Search results

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.

Disaster risk reduction is prominent in the international policy agenda, and the year 2015 brought together three international policy frameworks that contribute to disaster risk reduction (i.e. the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction, the Sustainable Development Goals and Paris Climate Change Agreement – COP21). However, there is a dearth of effort at identifying and aligning the specific educational needs of built environment professionals with the three policy frameworks. This is needed to facilitate the incorporation of the contents of the policy frameworks into built environment professionals’ training. Therefore, this study aims to map the educational needs of built environment professionals with the core areas of the three international policy frameworks.

This study utilized CADRE (Collaborative Action towards Disaster Resilience Education) research project outcomes alongside the earlier mentioned three international policy frameworks. A comprehensive desk review was done to map the educational needs identified in the CADRE project with the core priority areas of the three policy frameworks.

The study revealed the educational needs that are significant towards an effective implementation of the core priority areas of the three international policy frameworks.

This study would be beneficial to the built environment professionals involved in disaster risk reduction. They will be aware of the specific knowledge areas that would aid the successful implementation of the aforementioned three international policy frameworks.

The outcomes of the study would be beneficial to higher education providers in disaster risk reduction and sustainable development. It has identified the knowledge and competency gaps needed to be bridged in the curricula to meet the demands created by the international policy frameworks.

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.

As stated in the United Nations Global Assessment Report 2022 Concept Note, decision-makers everywhere need data and statistics that are accurate, timely, sufficiently disaggregated, relevant, accessible and easy to use. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate scalable and replicable methods to advance and integrate the use of earth observation (EO), specifically ongoing efforts within the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) Work Programme and the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) Work Plan, to support risk-informed decision-making, based on documented national and subnational needs and requirements.

Promotion of open data sharing and geospatial technology solutions at national and subnational scales encourages the accelerated implementation of successful EO applications. These solutions may also be linked to specific Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 2015–2030 Global Targets that provide trusted answers to risk-oriented decision frameworks, as well as critical synergies between the Sendai Framework and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This paper provides examples of these efforts in the form of platforms and knowledge hubs that leverage latest developments in analysis ready data and support evidence-based DRR measures.

The climate crisis is forcing countries to face unprecedented frequency and severity of disasters. At the same time, there are growing demands to respond to policy at the national and international level. EOs offer insights and intelligence for evidence-based policy development and decision-making to support key aspects of the Sendai Framework. The GEO DRR Working Group and CEOS Working Group Disasters are ideally placed to help national government agencies, particularly national Sendai focal points to learn more about EOs and understand their role in supporting DRR.

The unique perspective of EOs provide unrealized value to decision-makers addressing DRR. This paper highlights tangible methods and practices that leverage free and open source EO insights that can benefit all DRR practitioners.

The Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction (DRR) 2015–2030 offers guidelines to reduce disaster losses and further delivers a wake-up call to be conscious of disasters. Its four priorities hinge on science, technology and innovations as critical elements necessary to support the understanding of disasters and the alternatives to countermeasures. However, the changing dynamics of current and new risks highlight the need for existing approaches to keep pace with these changes. This is further relevant as the timeline for the framework enters its mid-point since its inception. Hence, this study reflects on the aspirations of the Sendai framework for DRR through a review of activities conducted in the past years under science, technology and innovations.

Multidimensional secondary datasets are collected and reviewed to give a general insight into the DRR activities of governments and other related agencies over the past years with case examples. The results are then discussed in the context of new global risks and technological advancement.

It becomes evident that GIS and remote sensing embedded technologies are spearheading innovations for DRR across many countries. However, the severity of the Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated innovations that use artificial intelligence-based technologies in diverse ways and has thus become important to risk management. These notwithstanding, the incorporation of science, technology and innovations in DRR faces many challenges. To mitigate some of the challenges, the study proposes reforms to the scope and application of science and technology for DRR, as well as suggests a new framework for risk reduction that harnesses stakeholder collaborations and resource mobilizations.

The approach and proposals made in this study are made in reference to known workable processes and procedures with proven successes. However, contextual differences may affect the suggested approaches.

The study provides alternatives to risk reduction approaches that hinge on practically tested procedures that harness inclusivity attributes deemed significant to the Sendai framework for DRR 2015–2030.

The 2030 agenda for sustainable development and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) constitute an overarching global milestone for creating a better sustainable future worldwide. The risk component of the agenda under the SFDRR must be better embedded into the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and integrating disaster risk management policy with broader development objectives at national and subnational levels in many countries is still a work in progress. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the progress between the SDGs and the SFDRR in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and its complementary features

Comprehensive and contextualized analyses of the progress of SFDRR and SDGs related to the LAC region need to be fully addressed to examine synergies and trade-offs with the two global agendas. Based on empirical evidence from United Nations global reports, a literature review of DRR and DRM, as well as development planning evidence, this paper addresses the implications of building coherence between the SDGs and the SFDRR in the region.

Interplay and connections of the two agendas are highlighted together with an analysis of coherence among indicators. Despite the richness of several indicators, the examined evidence suggests that derived from the current progress, indicators are unable to completely reflect the dynamics among disaster risk drivers for both the SFDRR and the SDGs in the region.

Data availability at UNIDSR as well as at the regional level can limit the scope of the research. When comparing and matching the agendas, results could be further improved upon new releases of data. SFDRR and SDGs have also ground for improvement and countries are doing well but still slow.

The paper offers new insights and findings for decision/policy makers in Latina America and the Caribbean.

The paper offers an overall understanding of the progress and coherence among SFDRR and SDGs global frameworks and provides insights to identify the gaps and opportunities that need to be addressed to integrate disaster risk reduction into sustainable development planning at national and regional scales in LAC.

Disasters are increasingly depicted as unique opportunities to ‘build back better’, to make communities more ‘resilient’ and to address pre-existing ‘vulnerabilities’. This has seen international disaster risk reduction (DRR) and recovery frameworks attempt to link short-term relief efforts with long-term development objectives while at the same time ensuring active community participation, local knowledge inclusion and ownership. This chapter looks at how ‘build back better’ – which became institutionalised through the 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction – attempts to reconcile normative concepts of ‘better’ with diverse place-based needs, interests and knowledge. Through an analysis of three United Nations DRR frameworks from 1994 to 2015, the chapter tracks how disasters have been constructed as opportunities for development, and asks whether the post-disaster context is the right time for implementing development agendas given the potential for recovery to be co-opted by dominant development ideologies.

The purpose of this paper is to identify how governance and accountability have been addressed in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030.

The research is mainly based on the analysis of the SFDRR; scientific literature, particularly recent publications covering the SFDRR. The paper also takes into account grey literature.

The SFDRR does address issues of governance and accountability in disasters. However, more needs to be done to translate it into practice – particularly with regard to accountability.

The paper covers a topic that has not attracted considerable academic attention, despite the fact that the need to address accountability in disaster risk management, notably in DRR, has been generally acknowledged. By addressing governance and accountability in the most recent international DRR framework the paper adds value to the literature.

Evidence abounds on surging disasters, mainly as consequences of poor risk identification and management, which have historically accompanied disaster management in many African countries. Effective management of disaster risks, whether natural or man-made, is necessary for building resilience, enhancing mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery and adaptation. As part of a broad-based risk management approach, Nigeria made frantic efforts to mitigate the effects of various disasters, by establishing relevant institutions and formulating policies. In spite of these efforts, implementation outcomes have not been adequately quantified and managed. This study reviews and assesses the policies and practices of disaster risk management (DRM) vis-á-vis institutional framework in Nigeria. It utilises available data and policy documents to review and analyse Nigeria’s institutional framework. Furthermore, the study carries out implicative scenario analysis based on the current institutional framework, to match the DRM trends. It also proffers recommendations on how best institutions could drive proper DRM in Nigeria. The strengths, opportunities, gaps and constraints associated with disaster and risk reduction in Nigeria are then highlighted.

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.