Ruby Ash for Vox
Planes are crashing on a near weekly basis. “Forever chemicals” and microplastics are in our water, embedded in our beauty products and clothing, and even burrowed in our brains. Your kitchen utensils might be poisoning you and perhaps your food is, too. Mysterious diseases and not-so-mysterious diseases seem to be forever threatening another global pandemic. Alarming news coverage of violent crime has people on edge, concerned for their safety………Continue reading…..By Allie Volpe
Source: Vox
.
Critics:
Disaster risk reduction aims to make disasters less likely to happen. The approach, also called DRR or disaster risk management, also aims to make disasters less damaging when they do occur. DRR aims to make communities stronger and better prepared to handle disasters. In technical terms, it aims to make them more resilient or less vulnerable.
When DRR is successful, it makes communities less the vulnerable because it mitigates the effects of disasters. This means DRR can make risky events fewer and less severe. Climate change can increase climate hazards. So development efforts often consider DRR and climate change adaptation together.
It is possible to include DRR in almost all areas of development and humanitarian work. People from local communities, agencies or federal governments can all propose DRR strategies. DRR policies aim to “define goals and objectives across different timescales and with concrete targets, indicators and time frames.”
There are some challenges for successful DRR. Local communities and organisations should be actively involved in the planning process. The role and funding of local government needs to be considered. Also, DRR strategies should be mindful of gender aspects. For example, studies have shown that women and girls are disproportionately impacted by disasters.
A gender-sensitive approach would identify how disasters affect men, women, boys and girls differently. It would shape policy that addresses people’s specific vulnerabilities and needs. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction is an international initiative that has helped 123 countries adopt both federal and local DRR strategies (as of 2022). The
International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction, on October 13 every year, has helped increase the visibility of DRR. It aims to promote a culture of prevention. Spending on DRR is difficult to quantify for many countries. Global estimates of costs are therefore not available. However an indication of the costs for developing countries is given by the Us$215 billion to $387 billion per year (up to 2030) estimated costs for climate adaptation.
DRR and climate adaptation share similar goals and strategies. They both require increased finance to address rising climate risks. DRR activities are part of the national strategies and budget planning in most countries. However the priorities for DRR are often lower than for other development priorities. This has an impact on public sector budget allocations.
For many countries, less than 1% of the national budget is available for DRR activities. The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) is a multi-donor partnership to support developing countries in managing the interconnected risks of natural hazards and climate hazards. Between 2007 and 2022, GFDRR provided $890 million in technical assistance, analytics, and capacity building support to more than 157 countries.
Mitigation is often used interchangeably with risk reduction, however the terms have a few key differences. Both aim to reduce the number of negative effects of hazards, but risk reduction focuses on reducing the likelihood of the event itself, while mitigation focuses on reducing the impact of the event. Natural risk assessments commonly use the term mitigation, while broader climate change reports tend to use adaptive capacity instead (mitigation holds another definition in the scope of climate change; see climate change mitigation).
Although related, adaptive capacity refers more to the potential to adjust a system, while mitigation is the actual implementation of adjustments. Mitigation planning helps local governments lessen the impacts of hazards within their communities. No two locations have the same hazard risks and communities know their experiences best. For example, even if a hazard is not recorded in government data, locals will take note of anything that occurs in their neighborhood.
Policymakers can use community input to create more efficient mitigation plans. Traditional emergency management thinking makes two misleading assumptions about communities. First, it sees other forms of social organisation (voluntary and community-based organisations, informal social groupings and families) as irrelevant to emergency action. Spontaneous actions by affected communities or groups (e.g., search and rescue) are viewed as irrelevant or disruptive, because they are not controlled by the authorities.
The second assumption is that disasters produce passive ‘victims’ who are overwhelmed by crisis or dysfunctional behavior (panic, looting, self-seeking activities) and need to be controlled — in some cases, through the imposition of martial law. An alternative viewpoint emphasises the importance of communities and local organisations in disaster risk management. In this strategy, local people and organisations are the main actors in risk reduction and disaster response.
Community-based disaster risk management responds to local problems and needs, capitalises on local knowledge and expertise, is cost-effective, improves the likelihood of sustainability through genuine ‘ownership’ of projects, strengthens community technical and organisational capacities, and empowers people by enabling them to tackle these and other challenges. Understanding the social capital already existent in the community can greatly help reducing the risk at the community level.
Low community involvement can increase the severity of disaster.[35] Community volunteers provide crucial resources to recovery efforts, such as access to communication, search and rescue efforts, supply distribution, housing and food provision, and technological assistance. Government agencies rarely “consider the needs and desires of communities” or ask for community input when implementing their DRR strategies.
A case study in Rwanda showed that only 14.7% of policy utilised “community’s traditional knowledge” when creating plans, despite expressed interest from the community.
“Disaster risk reduction progress score”.
Report of the open-ended intergovernmental expert working group
on indicators and terminology for disaster risk reduction.
Climate hazards and disasters: the need for capacity building”.
How Should the new international disaster risk framework address gender equality?”
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook”
Climate Change’s Role in Disaster Risk Reduction’s Future: Beyond Vulnerability and Resilience”.
Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation — IPCC”.
International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
Concept Note: International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction 2023″.
The Sustainable Development Goals Extended Report 2022: Climate Action”
.
.
Labels: disaster,risk,Resilience,Events, hazards,Impact,Catastrophy,crashing,poisoning,disease,microplastics
Leave a Reply