UNDERSTANDING DISASTER RISK

Understanding Disaster Risk is the number 1 priority for action under the Sendai DRRM
Framework. Disaster Risk is defined as: the potential disaster losses, in lives, health status,
livelihoods, assets and services, which could occur to a particular community or a society over
some specified future time period.

• The potential for adverse effects is determined by interactions between the Risk Factors:
Hazard, Exposure, Vulnerability, and Capacity. That is, Disaster Risk can be reduced or
exacerbated by the presence or absence of Risk Factors.
➢ For example – zero exposure to a hazard can reduce disaster risk to its lowest level,
which is why wearing good masks properly (prevents the virus from entering the
body) and lockdowns (prevents one’s exposure to infected people and prevents
infected people from spreading the disease to others) are effective measures
against getting COVID-19 as both measures limit one’s exposure to the SARS-
CoV-2 virus which causes the disease. In this case, infected people are hazards.

• Risk factors include underlying risk drivers, such as poverty, unequal availability of
technology, pandemics and declining ecosystems.
➢ For example – poor people will have less resources to buy good quality masks
and/or will have more difficulty complying with a lockdown as they are less likely
to be able to store adequate supplies to keep them from going out.

• Evidence collected over a decade indicates that disasters have increased and
intensified, exacerbated by climate change, and thus continue to bring heavy
damage. Further, vulnerability has decreased at a lower pace than exposure of
people and assets to hazards has increased, resulting in new risks especially at the
local and community levels.
https://www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/component-risk/disaster-risk
 • It is therefore more crucial to strengthen resilience by planning and anticipating for
more effective risk reduction with more preventive, multi-sectoral and people-
centered approaches, and with greater engagement of academia and other research
institutions.

As defined, Disaster Risk is essentially the possibility of harm or loss to an individual, group or
community (here we include the natural and built environments) within a particular situation –
in the case of Disaster Risk the situation is described in terms of 4 risk factors:
1) the presence or absence of hazard(s), and their characteristics in a specific location;
2) the extent of exposure of people and communities and their assets to the hazard(s);
3) the vulnerability of people and communities and their assets to the hazard(s); and
4) the capacity and available resources of people to manage and reduce disaster risks.

HAZARDS
The Sendai Framework has expanded the range of Hazards to be examined, to now include
biological hazards, and it has also shifted to multiple-hazard scenarios where, in many real
situations, one hazard leads to another or interacts with other hazards;

• Knowledge about hazards has grown tremendously, with increasing accuracy and
refinement, due to efforts of a broader scientific community that allows for
multidisciplinary collaboration.

• These efforts are accompanied by rapid technological advancements and more widespread
use of open data sharing in studying hazards and hazard risks.

• It should also be noted that understanding hazard risk is also influenced by the manner in
which risk information is communicated as well as the prevailing culture of a community.

• Greater access to knowledge about hazards enriches the understanding of hazard

risks and thus enables individuals and communities to act on their exposures and
vulnerabilities to reduce their disaster risks.
For example, Volcanic eruptions carry many hazard risks of lava flows, pyroclastic flows,
lahars, landslides or debris avalanches to nearby communities and ecosystems. (British Geological
Survey, 2012)

• But volcanic activity can pose other

risks such as tephra ashfalls, releases of
gas and tsunamis which can affect areas
far from the volcano.

• This was the case during the Taal

volcano eruption in January 2020 which
led to the suspension of classes and even
air flights as ashfall reached Metro
Manila and some parts of Central Luzon
and the Ilocos Region. (Rappler.com
January 16, 2020)

Jan 2020 Taal Eruption (Photo credit: Luna

Mendoza)

EXPOSURE
Exposure refers to the presence of people, property, systems, or other elements in hazard zones
and are thereby subject to potential losses.

uildings damaged by ash in the aftermath of Mount inatubo’s eruption – US National Archives
 • Measures of exposure can include the number of people or types of assets in an area to
estimate the quantitative risks associated with that hazard in the area of interest.

• Much of the work on exposure risk has been on mapping population densities as well as
exposed built assets or structural exposure, data for which is easily available using high-
resolution satellite observations and on-the-ground measurements from expert analysts.

• The use of satellite imaging is becoming more common even for smaller communities
with high flooding risks, with added information also now possible from social networks
as people are encouraged to contribute photos and other data in their locations,

• Local and national surveys also provide exposure data on number and age of buildings,
type of buildings, type of construction materials including roofs and floors, which can
provide different ways of mapping and can be combined with schemes that identify urban
centers and rural areas.

• Biodiversity and ecosystem health are assets which also are exposed to hazard risks, some
of which are anthropogenic. Much of the damage and losses are difficult to quantify, such
as the degradation of rivers from pollution, or the number of forests and animals lost to
wildfires, typhoons, earthquakes, or tsunamis.

• Exposure itself is as dynamic a risk factor as hazards, due to human behaviors that
produce urbanization and migration, as well as inconsistent regulation, safety
inspections and monitoring, and a variety of cultural attitudes and values about risk.

VULNERABILITY

Vulnerability is a factor
that highlights individual
differences in relation to
risk. It is defined as “the
conditions determined by
physical, social, economic
and environmental factors
or processes which increase
the susceptibility of an
individual, community,
assets or systems to the
impacts of hazards. “

Floodwaters brought by Tropical Storm Ketsana, Sept 26, 2009.

(JAY DIRECTO/AFP/Getty Images)

• In the Sendai Framework, exposure is sometimes included in measures of vulnerability.

This is because the relationship between the 2 variables imply some causality, the
direction of which is not always clear. For example, a poor person may live in a vulnerable
house (made of low quality materials) among other informal settlers, thereby increasing
exposure to risk of fire, typhoon, flooding, and earthquake.
 • People living in poverty, women and children, the elderly, persons with disabilities, people
who have low educational attainment, and indigenous groups are often identified as more
vulnerable since they are often “those left behind”.

• Those left behind are less capable of managing risk because of obstacles or challenges
that other people don’t have. Indicators of vulnerability are very specific and are often
linked to specific risk categories. For example, Health and Welfare Risks are associated
with indicators like nutrition, physical/mental health status, and poor sanitation services.

• Vulnerability assessments must also include the causes of vulnerability in terms of

ability to cope, access to resources, social support, and education. Such assessments
are crucial in creating better interventions for more equitable distribution of public
resources and capacity-building programs for “those left behind” in DRRM.

by
by using no ledge
ad us ng or ma ing life apa i es to
by a ely
hanges to de rease or an ipate and be
limi ng the ready to deal ith
moderate harm from
ad erse impa ts ha ards and disasters ha ards e e ely
of ha ards and thru proper
related disasters omplian e ith
arning systems

OVERVIEW OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION STRATEGIES

• In reducing Disaster Risk, the main strategies include Mitigation, Adaptation, and
Preparedness.
➢ Response, Relief, Recovery, and Rehabilitation are part of Disaster Management,
but these do not focus on the reduction of disaster risk potential. Such strategies
deal with the event itself and emphasize recovery from the adverse impacts.

• Mitigation includes all the actions by an individual or community to prevent the need
for a disaster response or to minimize the scope of the extent of the needed response.
Mitigation measures can be physical measures such as building a dike to prevent
flooding, or a legal measure such as the Building Code to reduce damage from an
earthquake.
 • Preparedness is planning for the best response. When the hazardous event takes place,
the person or community activates a plan that is already in place. Having a well-thought-
out evacuation plan in case of a fire or earthquake is an example.

• Adaptation is a change in lifestyle that is intended to significantly reduce the potential

of disaster. Consistent mitigation and preparedness efforts may both lead to better
adaptation.

• Disaster risk reduction is the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through
systematic efforts to analyze risk factors and reduce the causal factors of disasters.

More research initiatives are needed to better understand disaster risk from a scientific
perspective and to develop the much-needed methodologies and tools to assess and control
the risk.

STUDYING HAZARDS USING

THE CASE STUDY RESEARCH DESIGN

A CASE STUDY is a research design that involves an in-depth, multi-faceted examination of a

specific event or phenomenon that has a real-life context, a specific location, and has had a
significant impact on an individual, a group, a community or a system. This research design is
therefore sometimes called a “natural” design, compared to an experimental design where
variables are “controlled” or manipulated.
• Conducting a case study is usual in many disciplines such as psychology, medicine,
anthropology, business, geology, law and many more.

• A “case” refers to the object/phenomenon/group/system of study.

• The disciplinal context of a case is important because the boundary between the
phenomenon itself and its real context may not be easily distinguished. Hence the
definition of what the case is and what processes are used to conduct the case study may
depend on the discipline (or disciplines) involved.

• Studying the case means examining its details, including the case history and its present
characteristics, and then analyzing this information for different purposes:

• The objectives of a case study can include using the analyzed data to describe, explain
and/or explore: e.g. to make a diagnosis or similar predictions, and/or to develop
interventions or changes for improvement, treatment design, or even prevention.

• An exploratory case study is particularly helpful in understanding complex events that

involve or affect humans, as its design easily allows for reflective and interpretative
processes. These may enrich the study by taking into account psychological and cultural
perspectives, as well as the social-political contexts of the case. The exploratory case study
often answers the questions WHAT, HOW and WHY.
 THE DRMAPS CASE STUDY PROPOSAL PROJECT

The Learning Objectives of the Case Study Proposal:

To integrate, synthesize and apply the framework, key concepts and perspectives of DRMAPS
through a group Case Study Proposal.
This is a group project where the Case to be studied must involve a real hazardous event in a
particular location and must have had a significant impact to the community/communities in
that location.
Student Learning Outcomes:
1) Integrate various risk factors and diverse contexts.
2) Critique and reframe different risk management strategies within specific contexts.
3) Demonstrate leadership, group organization, and interpersonal skills for working
together in group discussions, research, case studies and presentations.

The original DRMAPS final requirement was a complete Case Study with the following
components:

M M

M
M
M M

MM

M
M

• Because of the pandemic the Case Study Project requirement has been revised into a
Case Study Proposal that can be conducted within the semester and without the Call for
Action component. This is to ensure that students do not have to conduct any fieldwork
and risk exposure to the virus responsible for the pandemic. The Situationer as well as
the Proposed Risk Assessment method(s) can be developed by research using online
sources, and online interviews with relevant respondents.
 CONDUCTING THE CASE STUDY PROPOSAL PROJECT

Identifying the Case

• The first step is identifying the Case by selecting a specific hazardous event that took
place in a given geographical location at a definite time period. The selection of the
hazard may be intrinsically interesting to members of the group, or may be informed by
the literature on hazards because of its frequency, or because it occurred in an important
location, or because of the effects of the event.

• Hazards that may be selected include: Earthquakes, Fires/Wildfires, Typhoons, Floods,

Storm Surges, Landslides, Volcanic Eruptions
Defining the Case: Formulating the Research Problem
• An important consideration in defining the Case is how relevant it will be to the course
DRMAPS (refer to the philosophy, framework, course objectives and intended learning
outcomes). Note that DRMAPS focuses on understanding risk factors and risk reduction
strategies.
• A framework-driven Case Study is more likely to produce data that will be useful in
addressing issues such as the How and the Why of the case – how did the hazard cause
so much (or so little) damage; how were warnings provided; how did the community
perceive and respond to warnings; why did the warnings fail (or succeed).
Developing the Situationer

• The Situationer is the backstory to the case study proposal – it describes the details of
the case as the hazardous or disastrous event that warrant improvements in DRRM with
focus on the DRMAP strategies. Such improvements can only be developed by
gathering more data through risk assessment.

• Look for sources of information on:

➢ History of disasters related to the selected Hazard that have taken place
(documentaries from Media/Individuals or Communities affected)
➢ Hazard risks involved in the Case
➢ Characteristics of the location and community affected in terms of risk factors:
Exposure, Vulnerability and Capacity
➢ Local knowledge concerning hazards and disasters
➢ Current Warning Systems in use in the community (if any) and
Compliance
➢ Future trends related to hazardous events

Data Gathering: Risk Assessment Methodology

In the succeeding weeks, more learning resources will be made available to build knowledge on
different types of hazards, risk assessments (both objective and subjective) and different
perspectives concerning disaster risks.
Each learning module from Week 4 to Week 12, as shown below, will contribute to the
development of the Case Study Proposal. These modules include lectures and reading materials
as well as videos and class activities for better understanding of the different concepts and
principles underlying DRMAPS.

CASE ST D PR P SAL
TECH ICAL REP RT PITCH

Focused Case Study Lecture on Lecture on Pitch with

with Risk Assessment Resilience and Slide Presentation or
Methodology MAPS Adaptive Coping minute Video

Activity on Mind Maps for Lecture on Risk Communication

Focused Case Study with
further developing the / / Presentation Exercise
Situationer and
Case Study Problem with Plenary Discussion on
/ / Presentation Format
Specific b ectives Case Study Proposal

Lecture on asics of Form Case Study roups Lectures on

The Case Study and Perspectives and C VID Hazard
Activity on Case Study b ective Sub ective Risk analysis for Household
verview of Case Study Problem Formulation Risk Assessment for ubble
Proposal Components different Hazards Ecocritical Issues

The case study proposal project has two main requirements to be submitted by end of the
semester: the Technical Report and The Pitch, as described briefly below.

The Case Study Proposal

roup Pro ect

The Technical Report is intended to be tatement of roblem and

read by faculty members, researchers, b e es
institutional administrators, and other
professionals engaged in the sub ect itua oner
identified in the study
It is the main document of the proposal.
is ssessment Methodology
(in PDF format)

The Pitch is a lay summary of the study that is a short, concise, and
engaging presentation to en oin the main stakeholder to undertake further
the research that is recommended in the proposal
.
It complements the main document but is no less significant as it highlights
the importance of risk communication in DRRM
(in slide PPT or minute Video MP format).
REFERENCES
https://www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/component-risk/disaster-risk
UNISDR Terminology
Sendai broadened view of world’s risk_gar2019
https://gar.undrr.org/

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030
https://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf

Research Methods in IO Psychology, in Muchinsky, P.M. & Howes, S.S. (2019). Psychology
applied to work (12th ed). Hypergraphic Press.

acmendoza_02/27/2022