Natural Hazards Governance in Democratic States With Developing Economies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Indrajit Pal
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Indian Ocean Tsunami ◽  
Cumulative Number ◽  
The Past

Catastrophic natural disasters have served as reminders of the connection between fragile governments and human losses. Developing economies are impacted most from natural as well as anthropogenic hazards. For example, the Indian Ocean tsunami (2004) claimed 227,898 lives, primarily in three politically fragmented countries with developing economies: Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and India; and the 2010 Haiti earthquake affected more than 3 million people and killed between 46,190 and 316,000. According to EM-DAT, the cumulative number of global disaster deaths over the past 30 years was 1,677,000, with an annual average of 54,082 deaths. According to Swiss reinsurance companies, the average global natural disaster insurance loss for the last 10 years (2009–2018) was $67 billion, and global insurance losses accounted for 0.09% of global GDP on average. Over the past decade, “natural” disasters have caused more than 780,000 fatalities and destroyed physical properties worth a minimum of $960 billion. The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) initiated the international disaster governance agenda for the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) global blueprint in 2005 and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) in 2015. Since the HFA, the international disaster risk reduction (DRR) community is increasingly viewing disaster risk management (DRM) as a governance concern. Governments are not a single structure; they are divided into various functions, hierarchies, policies, and responsibilities in working to create resilient communities at various levels (national and subnational). In countries with developing economies, government agencies have a significant role in DRM, which includes community-based organizations, science and technology research institutes, environmental protection agencies, and finance ministries. The existence of disaster management systems able to integrate vertical and horizontal coordination efforts is a critical weakness. Although there has been significant improvement globally in government capacities as well as institutional frameworks and legislative provisions for DRR in recent years, progress has been uneven. National-level policy formulation in a top-down model has often not made a significant impact at lower levels of government, where awareness-raising, training, and capacity-building likely would be significantly addressed. An extensive literature review is provided to help understand decentralized governance and its efficacy for local-level risk management of natural hazards for developing economies. Community risk perceptions and ways to respond to disasters vary from location to location; thus, it is important to implement decentralized policies and customize them to local needs and priorities to achieve low-impact sustainable development.

Natural Hazards Governance in the Philippines

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanako Iuchi ◽  
Yasuhito Jibiki ◽  
Renato Solidum ◽  
Ramon Santiago
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
The Philippines

Located in the Pacific Ring of Fire and the typhoon belt, the Philippines is one of the most hazard prone countries in the world. The country faces different types of natural hazards including geophysical disturbances such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, meteorological and hydrological events such as typhoons and floods, and slow-onset disasters such as droughts. Together with rapidly increasing population growth and urbanization, large-scale natural phenomena have resulted in unprecedented scales of devastation. In the early 21st century alone, the country experienced some of the most destructive and costliest disasters in its history including Typhoon Yolanda (2013), Typhoon Pablo (2012), and the Bohol Earthquake (2013). Recurrent natural disasters have prompted the Philippine government to develop disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) strategies to better prepare, respond, and recover, as well as to be more resilient in the face of natural disasters. Since the early 1940s, the governing structure has undergone several revisions through legal and institutional arrangements. Historical natural disasters and seismic risks have affected and continue to threaten the National Capital Region (NCR) and the surrounding administrative areas; these were key factors in advancing DRRM laws and regulations, as well as in restructuring its governing bodies. The current DRRM structure was instituted under Republic Act no. 10121 (RA10121) in 2010 and was implemented to shift from responsive to proactive governance by better engaging local governments (LGUs), communities, and the private sector to reduce long-term disaster risk. This Republic Act established a national disaster risk reduction and management council (NDRRMC) to develop strategies that manage and reduce risk. Typhoon Yolanda in 2013 was the most significant test of this revised governance structure and related strategies. The typhoon revealed drawbacks of the current council-led governing structure to advancing resilience. Salient topics include how to respond better to disaster realities, how to efficiently coordinate among relevant agencies, and how to be more inclusive of relevant actors. Together with other issues, such as the way to co-exist with climate change efforts, a thorough examination of RA 10121 by the national government and advocates for DRRM is underway. Some of the most important discourse to date focuses on ways to institute a powerful governing body that enables more efficient DRRM with administrative and financial power. The hope is that by instituting a governing system that can thoroughly lead all phases of preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery, the country can withstand future—and likely more frequent—mega-disasters.

scholarly journals Health Workforce Development in Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management: The Need for Evidence-Based Recommendations

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 3382
Author(s):  
Kevin K. C. Hung ◽  
Sonoe Mashino ◽  
Emily Y. Y. Chan ◽  
Makiko K. MacDermot ◽  
Satchit Balsari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Workforce Development ◽  
Health Workforce ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Disaster Risk Management ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Literature Reviews

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 placed human health at the centre of disaster risk reduction, calling for the global community to enhance local and national health emergency and disaster risk management (Health EDRM). The Health EDRM Framework, published in 2019, describes the functions required for comprehensive disaster risk management across prevention, preparedness, readiness, response, and recovery to improve the resilience and health security of communities, countries, and health systems. Evidence-based Health EDRM workforce development is vital. However, there are still significant gaps in the evidence identifying common competencies for training and education programmes, and the clarification of strategies for workforce retention, motivation, deployment, and coordination. Initiated in June 2020, this project includes literature reviews, case studies, and an expert consensus (modified Delphi) study. Literature reviews in English, Japanese, and Chinese aim to identify research gaps and explore core competencies for Health EDRM workforce training. Thirteen Health EDRM related case studies from six WHO regions will illustrate best practices (and pitfalls) and inform the consensus study. Consensus will be sought from global experts in emergency and disaster medicine, nursing, public health and related disciplines. Recommendations for developing effective health workforce strategies for low- and middle-income countries and high-income countries will then be disseminated.

scholarly journals Facilitating Sustainable Disaster Risk Reduction in Indigenous Communities: Reviving Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge and Practices through Two-Way Partnering

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 855
Author(s):  
Tahir Ali ◽  
Petra Topaz Buergelt ◽  
Douglas Paton ◽  
James Arnold Smith ◽  
Elaine Lawurrpa Maypilama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Ecological Knowledge ◽  
Community Members

The Sendai Framework of Action 2015–2030 calls for holistic Indigenous disaster risk reduction (DRR) research. Responding to this call, we synergized a holistic philosophical framework (comprising ecological systems theory, symbolic interactionism, and intersectionality) and social constructionist grounded theory and ethnography within a critical Indigenous research paradigm as a methodology for exploring how diverse individual and contextual factors influence DRR in a remote Indigenous community called Galiwinku, in the Northern Territory of Australia. Working together, Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers collected stories in local languages using conversations and yarning circles with 20 community members, as well as participant observations. The stories were interpreted and analysed using social constructivist grounded theory analysis techniques. The findings were dialogued with over 50 community members. The findings deeply resonated with the community members, validating the trustworthiness and relevance of the findings. The grounded theory that emerged identified two themes. First, local Indigenous knowledge and practices strengthen Indigenous people and reduce the risks posed by natural hazards. More specifically, deep reciprocal relationships with country and ecological knowledge, strong kinship relations, Elder’s wisdom and authority, women and men sharing power, and faith in a supreme power/God and Indigenous-led community organizations enable DRR. Second, colonizing practices weaken Indigenous people and increase the risks from natural hazards. Therefore, colonization, the imposition of Western culture, the government application of top-down approaches, infiltration in Indigenous governance systems, the use of fly-in/fly-out workers, scarcity of employment, restrictions on technical and higher education opportunities, and overcrowded housing that is culturally and climatically unsuitable undermine the DRR capability. Based on the findings, we propose a Community-Based DRR theory which proposes that facilitating sustainable Indigenous DRR in Australian Indigenous communities requires Indigenous and non-Indigenous partners to genuinely work together in two-directional and complementary ways.

scholarly journals Social Work and Community Based Disaster Risk Management in Pakistan

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-132
Author(s):  
Sajjad Hussain ◽  
Saira Miraj ◽  
Rani Saddique
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Civil Unrest ◽  
The Government ◽  
Negative Impacts

Pakistan is exposed to various natural calamities due to its geophysical condition and climatic changes. In addition, man-made disasters also pose a threat to human lives and properties which includes industrial and transport disasters including oil spills, civil unrest, wars and conflicts. Although it is not possible to stop or prevent natural disasters, but the negative impacts of natural disasters can be minimized through human efforts. The government of Pakistan has adopted participatory approach as part of its policy for disaster management. This research paper is based on the analysis of secondary data for reviewing the existing policies with emphasis on disaster risk reduction in pre and post disaster period. The paper concludes that participation of target community is indispensable for disaster risk reduction on sustainable basis. The article suggests that community should be meaningfully involved in disaster risk reduction efforts at the local level. In this connection the role of social workers is indispensable for disaster risk reduction on sustainable basis.

Risk Management, Response, Relief, Recovery, Reconstruction, and Future Disaster Risk Reduction

2018 ◽  
pp. 95-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amod M. Dixit ◽  
Surya N. Shrestha ◽  
Ramesh Guragain ◽  
Bishnu H. Pandey ◽  
Khadga S. Oli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk

Multiple-hazards and their interactions in urban low-to-middle income countries: a case study from Nairobi

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce D. Malamud ◽  
Emmah Mwangi ◽  
Joel Gill ◽  
Ekbal Hussain ◽  
Faith Taylor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Soil Subsidence ◽  
Ground Collapse

<p>Global policy frameworks, such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, increasingly advocate for multi-hazard approaches across different spatial scales. However, management approaches on the ground are still informed by siloed approaches based on one single natural hazard (e.g. flood, earthquake, snowstorm). However, locations are rarely subjected to a single natural hazard but rather prone to more than one. These different hazards and their interactions (e.g. one natural hazard triggering or increasing the probability of one or more natural hazards), together with exposure and vulnerability, shape the disaster landscape of a given region and associated disaster impact.  Here, as part of the UK GCRF funded research grant “Tomorrow’s Cities” we first map out the single natural hazardscape for Nairobi using evidence collected through peer-reviewed literature, grey literature, social media and newspapers. We find the following hazard groups and hazard types present in Nairobi: (i) geophysical (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides), (ii) hydrological (floods and droughts), (iii) shallow earth processes (regional subsidence, ground collapse, soil subsidence, ground heave), (iv) atmospheric hazards (storm, hail, lightning, extreme heat, extreme cold), (v) biophysical (urban fires), and vi) space hazards (geomatic storms, and impact events). The breadth of single natural hazards that can potentially impact Nairobi is much larger than normally considered by individual hazard managers that work in Nairobi. We then use a global hazard matrix to identify possible hazard interactions, focusing on the following interaction mechanisms: (i) hazard triggering secondary hazard, (ii) hazards amplifying the possibility of the secondary hazard occurring.  We identify 67 possible interactions, as well as some of the interaction cascade typologies that are typical for Nairobi (e.g. a storm triggers and increases the probability of a flood which in turn increases the probability of a flood). Our results indicate a breadth of natural hazards and their interactions in Nairobi, and emphasise a need for a multi-hazard approach to disaster risk reduction.</p>

From co-production of knowledge to a participatory governance concept: a research design focusing on knowledge practices in flood risk management and disaster risk reduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ida Wallin
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Disaster Risk Reduction ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Flood Risk Management ◽  
Participatory Governance ◽  
Production Of Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Practices

<p>Knowledge has been shown to be more effectively implemented in practice when produced in collaboration between researchers and other stakeholders as the co-produced knowledge is more likely to be accepted and found relevant. Knowledge co-production processes have however been found guilty of depoliticizing and hiding political struggles to the end of reinforcing existing unequal power relations and prevent broad societal transformation from taking place. From this perspective, knowledge co-production can come into conflict with participatory governance that focuses on the empowerment and capacity building of actors, social justice and advocacy. In this presentation I take a closer look at this conflictual perspective and propose a research focus on knowledge practices for exploring and analyzing participatory governance options for flood risk management (FRM) and disaster risk reduction (DRR). I do this by exemplifying and presenting a research design developed within the newly started PARADeS-project.</p><p>The PARADeS-project is a research project led by German research institutions in close collaboration with partners in Ghana and with the overall aim to contribute to enhancing Ghana’s national flood risk and disaster management strategy. Co-production of knowledge is foreseen to take place in several workshops including collaborative modelling, scenario- and policy back-casting exercises. One of the planned project outputs is a concept of participatory governance in FRM and DRR based on the findings from a stakeholder analysis, a policy network analysis and a participatory assessment of different policy options.</p><p>In this project context a research focus on stakeholders’ knowledge practices can be used to inform and improve the participatory governance concept and facilitate its implementation process. Knowledge is used by stakeholders as a powerful resource in suggesting certain policy options and convincing others of their necessity. Knowledge practices entail how actors use knowledge to argue, convince and make decisions. Through knowledge practices, stakeholders decide what knowledge to base decisions on and how to convince others of their position using that knowledge. What knowledge becomes accepted as legitimate in such interactions - often deliberative settings - can be decisive for the acceptability of any policy option. It is therefore important to study not only the different types of stakeholders and technical options for FRM and DRR, but the interaction between stakeholders and how they use information and co-create knowledge - the knowledge practices.</p><p>Within the presentation I discuss the proposed research design for how to study knowledge practices and how to make use of these findings when going from research project and co-production of knowledge to a concept of participatory governance in flood risk management and disaster risk reduction in Ghana.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document