Search results

Wine is widely regarded as a ‘complicated’ product and for the majority of consumers the purchasing of wine in the retail situation evokes considerable risk. Marketers are therefore constantly and increasingly trying to demystify wine in order to reduce the perceived risk levels of consumers in the purchase situation. Most previous research in the area of perceived risk literature tended to focus on the concept of risk and its measurement rather than on risk‐reduction. This study examined the preferred risk‐reduction strategies (RRS) employed by identified wine‐related lifestyle segments in the Australian wine market and linked these strategies to the wine retail environment. Relying on favourite brands or so‐called ‘safe brand’ buying was found to rank highest as a risk reduction strategy in the commercial (under $15 per bottle) and premium‐to super‐premium ($15‐$25) price ranges while the opportunity to try before buying ranked highest in the ultra‐premium ($25) price range. The results obtained have major implications for retailers and form the foundation for a competitive advantage. It also indicates the direction for future research in this strategically important area of wine consumer behaviour.

This exploratory study aims to identify the main risk reduction strategies when individuals suffer from coeliac disease (CD) or non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) travel. Based on Yeung and Yee's (2013; 2019) model, the paper offers a new framework for analysing the main travel risk reduction strategies for people with specific food needs. The empirical work focuses on the perspectives of different stakeholders (CD and NCGS community, restaurant managers/service providers and nutritionists).

A qualitative approach based on thematic analysis is adopted. The results of 32 semi-structured in-depth interviews reveal different stakeholders' perspectives in order to understand the various strategies.

The findings confirm the high level of consensus that the main food risk reducers are: travel information, staff training in safety assurance, legislation and risk prevention protocols. The findings also show significant limitations in the information offered by restaurants, organisations and tourist destinations and the negative repercussions on the tourist experience and the reputation on a particular destination.

The results will help hospitality business managers and destination management organisations develop food risk reduction strategies to solve some of the most important food-related problems when people in this market segment travel.

This work contributes to the literature by providing a new framework on travel risk reduction strategies for people with specific food needs. The novelty of this research is mainly found in the study of risk reduction strategies related to the travel decision-making process for those with CD and NCGS from different perspectives.

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.

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.

Surging natural disasters globally has precipitated renewed interests in disaster risk management. Though several global and regional disaster risk management policy frameworks have been put in place, it is necessary to evaluate their successes and capacities to deliver. This chapter reviews key disaster management frameworks, particularly the Yokohama Strategy, the Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. It examines the extent to which these policies shaped Africa’s regional disaster risk management processes, with an emphasis on sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Through documentary analysis and scientific literature review, this chapter identifies key parameters that shaped SSA’s disaster risk reduction (DRR) processes and their implications for DRR policy instruments and impact studies. The analysis reveals a number of findings. First, the roll-out process of global disaster reduction and management policy processes and instruments is yet to optimally impact SSA, in terms of effective disaster management. Second, a more comprehensive understanding of the magnitude and severity of natural disasters could contribute to stem the damages linked to their occurrence. This is yet to be achieved. Third, paradigm shifts towards fully appreciating underlying disaster risk factors and manifestations could potentially support the practical drift from disaster coping and management towards risk identification, reduction and resilience building in SSA. Finally, instruments that prioritise capacity building (such as extension services training, research and development, information and communication), organisational governance, sustainable financing and technology, still relatively weak in SSA, should be stepped up to promote DRR capacities and strategies.

The paper aims to further understand the contribution of indigenous knowledge to disaster risk reduction through reviewing the experiences of Baliau village situated on Manam Island in Madang Province, Papua New Guinea.

Indigenous strategies for disaster risk reduction were identified through participatory group discussions with community members, including a strengths‐weaknesses‐opportunities‐threats analysis.

The paper outlines how indigenous knowledge was used for disaster risk reduction and to cope with enforced evacuation. It demonstrates the need for community consultation alongside the benefits of applying the sustainable livelihoods approach to better understand volcano‐related opportunities, rather than just focusing on the volcano's threats.

Indigenous knowledge has both relevance and applicability when applied to disaster risk reduction. Communities should be consulted at all stages of disaster risk reduction and disaster response in order to ensure the relevance and applicability of any strategy.

Through a new case study, this paper explores the contributions of indigenous knowledge to disaster risk reduction and outlines the disruption of evacuation upon indigenous communities. Lessons learnt for future evacuation and rehabilitation scenarios are outlined through application of the sustainable livelihoods approach.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how, despite increasing data availability from a wide range of sources unlocks unprecedented opportunities for disaster risk reduction, data interoperability remains a challenge due to a number of barriers. As a first step to enhancing data interoperability for disaster risk reduction is to identify major barriers, this paper presents a case study on data interoperability in disaster risk reduction in Europe, linking current barriers to the regional initiative of the European Science and Technology Advisory Group.

In support of Priority 2 (“Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk”) of the Sendai Framework and SDG17 (“Partnerships for the goals”), this paper presents a case study on barriers to data interoperability in Europe based on a series of reviews, surveys and interviews with National Sendai Focal Points and stakeholders in science and research, governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations and industry.

For a number of European countries, there remains a clear imbalance between long-term disaster risk reduction and short-term preparation and the dominant role of emergency relief, response and recovery, pointing to the potential of investments in ex ante measures with better inclusion and exploitation of data.

Modern society is facing a digital revolution. As highlighted by the International Council of Science and the Committee on Data for Science and Technology, digital technology offers profound opportunities for science to discover unsuspected patterns and relationships in nature and society, on scales from the molecular to the cosmic, from local health systems to global sustainability. It has created the potential for disciplines of science to synergize into a holistic understanding of the complex challenges currently confronting humanity; the Sustainable Development Goals are a direct reflectance of this. Interdisciplinary is obtained with integration of data across relevant disciplines. However, a barrier to realization and exploitation of this potential arises from the incompatible data standards and nomenclatures used in different disciplines. Although the problem has been addressed by several initiatives, the following challenge still remains: to make online data integration a routine.

Research has demonstrated that governance of disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) have evolved largely in isolation from each other – through different conceptual and institutional frameworks, response strategies and plans, at both international, national and subnational levels. As a result, the management of disaster risk through DRR and CCA is highly fragmented. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the set of actors and their location in government that create and shape governance in DRR and CCA integration within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states.

The study draws upon a range of data collection techniques including a comprehensive literature review relating to DRR and CCA in general and in the SADC member states, face-to-face interviews and an online survey. A mixed method research design was applied to the study with a total of 35 respondents from Botswana, Madagascar, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe participating in the face-to-face interviews and an online survey.

The analysis shows that DRR and CCA are carried out by different departments, agencies and/or ministries in all but three SADC member states, namely, Mozambique, Mauritius and the Seychelles. Participants were able to highlight the different ways in which integration should unfold. In light of this, the paper proposes a normative model to integrate government organisations for DRR and CCA within SADC member states.

The implementation of the model has the potential to accelerate the integration of organisations for DRR and CCA, with the resultant improvement in the implementation of risk reduction strategies and efficient use of resources.

The purpose of this research is to highlight issues related to the management of indigenous and scientific knowledge, and the approach towards transferring these from one community to another, to therefore reduce risk in communities living with multiple hazards and disasters in cyclone, flood, earthquake and drought prone regions of India.

A case study based approach and secondary research have been used to understand the disaster‐related problems and the mitigation strategy. Lessons are drawn from Indian scenarios such as Orissa super cyclone, Bhuj earthquake, etc.

The study highlights a few important points for practising managers/officers. Rural telecentres need to evolve for relief and rehabilitation work. Indigenous knowledge is more in tacit form; therefore, a carefully designed strategy would be needed to manage this.

The study focuses on many practical issues related to disaster management in India. These issues are derived from past experiences.

The research provides insight to researchers and practising officers/managers. Newer insights have been presented on tacit‐knowledge management and use of scientific understanding on the management of natural disasters.

There are many pragmatic challenges and complex interactions in the reduction of systemic disaster risk. No single agency has the mandate, authority, legitimacy or resources to fully address the deeper socio-economic, cultural, regulatory or political forces that often drive the creation and transfer of risk. National leadership and co-ordination are key enablers. This paper shares Australia's progress in building an enabling environment for systemic disaster risk reduction, and specifically how a change in thinking and resolve to work differently is beginning to shape nation-wide reforms and national programs of work.

The project and program of work adopted an inclusive, collaborative, co-design and co-production approach, working with diverse groups to create new knowledge, build trust, ongoing learning and collective ownership and action. Values- and systems-based approaches, and ethical leadership were core aspects of the approach.

Co-creating a more comprehensive and shared understanding of systemic disaster risk, particularly the values at risk and tensions and trade-offs associated with the choices about how people prevent or respond, has contributed to a growing shift in the way disasters are conceptualised. New narratives about disasters as “unnatural” and the need for shared responsibilities are shaping dialogue spaces and policy frameworks. The authors’ experience and ongoing learning acknowledge pragmatic challenges while also providing evidence-based ideas and guidance for more systems and transformative styles and competencies of leadership that are needed for convening in contested and complex environments.

This work built networks, competencies and generated ongoing momentum and learning. The lessons, evidence and reports from the work continue to be accessed and influential in research, emergency management and disaster mitigation practices (e.g. engagement, communications, training) and policy. Most significantly, the National Disaster Risk Reduction Framework provides the basis, justification and guidance for the nation's policy reform agenda around disaster risk reduction and is catalysing national efforts in developing a national action plan and systemic measurement, evaluation and learning to ensure the realisation of disaster risk reduction priorities.

A practical example is offered of a nation actively learning to navigate the governance challenges and implement strategies to address the reduction of complex, systemic risks.