This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
There have recently been some naturalhazard events of extraordinary size and power, but they are no more than curtain raisers. Naturalhazard impacts are becoming fiercer, more extensive and more frequent. In the light of this, our 'operating environment' as advocates of disaster riskreduction has changed drastically.
Like any field of study, disaster riskreduction needs lateral thinking. NaturalHazards 86: 969-988. Sadly, a follow-the-herd mentality all too easily develops among researchers. The residual question is how to liberate and encourage creativity. Ismail-Zadeh, A.T., Takeuchi and D. Paton 2017. first edition 1962).
In disaster riskreduction circles, there is an almost desperate reliance on 'community' and a strong growth in studies and plans to "involve the community" in facing up to risks and impacts (Berkes and Ross 2013). The intentions are laudable, as DRR needs to be democratised if it is to function.
The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction was born out of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, 1990-2000. On 1 May 2019 it was renamed the UN Office for Disaster RiskReduction. Unofficial voices have suggested that the 'cure to damage ratio' for naturalhazards is 1:43.
This is not to denigrate the work of resilience managers, as there is obviously much to be done to reduce the risk and impact of adverse events. Put bluntly, in disaster riskreduction, these days the goalposts are moving faster than the players. Resilience and disaster riskreduction: an etymological journey.
The next question is where to draw the boundaries in the study of disasters and practice of disaster riskreduction. Pandemics are included because many of the effects of a pandemic are likely to be socio-economic in nature. Disaster riskreduction policy is heavily influenced by the class of disaster involved.
Given the depth and breadth of knowledge represented in this book, the conclusions should be and are important, worth shouting from the rooftops, for the author knows of what he writes, as he sums up in his closing chapter: “Riskreduction should be proclaimed as a principal development goal.
The book is part of Routledge Studies in Hazards, Disaster Risk and Climate Change. is a disaster risk management specialist, currently working for the Pacific Disaster Center (PDC Global). Series Editor: Ilan Kelman. For more information: [link]. Reviewer: Irmak Renda-Tanali, D.Sc.
trillion in global economic losses,” according to a report conducted by the UN Office for Disaster RiskReduction (UNDRR). There has also been a rise in geophysical events including earthquakes and tsunamis which have killed more people than any of the other naturalhazards under review in this report.
Resilience and disaster riskreduction: an etymological journey. NaturalHazards and Earth System Sciences 13(11): 2707-2716. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 76(1): 38-49. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1986.tb00102.x 1467-8306.1986.tb00102.x x Alexander, D.E. DOI: 10.5194/nhess-13-2707-2013 Clayton, M.
The year 1980 was something of a watershed in the field of disaster riskreduction (or disaster management as it was then known). It was clear that the US Government was influenced by the suffering and the shortcomings of the response to the tragedy as it built up its own capacity to respond to naturalhazard impacts.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 25,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content