Challenging disparities in capacity development for disaster risk reduction

Although capacity development has been identified as the means to substantially reduce global disaster losses, it is a challenge for external partners to facilitate the development of sustainable capacities for disaster risk reduction in disaster-prone countries. The purpose of this study is to investigate potential gaps between how leading professionals approach such capacity development and guidelines found in available theory. The analysis of data from thirty-five qualitative semi-structured interviews reveals that there are gaps between theory and practise, as well as between the practitioners, in all seven elements identified in available theory. There is ambiguity regarding terminology, different views about the meaning of local context, ownership and capacity assessment, as well as contradicting opinions of the role and responsibilities of external partners. Focus is on training individuals, while other requisites are often ignored, and there is a general lack of understanding of what results to assess and how to monitor and evaluate projects

Forwarding a challenging task: Seven elements for capacity development for disaster risk reduction

Capacity development for disaster risk reduction is an important process to substantially reduce disaster losses, which threaten sustainable development and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. This paper presents seven elements for capacity development for disaster risk reduction that has been applied in practise with noteworthy results. The seven elements are: (1) Terminology, (2) Local context, (3) Ownership, (4) Capacity assessment, (5) Roles and responsibilities, (6) Mix of activities, and (7) Monitoring, evaluation and learning. Although this set of elements should not be seen as a comprehensive methodology in itself, the seven elements for capacity development for disaster risk reduction still highlight vital aspects and seem to be a both conceptually and pragmatically interesting path to follow for increasing the impact and sustainability of projects

Parallel structures for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in Southern Africa

During the last decade, the interest of the international community in the concepts of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation has been growing immensely. Even though an increasing number of scholars seem to view these concepts as two sides of the same coin (at least when not considering the potentially positive effects of climate change), in practice the two concepts have developed in parallel rather than in an integrated manner when it comes to policy, rhetoric and funding opportunities amongst international organisations and donors. This study investigates the extent of the creation of parallel structures for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. The chosen methodology for the study is a comparative case study and the data are collected through focus groups and content analysis of documentary sources, as well as interviews with key informants. The results indicate that parallel structures for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation have been established in all but one of the studied countries. The qualitative interviews performed in some of the countries indicate that stakeholders in disaster risk reduction view this duplication of structures as unfortunate, inefficient and a fertile setup for conflict over resources for the implementation of similar activities. Additional research is called for in order to study the concrete effects of having these parallel structures as a foundation for advocacy for more efficient future disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation

Moving with risk: Forced displacement and vulnerability to hazards in Colombia

The paper examines the processes through which people forced from their homes by conflict can become exposed to heightened risk from environmental hazards in the places where they resettle. It reports on research undertaken with internally displaced people who moved to informal settlements in four locations in Colombia. With one of the world’s largest displaced populations and a high annual incidence of hazard events such as landslides and floods, enabling people to create a durable sense of security in their places of resettlement is a major development challenge for the country. However, as the testimonies from individual experiences and perspectives makes clear, this problem is not one that can or should be addressed simply by enforcing existing land use and tenure regulations. The study combined qualitative interview methods with arts-based elements designed to facilitate and open up dialogue with research participants. We found that creating a permanent home, however modest, has symbolic meaning that reflects both personal struggle and collective effort: it represents security and stability, even in sites people know are associated with hazards. In tracing how they have interacted with multiple forms of risk, our work shows how displaced people have had to weigh up the threats they face against limited resettlement options, in an ongoing context of marginalisation. For complex reasons, this is a population that tends to be excluded from formal disaster preparedness and mitigation. However, there are indications that this prevailing situation could be challenged, promoting greater flexibility on the part of governmental organisations and enabling communities to become more engaged in disaster risk reduction. In bringing empirical depth to a topic of global significance at the intersection of displacement, disaster and development, we support the call for adaptable approaches to disaster risk management that can support displaced people more effectively and equitably

A Great Babylonian Confusion: Terminological Ambiguity in Capacity Development for Disaster Risk Reduction in the International Community

Society is becoming increasingly dynamic and complex, and therefore more vulnerable. It is thus important that society is resilient in order to be able to protect citizens and critical functions in the wake of disasters. It has been suggested that disaster risk reduction (DRR) is key in establishing resilience, and that adequate capacity in DRR is vital to reduce the effects of disasters. DRR and capacity development involve many individuals and organisations, and previous studies have indicated discrepancies in how individuals and organisations perceive key aspects of DRR and capacity development. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the potential for misunderstanding of the key concepts of DRR and capacity development, focusing on a homogeneous group of international experts and on documents from nine capacity development projects for DRR. Thirty-five qualitative interviews and content analysis of the project documentation revealed substantial conceptual ambiguity, indicating significant differences in the way in which the respondents perceive and define key concepts. The findings also showed that there is still a gap with respect to how these concepts are understood and communicated in the project documentation. This high degree of terminological ambiguity is likely to cause misunderstanding and have a negative impact on the effectiveness of capacity development projects for DRR