Natural Hazards Governance in China

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Sim ◽  
Jun Lei Yu
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Management ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Chinese Government ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Social Organizations

China is a vast country frequently impacted by multiple natural hazards. All natural disasters have been reported in China, except volcanic eruptions. Almost every region in China is threatened by at least one type of natural hazard, and the rural areas are most vulnerable, with fewer resources and less developed disaster protective measures as well as lower levels of preparedness. In the first 30 years since its establishment in 1949, the Chinese government, hindered by resource constraints, encouraged local communities to be responsible for disaster response. As the country’s economy grew exponentially, after it opened its doors to the world in the late 1970s, China’s natural hazard governance (NHG) system quickly became more top-down, with the government leading the way for planning, coordinating, directing, and allocating resources for natural disasters. The development of China’s NHG is linked to the evolution of its ideologies, legislation system, and organizational structures for disaster management. Ancient China’s disaster management was undergirded by the ideology that one accepted one’s fate passively in the event of a disaster. In contemporary China, three ideologies guide the NHG: (a) passive disaster relief characterized by “help oneself by engaging in production”; (b) active disaster management characterized by “emergency management”; and (c) optimized disaster risk governance characterized by “multiple stakeholders working together.” Meanwhile, the NHG legislation and systems have become more open, transparent, and integrated one over time. Evidenced by the unprecedented growth of social organizations and private companies that engaged in disaster-related activities during and after the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, discussions on integrating bottom-up capacities with the top-down system have increased recently. The Chinese government started purchasing services from social organizations and engaging them in building disaster model communities (officially known as “Comprehensive Disaster Reduction Demonstration Communities”) in recent years. These are, potentially, two specific ways for social organizations to contribute to China’s NHG system development.

scholarly journals (P1-86) Socioeconomic Impact of Natural Disasters in China

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s126-s127
Author(s):  
W. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Epidemiological Data ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Socioeconomic Impact ◽  
Chinese Government ◽  
Chinese Yuan

IntroductionChina is one of the countries most affected by disasters caused by natural hazards. Disasters comprise an important restricting factor for economic and social development.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed based on the epidemiological data of disasters caused by natural hazards in recent two decades.ResultsThe deadliest disaster that was reviewed was the Sichuan, Wenchuan earthquake on 12 May 2008 with a death toll of 88,928. Floods were the the primary natural hazard resulting in disaster in China. The economic loss caused by natural disasters was huge, the Sichuan earthquake alone resulted in an economic loss of 845.1 billion Chinese Yuan. However, psychosocial factors did not receive attention by Chinese Government and academics.ConclusionsThe characteristics and impact of disasters should be analyzed to scientifically provide useful information for natural disaster mitigation in China.

scholarly journals Peran TNI dalam Penanggulangan Bencana Alam (Studi Kasus Peran Korem 043/Gatam dalam Penanggulangan Bencana Alam di Provinsi Lampung)

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nrangwesthi Widyaningrum ◽  
Muhammad Sarip Kodar ◽  
Risma Suryani Purwanto ◽  
Agung Priambodo
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Disaster Management ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Disaster Response ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Tidal Waves ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Natural Disaster Management

Indonesia has the most complete types of disasters in the world such as floods, landslides, tidal waves, tornadoes, drought, forest and land fires, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, liquefaction and many more. Natural disasters that occur in Indonesia often just happen and it is not predictable when it will happen. This causes problems in handling natural disasters. Natural disaster management is not a matter of BNPB or BPBD, one important element is the involvement of the Indonesian National Army (TNI). One of Indonesia's regions that are vulnerable to natural disasters is Lampung Province. This research will describe how the role of the TNI in the case study in Korem 043 / Gatam in helping to overcome natural disasters in Lampung Province. The research method used in this research is qualitative research with a literature study approach. The role of the TNI in disaster management in Lampung Province is inseparable from the duties and functions of the TNI that have been mandated in Law Number 34 of 2004. Korem 043 / Gatam has taken strategic steps both from the pre-disaster, disaster response, and post-disaster phases . TNI involvement in the process of disaster management does not stand alone, but cooperates and synergizes with local governments.

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>

Risk Governance of Limited-Notice or No-Notice Natural Hazards

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Papathoma-Köhle ◽  
Dale Dominey-Howes
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Early Warning ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Early Warning Systems ◽  
Global South ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Tsunami Warning ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Warning Systems ◽  
Global North

The second priority of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 stresses that, to efficiently manage risk posed by natural hazards, disaster risk governance should be strengthened for all phases of the disaster cycle. Disaster management should be based on adequate strategies and plans, guidance, and inter-sector coordination and communication, as well as the participation and inclusion of all relevant stakeholders—including the general public. Natural hazards that occur with limited-notice or no-notice (LNN) challenge these efforts. Different types of natural hazards present different challenges to societies in the Global North and the Global South in terms of detection, monitoring, and early warning (and then response and recovery). For example, some natural hazards occur suddenly with little or no warning (e.g., earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis, snow avalanches, flash floods, etc.) whereas others are slow onset (e.g., drought and desertification). Natural hazards such as hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, and floods may unfold at a pace that affords decision-makers and emergency managers enough time to affect warnings and to undertake preparedness and mitigative activities. Others do not. Detection and monitoring technologies (e.g., seismometers, stream gauges, meteorological forecasting equipment) and early warning systems (e.g., The Australian Tsunami Warning System) have been developed for a number of natural hazard types. However, their reliability and effectiveness vary with the phenomenon and its location. For example, tsunamis generated by submarine landslides occur without notice, generally rendering tsunami-warning systems inadequate. Where warnings are unreliable or mis-timed, there are serious implications for risk governance processes and practices. To assist in the management of LNN events, we suggest emphasis should be given to the preparedness and mitigation phases of the disaster cycle, and in particular, to efforts to engage and educate the public. Risk and vulnerability assessment is also of paramount importance. The identification of especially vulnerable groups, appropriate land use planning, and the introduction and enforcement of building codes and reinforcement regulations, can all help to reduce casualties and damage to the built environment caused by unexpected events. Moreover, emergency plans have to adapt accordingly as they may differ from the evacuation plans for events with a longer lead-time. Risk transfer mechanisms, such as insurance, and public-private partnerships should be strengthened, and redevelopment should consider relocation and reinforcement of new buildings. Finally, participation by relevant stakeholders is a key concept for the management of LNN events as it is also a central component for efficient risk governance. All relevant stakeholders should be identified and included in decisions and their implementation, supported by good communication before, during, and after natural hazard events. The implications for risk governance of a number of natural hazards are presented and illustrated with examples from different countries from the Global North and the Global South.

Long-Term Consequences of Natural Disasters

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilan Noy ◽  
William duPont
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Local Economy ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Country Level

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Natural Hazard Science. Please check back later for the full article. What are the long-term economic and demographic impacts of disasters? Do disasters caused by natural hazards lead to long-term declines in economic activity, or do they stimulate the local economy because of the added investment and the upgrading of infrastructure? What are the main facets of the economy that are impacted in the long term—population, incomes, employment, other parameters, or none at all? Are the long-term impacts of disasters caused by natural hazards different from those caused by man-made shocks, such as civil wars or terrorist attacks? The type and severity of the natural hazard surely have an effect on the kinds of dynamics experienced after a disaster, but so do the levels of exposure of people and wealth (in the form of man-made infrastructure), and the social and economic vulnerabilities that characterize the affected area. Additionally, one needs to differentiate, when examining long-term impacts, between direct and indirect damage, and whether this distinction assists us in explaining different trajectories. The role of policy in shaping long-term outcomes is potentially very important. While it is difficult to claim significant agreement on any one topic, some intriguing insights have been emerging in recent research. To discuss the long-term economic impact of natural disasters, one must first define impact. A common way to determine this impact is to compare the economy post-disaster to its state prior to the disaster. Some argue that an economy has recovered when it returns to pre-disaster levels. This approach can be misleading as the evidence suggests that, in some cases, economies that were severely impacted by disasters may experience a brief return to pre-disaster levels, occasioned by the boom in reconstruction spending, but then decline back to experience long-term decline associated with the disaster event itself or the fear it has created of future events. It is clear from the above example that the appropriate comparison is to a counterfactual scenario without event. Of course, even more challenging is to identify, or predict, what would have happened had the disaster not occurred. Not surprisingly, the ways in which this counterfactual, disaster-free state is identified may determine the conclusions reached. A minority of observers argue that it is common to see economies and communities reconstructed to a better state than they were pre-disaster (a “build-back-better” scenario), and others conclude that disasters occasioned by natural hazards are benign in the long term, at least at a large enough scale (potentially at the country level). On the other hand, very poor countries, very small countries, or regional economies within countries can all experience significant and very prolonged declines in economic activity in the aftermath of catastrophic natural hazard events. These adverse developments can be experienced as long-term declines in populations (e.g., New Orleans, post-2005), long-term declines in incomes and employment (e.g., Kobe, post-1995), very long-term declines in asset prices (the Dust-Bowl midwestern United States, post-1930s), or shifts in the sectors of economic activity (San Francisco, post-1906).

Natural Hazards Governance Practices and Key Natural Hazards in Latin America and the Caribbean

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivis García
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Volcanic Eruptions ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Governance Practices ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Caribbean

Along with sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean is among the geographic regions most exposed and vulnerable to the occurrence of disasters. The vulnerability is explained by geography and climate, but also by prevailing poverty and inequality. Year after year, multiple disasters such as landslides, hurricanes, floods, rains, droughts, storms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tsunamis, among others, threaten the region. Natural disasters reveal the deficiencies of infrastructure and essential services. In particular, they highlight the lack of an institutional framework for effective governance with clearly defined goals of how to prevent, respond to, and reconstruct after a natural catastrophe. One of the priorities of governments in the region is to achieve resilience—that is, to strengthen the capacity to resist, adapt, and recover from the effects of natural disasters. To be able to accomplish this, governments need to prepare before a natural disaster strikes. Therefore, disaster risk management is critical. A fundamental element in the strategy of increasing resilience is good planning in general—that is, to reduce inequality, manage urbanization, and invest in necessary infrastructure such as energy, sewage, and water management. Because climate change increases the risk of disasters, it is generally understood that good governance practices can prevent further global warming. Governments might achieve this, for example, by investing in renewable energy and financing other environmentally friendly initiatives. Unfortunately, most current governance models in Latin America and the Caribbean are characterized by bureaucratic structures that are fragmented into different sectors and whose actors do not have much interaction between them. With technical assistance from organizations, such as the World Bank and the United Nations, stakeholders in Latin America and the Caribbean are learning how to develop plans that encourage the collaboration of multiple sectors (e.g., transportation, housing) and improve the working relationships between various institutions (e.g. local associations, NGOs, private and public organizations). To be adequately prepared for a disaster, it is necessary to establish a network of actors that can engage quickly in decision-making and coordinate effectively between local, regional, and national levels.

scholarly journals A framework for profiling the characteristics of risk governance in natural hazard contexts

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 2207-2229 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Walker ◽  
F. Tweed ◽  
R. Whittle
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Risk Governance ◽  
Specific Work ◽  
Policy Area ◽  
Full Diversity ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
And Control

Abstract. The observed moves over recent decades away from government towards a broader practice of "governance" is as relevant to the handling of natural hazards as it is to other societal concerns. Key characteristics of this change include the emergence of multi-level governance processes and the "hollowing out" of the nation state; shifts away from the exercise of centralised authority towards the involvement and collaboration of a multiplicity of actors specific to each policy area; the creation of new forms of authority and control; and changing distributions of responsibilities between the state and other actors. However, the extent to which these shifts have taken place across the full diversity of national contexts in Europe, and can be observed specifically in relation to the governance of natural hazards, is very much open to judgement and debate. In this paper, we propose a framework for profiling risk governance in relation to key characteristics identified in both the general governance literature and in more specific work on risk governance. This framework can be flexibly applied in relation to a specific hazard and national/regional context and enables qualitative profiling across a spectrum of eight governance characteristics. Past trends and likely future changes can also be represented. We discuss the formulation of this framework as well as illustrating how it can be used in a process of discussion and debate about risk governance issues. We provide examples of the ways in which the profiling approach can enable comparison between risk governance contexts and approaches, and how it can be used in a variety of potential settings.

scholarly journals The Integration of Knowledge Resources and Logistic Resilience for Effective Disaster Management

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-31
Author(s):  
Muhammad Rizwan Junaid
Keyword(s):  
Population Growth ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Management ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Pivotal Role ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Rapid Population Growth ◽  
Initial Attempt ◽  
Knowledge Resources

Rapid population growth, changing weather conditions and an increasing number of natural disasters have left human beings more vulnerable and exposed to nature’s onslaught. Disaster Management Organizations (DMOs) need to be more resilient, responsive and effective to counter these natural hazards and should not leave any stone unturned in order to play their pivotal role in rescue, relief and rehabilitation. Organizational knowledge and logistics are two core factors considered most significant in transforming a DMO into a resilient organization that can shoulder its due responsibility in a plausible and desired manner. This paper is an initial attempt that discusses the integration of knowledge resources and logistics to accelerate the process of the said transformation.

Natural Hazards Governance in Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bevaola Kusumasari
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Disaster Management ◽  
Forest Fires ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Disaster Risk Management ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Active Tectonic

Geographically, Indonesia is located in southeast Asia between the Indian and the Pacific Oceans. It is recognized as an active tectonic region because it consists of three major active tectonic plates: the Eurasian plate in the north, the Indo-Australian plate in the south, and the Pacific plate in the east. The southern and eastern parts of the country feature a volcanic arc stretching from the islands of Sumatra, Java, Nusa Tenggara, and Sulawesi, while the remainder of the region comprises old volcanic mountains and lowlands partly dominated by marshes. Territorially, it is located in a tropical climate area, with its two seasons—wet and dry—exhibiting characteristic weather changes, such as with regard to temperature and wind direction, that can be quite extreme. These climatic conditions combine with the region’s relatively diverse surface and rock topographies to provide fertile soil conditions. Conversely, the same conditions can lead to negative outcomes for this densely populated country, in particular, the occurrence of hydrometeorological disasters such as floods, landslides, forest fires, and drought. The 2017 World Risk Report’s ranking of countries’ relative vulnerability and exposure to natural hazards such as earthquakes, storms, floods, droughts, and sea-level rise calculated Indonesia to be the 33rd most at-risk country. Between 1815 and 2018, 23,250 natural hazards occurred here; 302,849 people died or were otherwise lost, 371,059 were injured, and there were 39,514,636 displaced persons, as well as billions of rupiah in losses. The most frequent type of natural hazard has been floods (8,919 instances), followed by cyclones (5,984), and then landslides (4,947). Following these latest disasters and acknowledging that Indonesia is becoming increasingly vulnerable to such natural hazards, the country’s government established a comprehensive disaster management system. Specifically, it instituted an organization capable of and responsible for handling such a wide-reaching and complex situation as a natural hazard. A coordinated national body had first been developed in 1966, but the current discourse concerning proactive disaster risk management at national and local levels has encouraged the central government to adapt this organization toward becoming more accountable to and involving the participation of local communities. Law No. 24/2007 of the Republic of Indonesia Concerning Disaster Management, issued on April 26, 2007, established a new National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB), but it also focusses on community-based disaster risk management pre- and post-disaster. Through the BNPB and by executing legislative reform to implement recommendations from the international disaster response laws, Indonesia has become a global leader in legal preparedness for natural hazards and the reduction of human vulnerability.

United Arab Emirates

2011 ◽  
pp. 65-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamdan Al Ghasyah Dhanhani ◽  
Angus Duncan ◽  
David Chester
Keyword(s):  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Natural Hazards ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Natural Hazard ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Tropical Storms ◽  
Clear Delineation ◽  
The Impact

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has more exposure to natural hazards than has been previously recognized. In the last 20 years the UAE has been subject to earthquakes, landslides, floods and tropical storms. This chapter examines the structure and procedures for management of natural disasters in the UAE, in particular issues of governance, accountability and communication within states that are part of a federal system. The study involved interviews with officials at both federal and emirate levels and case studies are presented of the impact of recent natural hazard events. Two emirates were selected for more detailed examination, Fujairah the most hazard prone and a rural emirate and Dubai which is a highly urbanized emirate which has undergone rapid development. There is now increasing awareness of natural hazards in the UAR and progress is being made at regional and federal levels. There needs to be a clear delineation between regional and federal roles and an understanding of the need for effective channels of information to relevant agencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document