with personal experience of implementing such strategies in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

The paper finds that a model can be developed that incorporates good practice from the climate and disaster management communities.

The paper presents a model that can be used by those stakeholders that have an interest in protecting cultural heritage form climate driven hazards.

Cultural heritage has a value for all and protecting it from climate driven hazards can impact human well-being

The paper brings together concepts from different academic and practitioner communities. The concept outlined in the paper will be of interest to all those interested in protecting cultural heritage for climate driven hazards.

Malaysia is still in the process of reorganising and restructuring disaster management policy, learning from national and international experiences. Argument about the current situation of emergency management and housing in Malaysia can be used by the decision makers, authorities and NGOs to develop strategies and actions that include awareness raising and capacity building for enhancing enforcement of current legislation.

The work concentrated mostly on academic reports of original investigations rather than reviews. The conclusions in this paper are generalizations based on the authors' interpretation of those original reports.

Malaysia is not a developed country and also not a developing country but is more in the middle, and follows any direction from the international arena to national situation. Malaysia has a developed country approach in disaster management policy but with the implementation capacity of a developing country. This paper argues that providing post‐disaster housing must accommodate requirements in the national disaster management policy and parallel with the needs from international concern to the rights of disaster victims.

The outcomes from this discussion might give insights into designing and planning the national policy and disaster management framework by restructuring and reorganising the present National Disaster Management Mechanism in terms of enhancing the coordination of responsibility between and within government bodies in the National Disaster Management Mechanism.

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 transcript provides an overview of the development of the field and changing paradigms in this regard.

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

The transcript traces the initial discussions of how the At Risk book was conceived and presents new dimensions and challenges within the field.

The interview highlights the importance of the need to document the transitions, developments and paradigm changes in the field over time.

This chapter identifies and analyzes three systemic obstacles to American public policy addressing natural disasters: symbolic obstacles, cognitive obstacles, and structural obstacles. The way we talk about natural disaster, the way we think about the risks of building in hazardous places, and structural aspects of American political institutions all favor development over restraint. These forces have such strength that in the wake of most disasters society automatically and thoughtlessly responds by rebuilding what was damaged or destroyed, even if reconstruction perpetuates disaster vulnerability. Only by addressing each of the obstacles identified are reform efforts likely to succeed.

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 purpose of this paper is to determine whether it is useful to tease apart the intimately related propositions of social production and social construction to guide thinking in the multidisciplinary study of disasters.

The authors address our question by reviewing literature on disasters in the social sciences to disambiguate the concepts of social production and social construction.

The authors have found that entertaining the distinction between social production and social construct can inform both thinking and action on disasters by facilitating critical exercises in reframing that facilitate dialog across difference. The authors present a series of arguments on the social production and construction of disaster and advocate putting these constructs in dialog with vulnerability frameworks of the social production of disasters.

This commentary contributes to disambiguating important theoretical and practical concepts in disaster studies. The reframing approach can inform both research and more inclusive disaster management and risk reduction efforts.

The interview documents early days in the field of disaster risk reduction.

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

The transcript presents important developments during the 1980s with valuable lessons about risk reduction.

It takes the readers on a history of the journey of DRR over three decades.