Contents

Articles
Disaster risk reduction 1
Change management 5

References
Article Sources and Contributors 8

Article Licenses
License 9
Disaster risk reduction 1

Disaster risk reduction

Disaster risk reduction (DRR) is a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing the risks of disaster.
It aims to reduce socio-economic vulnerabilities to disaster as well as dealing with the environmental and other
hazards that trigger them: Here it has been strongly influenced by the mass of research on vulnerability that has
appeared in print since the mid-1970s.[1] It is the responsibility of development and relief agencies alike. It should be
an integral part of the way such organisations do their work, not an add-on or one-off action. DRR is very
wide-ranging: Its scope is much broader and deeper than conventional emergency management. There is potential
for DRR initiatives in just about every sector of development and humanitarian work.
The most commonly cited definition of DRR is one used by UN agencies such as UNISDR and UNDP: "The
conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks
throughout a society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards,
within the broad context of sustainable development."[2]

Context
Only 4% of the estimated $10 billion in annual humanitarian assistance is devoted to prevention, and yet every dollar
spent on risk reduction saves between $5 and $10 in economic losses from disasters.[3]

Development of the concept and approach

The evolution of disaster management thinking and practice since the 1970s has seen a progressively wider and
deeper understanding of why disasters happen, accompanied by more integrated, holistic approaches to reduce their
impact on society. The modern paradigm of disaster management — disaster risk reduction (DRR) — represents the
latest step along this path. DRR is a relatively new concept in formal terms, but it embraces much earlier thinking
and practice. It is being widely embraced by international agencies, governments, disaster planners and civil society
organisations.[4]
DRR is such an all-embracing concept that it has proved difficult to define or explain in detail, although the broad
idea is clear enough. Inevitably, there are different definitions in the technical literature, but it is generally
understood to mean the broad development and application of policies, strategies and practices to minimise
vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout society. The term ‘disaster risk management’ (DRM) is often used in the
same context and to mean much the same thing: a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing risks of
all kinds associated with hazards and human activities. It is more properly applied to the operational aspects of DRR:
the practical implementation of DRR initiatives.
There have been growing calls for greater clarity about the components of DRR and about indicators of progress
toward resilience — a challenge that the international community took up at the UN’s World Conference on Disaster
Reduction (WCDR) in Kobe, Japan, in 2005, only days after the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. The WCDR began
the process of pushing international agencies and national governments beyond the vague rhetoric of most policy
statements and toward setting clear targets and commitments for DRR. The first step in this process was the formal
approval at the WCDR of the Hyogo Framework for Action [5] (2005–2015) (HFA). This is the first internationally
accepted framework for DRR. It sets out an ordered sequence of objectives (outcome – strategic goals – priorities),
with five priorities for action attempting to ‘capture’ the main areas of DRR intervention. The UN's biennial Global
Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction [6] provides an opportunity for the UN and its member states to review progress
against the Hyogo Framework. It held its first session 5–7 June 2007 in Geneva, Switzerland.
UN initiatives have helped to refine and promote the concept at international level, stimulated initially by the UN's
designation of the 1990s as the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.
Disaster risk reduction 2

Some issues and challenges in DRR

Priorities
It is unrealistic to expect progress in every aspect of DRR: capacities and resources are insufficient. Governments
and other organisations have to make what are in effect ‘investment decisions’, choosing which aspects of DRR to
invest in, when, and in what sequence. This is made more complicated by the fact that many of the interventions
advocated are developmental rather than directly related to disaster management. Most existing DRR guidance
sidesteps this issue. One way of focusing is to consider only actions that are intended specifically to reduce disaster
risk. This would at least distinguish from more general efforts toward sustainable development. The concept of
‘invulnerable development’ attempts this: In this formulation, invulnerable development is development directed
toward reducing vulnerability to disaster, comprising ‘decisions and activities that are intentionally designed and
implemented to reduce risk and susceptibility, and also raise resistance and resilience to disaster’.[7]

Partnerships and inter-organisational co-ordination

No single group or organisation can address every aspect of DRR. DRR thinking sees disasters as complex problems
demanding a collective response. Co-ordination even in conventional emergency management is difficult, for many
organisations may converge on a disaster area to assist. Across the broader spectrum of DRR, the relationships
between types of organisation and between sectors (public, private and non-profit, as well as communities) become
much more extensive and complex. DRR requires strong vertical and horizontal linkages (central-local relations
become important). In terms of involving civil society organisations, it should mean thinking broadly about which
types of organisation to involve (i.e., conventional NGOs and such organisations as trades unions, religious
institutions, amateur radio operators (as in the USA and India), universities and research institutions).

Communities and their organisations

Traditional emergency management/civil defence 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
behaviour (panic, looting, self-seeking activities). They therefore need to be told what to do, and their behaviour
must be controlled — in extreme cases, through the imposition of martial law. There is plenty of sociological
research to refute such 'myths'.[8][9]
An alternative viewpoint, informed by a considerable volume of research, emphasises the importance of
communities and local organisations in disaster risk management. The rationale for community-based disaster risk
management that it 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. Local people and organisations are the main actors in risk reduction and disaster response in any case.[10]

Governance
The DRR approach requires redefining the role of government disaster reduction. It is generally agreed that national
governments should be main actors in DRR: They have a duty to ensure the safety of citizens, the resources and
capacity to implement large-scale DRR, a mandate to direct or co-ordinate the work of others, and they create the
necessary policy and legislative frameworks. These policies and programmes have to be coherent. More research is
needed into why some governments are more successful than others in disaster management. There is still no general
consensus on what drives changes in policy and practice. The shifting relationship between central government and
Disaster risk reduction 3

other actors is another area requiring research.

Accountability and rights

The principle of accountability lies at the heart of genuine partnership and participation in DRR. It applies to state
institutions that are expected to be accountable through the democratic process and to private sector and non-profit
organizations that are not subject to democratic control. Accountability is an emerging issue in disaster reduction
work. Accountability should be primarily toward those who are vulnerable to hazards and affected by them.
Many organisations working in international aid and development are now committing themselves to a ‘rights-based’
approach. This tends to encompass human rights (i.e., those that are generally accepted through international
agreements) and other rights that an agency believes should be accepted as human rights. In such contexts, the
language of rights may be used vaguely, with a risk of causing confusion. Security against disasters is not generally
regarded as a right although it is addressed in some international codes, usually indirectly. The idea of a ‘right to
safety’ is being discussed in some circles.

Policy and investment

In a June 2012 study, researchers at the Overseas Development Institute highlighted the need for more focus on
disaster risk management (DRM) in the international policy frameworks to be agreed in 2015.[11] Economic costs of
disasters are on the rise, but most humanitarian investment is currently spent on responding to disasters, rather than
managing their future risks. If this pattern continues, the researchers argue, then "spending on reconstruction and
relief will become unsustainable." A more developed evidence base, enhanced political commitment, and dialogue
across policy areas will be needed for this mainstreaming of disaster risk management to happen.

Major international conferences & workshops

With the growth of interest in disasters and disaster management, there are many conferences and workshops held on
the topic, from local to global levels. Regular international conferences include:
• The annual conference of TIEMS [12]: The International Emergency Management Society.
• The International Disaster and Risk Conferences [13] (IDRC) and workshops, held each year since 2006, in Davos,
Switzerland (even-numbered years), and other locations (odd numbered years).
• The meetings of the International Research Committee on Disasters (IRCD), held as part of the International
Sociological Association's World Congress of Sociology [14].

References
[1] Wisner B et al. 2004, At Risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (London: Routledge)
[2] Living With Risk: A Global Review of Disaster Reduction Initiatives (http:/ / www. unisdr. org/ eng/ about_isdr/ bd-lwr-2004-eng. htm),
UNISDR, 2004; pg. 17
[3] "A Needless Toll of Natural Disasters" (http:/ / www. boston. com/ news/ globe/ editorial_opinion/ oped/ articles/ 2006/ 03/ 23/
a_needless_toll_of_natural_disasters/ ), Op-Ed, Boston Globe, 23 March 2006, by Eric Schwartz (UN Secretary General’s Deputy Special
Envoy for Tsunami Recovery
[4] § UN ISDR 2004, Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives (Geneva: UN International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction), (http:/ / www. unisdr. org/ eng/ about_isdr/ bd-lwr-2004-eng. htm)
[5] http:/ / www. unisdr. org/ eng/ hfa/ hfa. htm
[6] http:/ / www. preventionweb. net/ english/ hyogo/ GP/
[7] McEntire DA 2000, ‘Sustainability or invulnerable development? Proposals for the current shift in paradigms’. Australian Journal of
Emergency Management 15(1): 58-61. (http:/ / www. ema. gov. au/ www/ emaweb/ RWPAttach. nsf/ VAP/
(3273BD3F76A7A5DEDAE36942A54D7D90)~AJEM_Vol15_Issue1. pdf/ $file/ AJEM_Vol15_Issue1. pdf)
[8] § Quarantelli EL 1998, Major Criteria for Judging Disaster Planning and Managing and their Applicability in Developing Societies
(University of Delaware: Disaster Research Center, Preliminary Paper 268).
[9] § Dynes RR 1994, ‘Community Emergency Planning: False Assumptions and Inappropriate Analogies’. International Journal of Mass
Emergencies and Disasters 12(2): 141-158.
Disaster risk reduction 4

[10] § Maskrey A 1989, Disaster Mitigation: A Community-Based Approach (Oxford: Oxfam).

[11] Mitchell, T. and Wilkinson, E. (2012) Disaster risk management in post-2015 policy frameworks: forging a more resilient future. Overseas
Development Institute Briefing Paper (http:/ / www. odi. org. uk/ publications/
6663-disaster-risk-management-sustainable-development-policy-post2015)
[12] http:/ / www. tiems. org/
[13] http:/ / www. idrc. info/ pages_new. php/ -About-IDRC/ 236/ 1/
[14] http:/ / www. isa-sociology. org/

External links
• Emergency Capacity Building Project (http://www.ecbproject.org)
• EM-DAT: The International Disaster Database (http://www.emdat.be)
• Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (http://www.gfdrr.org)
• United Nations - International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (http://www.unisdr.org)
• United Nations - International Strategy for Disaster Reduction- Regional Unit for the Americas (http://www.
eird.org)
• UN-SPIDER - United Nations Platform for Space-based Information for Disaster Management and Emergency
Response (http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/unspider/about_us.html)
• Preventionweb - Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters (http://www.preventionweb.
net)
• Education for hazards - What to do (http://www.edu4hazards.org) A guide for children and youth
• International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (http://www.ifrc.org/what/disasters/index.
asp?navid=04_03) Disaster Management pages
• The ProVention Consortium - Red Cross and Red Crescent (http://www.proventionconsortium.org)
• UNDP/CADRI (http://www.undmtp.org)
• UNDP/BCPR (http://www.undp.org/bcpr/we_do/integrating_risk.shtml)
• UNDP DRR links (http://www.undp.org/bcpr/disred/english/links.htm)
• The World Bank, Hazards Management Unit (http://www.worldbank.org/hazards/)
• United Nations Platform for Space-based Information for Disaster Management and Emergency Response (http://
www.unspider.org/)
• Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative (http://www.emi-megacities.org/)
• International Recovery Platform (http://www.recoveryplatform.org/)

Major publications
• Toward Resilience: A Guide to Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation (http://www.
ecbproject.org/resources/library/
341-toward-resilience-a-guide-to-disaster-risk-reduction-and-climate-change-adaptation)
• Disaster prevention: a role for business? (http://www.pacificdisaster.net/pdnadmin/data/original/
IFRC_2006_business_case_DRR.pdf) - ProVention & Maplecroft
• Tools for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction: Guidance Notes for Development Organisations (http://www.
preventionweb.net/files/1066_toolsformainstreamingDRR.pdf) - Charlotte Benson and John Twigg with
Tiziana Rossetto, IFRC & ProVention
• Natural Disaster Hotspots Case Studies (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDISMGMT/Resources/
0821363328.pdf) - World Bank
• World Disasters Report 2006 (http://www.ifrc.org/publicat/wdr2006/index.asp), IFRC
• Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/
Indigenous_Knowledge_for_Disaster_Risk_Reduction) UNISDR
• Words Into Action (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Words_Into_Action) UNISDR
• Living with Risk (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Living_with_Risk) UNISDR
Disaster risk reduction 5

• UNISDR Informs (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Asia_and_Pacific_UNISDR_Informs_Issue_3) UNISDR

• Guidance Notes on Safer School Construction (http://gfdrr.org/docs/Guidance_Notes_Safe_Schools.pdf)
World Bank, INEE, ISDR
• Guidance Note on Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction into the CCA and UNDAF (http://www.undg.org/docs/
9866/UNDG-DRR-Guidance-Note-2009_DUP_08-07-2009_11-43-02-734_AM.PDF) UNDG

Change management
Change management is an approach to shifting/transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations from a current
state to a desired future state. It is an organizational process aimed at helping change stakeholders to accept and
embrace changes in their business environment or individuals in their personal lives. In some project management
contexts, change management refers to a project management process wherein changes to a project are formally
introduced and approved.[1]
Change management uses basic structures and tools to control any organizational change effort. The goal is to
maximize benefits and minimize the change impacts on workers and avoid distractions.[2]

History
Linda Ackerman Anderson,[3] co-author of Beyond Change Management, described how in the late 1980s and early
1990s top leaders were growing dissatisfied with the failures of creating and implementing changes in a top-down
fashion. They created the role of the change leader to take responsibility for the people side of the change. The first
"State of the Change Management Industry" report in the Consultants News was published in February 1994.[4]
McKinsey consultant Julien Phillips first published a change management model in 1982 in the journal Human
Resource Management, though it took a decade for his change management peers to catch up with him.[5]
Marshak[6] credits the big 6 accounting firms and management consulting firms with creating the change
management industry when they branded their reengineering services groups as change management services in the
late 1980s.

Organizational Change
Organizational change is a structured approach in an organization for ensuring that changes are smoothly and
successfully implemented, and that the lasting benefits of change are achieved. In the modern business environment,
organizations face rapid change like never before. Globalization and the constant innovation of technology result in a
constantly evolving business environment. Recent phenomena such as social media and mobile adaptability have
revolutionized business and the effect of this is an ever increasing need for change, and therefore change
management. The growth in technology also has a secondary effect of increasing the availability and therefore
accountability of knowledge. Easily accessible information has resulted in unprecedented scrutiny from stockholders
and the media. Prying eyes and listening ears raise the stakes for failed business endeavors and increase the pressure
on struggling executives. With the business environment experiencing so much change, organizations must then
learn to become comfortable with change as well. Therefore, the ability to manage and adapt to organizational
change is an essential ability required in the workplace today.
Due to the growth of technology, modern organizational change is largely motivated by exterior innovations rather
than internal moves. When these developments occur, the organizations that adapt quickest create a competitive
advantage for themselves, while the companies that refuse to change get left behind. This can result in drastic profit
and/or market share losses.
Change management 6

Organizational change directly affects all departments from the entry level employee to senior management. With
recent developments, such as social media marketing and smart phone applications, the entire company must learn
how to handle these new changes to the organization. Whether it is the CMO determining how to incorporate social
media, or the executive assistants representing themselves and their company responsibly online, change is occurring
at an increasingly rapid pace.
When determining which of the latest techniques or innovations to adopt, there are four major factors to be
considered.
1. Levels, goals, and strategies,
2. Measurement system,
3. Sequence of steps,
4. Implementation and organizational change,
Organizational change can have many faces. But regardless of the type, the critical aspect is a company’s ability to
win the buy-in of their organization’s employees on the change. To effectively implement organizational change
consists of a four-step process. First, recognizing the changes in the broader business environment. Second,
developing the necessary adjustments for their company’s needs. Third, training their employees on the appropriate
changes. And fourth, winning the support of the employees with the persuasiveness of the appropriate adjustments.
This four-step process is change management in its essence, and organizational change in practice.

Examples of organizational change

1. Mission changes,
2. Strategic changes,
3. Operational changes (including Structural changes),
4. Technological changes,
5. Changing the attitudes and behaviors of personnel,
As a multidisciplinary practice that has evolved as a result of scholarly research, Organizational Change
Management should begin with a systematic diagnosis of the current situation in order to determine both the need for
change and the capability to change. The objectives, content, and process of change should all be specified as part of
a Change Management plan.
Change Management processes may include creative marketing to enable communication between changing
audiences, as well as deep social understanding about leadership’s styles and group dynamics. As a visible track on
transformation projects, Organizational Change Management aligns groups’ expectations, communicates, integrates
teams and manages people training. It makes use of performance metrics, such as financial results, operational
efficiency, leadership commitment, communication effectiveness, and the perceived need for change to design
appropriate strategies, in order to avoid change failures or resolve troubled change projects.
Successful change management is more likely to occur if the following are included:
1. Benefits management and realization to define measurable stakeholder aims, create a business case for their
achievement (which should be continuously updated), and monitor assumptions, risks, dependencies, costs, return
on investment, dis-benefits and cultural issues affecting the progress of the associated work.
2. Effective Communications that informs various stakeholders of the reasons for the change (why?), the benefits of
successful implementation (what is in it for us, and you) as well as the details of the change (when? where? who
is involved? how much will it cost? etc.).
3. Devise an effective education, training and/or skills upgrading scheme for the organization.
4. Counter resistance from the employees of companies and align them to overall strategic direction of the
organization.
5. Provide personal counseling (if required) to alleviate any change-related fears.
Change management 7

6. Monitoring of the implementation and fine-tuning as required.

References
[1] Filicetti, John (August 20, 2007). "Project Management Dictionary" (http:/ / www. pmhut. com/ pmo-and-project-management-dictionary).
PM Hut. . Retrieved 16 November 2009.
[2] Kotter, J. (2011). "Change Management vs. Change Leadership -- What's the Difference?" (http:/ / www. forbes. com/ sites/ johnkotter/ 2011/
07/ 12/ change-management-vs-change-leadership-whats-the-difference/ ). Forbes online. . Retrieved 12/21/11.
[3] Anderson, D. & Anderson, L.A. (2001). Beyond Change Management: Advanced Strategies for Today’s Transformational Leaders. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. Retrieved 12/21/11 from http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=WbpH7p5qQ88C& printsec=frontcover&
dq=beyond+ change+ management& hl=en& sa=X& ei=kEfzTpewMYKpiQLGz5S8Dg& ved=0CD0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&
q=beyond%20change%20management& f=false
[4] Whelehan, S. (1995). Capturing a Moving Target: Change Management. Consultants News: Retrieved from http:/ / www. slideshare. net/
wikipediaCM/ cm-consultantnews
[5] Phillips, J. R. (1983). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Organizational Change Management. Human Resource Management, 22(1/2), 183-199.
Retrieved 12/21/11 from http:/ / onlinelibrary. wiley. com/ doi/ 10. 1002/ hrm. 3930220125/ abstract
[6] Marshak, R.J. (2005). Contemporary challenges to the philosophy and practice of organizational development. In David L. Bradford and W.
Warner Burke (Eds.) Reinventing organizational development: New approaches to change in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Article Sources and Contributors 8

Article Sources and Contributors

Disaster risk reduction  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=541602028  Contributors: A.thinus, Angelakohama, Anna Frodesiak, Arcmk7, Ashburyintl, Avanidixit, Biker Biker,
CQPress, Cahk, Ccgrimm, Danger, DisasterSpecialist, Ebyabe, Glogger, Hu12, IR platform, Infoanalyst, Intgr, ItsZippy, January, John Twigg, LilHelpa, LittleBenW, Mexijack, Mschiffler,
Naniwako, NastalgicCam, Pads1Fan13, Ps07swt, Pzavon, Rjwilmsi, Rxnd, SambarnardODI, Smashville, Tazarkount, TimClicks, Viriditas, Weazzel, 45 anonymous edits

Change management  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=541780920  Contributors: 2001:660:7220:385:193:52:103:30, ARUNKUMAR P.R, Aboluay, AdamJLScott, Alansohn,
Alison9, Anna Frodesiak, Anto101211, Antur, Augustoklee, Barek, Bduafala, Bhny, ChristianBk, Comeez, Crysb, Cybercobra, DVdm, Dan88888, Diomedea Exulans, Dohaschmoha,
Florent1024, Frehley, FrigidNinja, Froid, Geoff1955, Giraffedata, Gsschweppe, Hoo man, Hu12, Ihcoyc, Jasondiff, Jeremy Visser, Jodilkahe, Jonkerz, Joshplusplus, Joshualagan, KConWiki,
Khazar2, Kku, L Kensington, LCE1506, Levineps, Lifecycleengineering, Linforest, Liu.spain, Magioladitis, Mantik1987, Margaretmarythomas, Markkawika, Martarius, Materialscientist,
Matterhorn33, Matthews sam, Maya.lincoln, MelbourneStar, Michael Murog, Michelle Wylde Smith, Misterx2000, Moormktg, N5iln, Nasnema, Nicolay Worren, OscarBanjo, PM800,
Percyagrerasdastur, Pilgaard, Plato's Dog, Pm master, Prof. Miles, Rich Farmbrough, Rick Wolfe, Rightbrainguy, Rjwilmsi, Ronkoller, SFK2, SQGibbon, Sabri76, Sadads, Sameer.sa20,
Scmbwis, Seb az86556, Strike Eagle, Sunnykshah85, Technobadger, Tema, Torreslfchero, VMS Mosaic, Vacio, Wuhwuzdat, 130 anonymous edits
Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 9

License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/