Disaster risk management

Disaster risk management is the application of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies to
prevent new disaster risk, reduce existing disaster risk and manage residual risk, contributing to
the strengthening of resilience and reduction of disaster losses.
Annotation: Disaster risk management actions can be distinguished between prospective disaster
risk management, corrective disaster risk management and compensatory disaster risk
management, also called residual risk management.
Prospective disaster risk management activities address and seek to avoid the development of
new or increased disaster risks. They focus on addressing disaster risks that may develop in
future if disaster risk reduction policies are not put in place. Examples are better land-use
planning or disaster-resistant water supply systems.
Corrective disaster risk management activities address and seek to remove or reduce disaster
risks which are already present and which need to be managed and reduced now. Examples are
the retrofitting of critical infrastructure or the relocation of exposed populations or assets.
Compensatory disaster risk management activities strengthen the social and economic
resilience of individuals and societies in the face of residual risk that cannot be effectively
reduced. They include preparedness, response and recovery activities, but also a mix of different
financing instruments, such as national contingency funds, contingent credit, insurance and
reinsurance and social safety nets.
Community-based disaster risk management promotes the involvement of potentially affected
communities in disaster risk management at the local level. This includes community
assessments of hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities, and their involvement in planning,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of local action for disaster risk reduction.
Local and indigenous peoples’ approach to disaster risk management is the recognition and
use of traditional, indigenous and local knowledge and practices to complement scientific
knowledge in disaster risk assessments and for the planning and implementation of local disaster
risk management.
Disaster risk management plans set out the goals and specific objectives for reducing disaster
risks together with related actions to accomplish these objectives. They should be guided by the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 and considered and coordinated
within relevant development plans, resource allocations and programme activities. National-level
plans need to be specific to each level of administrative responsibility and adapted to the different
social and geographical circumstances that are present. The time frame and responsibilities for
implementation and the sources of funding should be specified in the plan. Linkages to
sustainable development and climate change adaptation plans should be made where possible.
https://www.undrr.org/terminology/disaster-risk-management

Disaster risk reduction & disaster risk management

The policy objective of anticipating and reducing risk is called disaster risk
reduction (DRR). Although often used interchangeably with DRR, disaster risk
management (DRM) can be thought of as the implementation of DRR, since it
describes the actions that aim to achieve the objective of reducing risk.
Adapted from UNISDR Global Assessment Report 2015

People making sandbags in Bangkok, Thailand. Source: pornvit_v/Shutterstock

Disaster risk is an indicator of poor development, so reducing disaster risk requires

integrating DRR policy and DRM practice into sustainable development goals.

What is disaster risk reduction?

Historically, dealing with disasters focused on emergency response, but towards the end of the 20th
century it was increasingly recognised that disasters are not natural (even if the associated hazard is) and
that it is only by reducing and managing conditions of hazard, exposure and vulnerability that we can
prevent losses and alleviate the impacts of disasters. Since we cannot reduce the severity of natural
hazards, the main opportunity for reducing risk lies in reducing vulnerability and exposure. Reducing
these two components of risk requires identifying and reducing the underlying drivers of risk, which are
particularly related to poor economic and urban development choices and practice, degradation of the
environment, poverty and inequality and climate change, which create and exacerbate conditions
of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Addressing these underlying risk drivers will reduce disaster risk,
lessen the impacts of climate change and, consequently, maintain the sustainability of development.

We need to manage risks, not just disasters.

DRR is a part of sustainable development, so it must involve every part of society, government, non-
governmental organizations and the professional and private sector. It therefore requires a people-
centred and multi-sector approach, building resilience to multiple, cascading and interacting hazards and
creating a culture of prevention and resilience. Consequently DRM includes strategies designed to:

 avoid the construction of new risks

 address pre-existing risks
 share and spread risk to prevent disaster losses being absorbed by other development
outcomes and creating additional poverty

Although DRM includes disaster preparedness and response activities, it is about much more than
managing disasters.

Successful DRR results from the combination of top-down, institutional changes and strategies, with
bottom-up, local and community-based approaches. DRM programmes should not be standalone but
instead be integrated within development planning and practice, since disasters are an indicator of failed
or skewed development, of unsustainable economic and social processes, and of ill-adapted societies.
Approaches need to address the different layers of risk (from intensive to extensive risk), underlying risk
drivers, as well as be tailored to local contexts. There is no ‘one-size fits all’ approach to DRM, but there
exist a number of approaches and frameworks, which have been effectively implemented to reduce
disaster risk. But, before being able to reduce risk, we need to understand the hazards, and the exposure
and vulnerability of people and assets to those hazards.
How do we reduce risk?

Disaster risk management

involves activities related to:

Prevention

Activities and measures to avoid existing and new disaster risks (often less costly than disaster relief and
response). For instance, relocating exposed people and assets away from a hazard area. See a related
story: Managed retreat of settlements remains a tough call even as homes flood and coasts erode.

Mitigation

The lessening or limitation of the adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters. For instance,
constructing flood defences, planting trees to stabilize slopes and implementing strict land use and
building construction codes. See a related story: Mitigation saves: A resilient runway at Portland
International Airport could save up to $50 for every mitigation dollar invested.

Transfer

The process of formally or informally shifting the financial consequences of particular risks from one party
to another whereby a household, community, enterprise or state authority will obtain resources from the
other party after a disaster occurs, in exchange for ongoing or compensatory social or financial benefits
provided to that other party. For instance, insurance. See a related story: Developing disaster risk finance
in Morocco: Leveraging private markets for sovereign risk transfer.

Preparedness

The knowledge and capacities of governments, professional response and recovery organisations,
communities and individuals to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from the impacts of likely,
imminent or current hazard events or conditions. For instance, installing early warning systems,
identifying evacuation routes and preparing emergency supplies. See a related story: New Minecraft
world from NRMA Insurance teaches Aussie kids the importance of bushfire preparedness.

Source of text: UNDRR, 2017Simulation exercises (SIMEX) play an important role in promoting a culture of
disaster risk reduction and they are a preparedness activity. More information can be found here

Implementation of these activities and measures is rarely done in isolation and includes a number of
associated activities, including:

 Identification and measuring disaster risk

 Education and knowledge development
 Informing people about their risk (awareness raising)
 Incorporating DRM into national planning and investment
 Strengthening institutional and legislative arrangements
 Providing financial protection for people and businesses at risk (finance and contingency
planning)
 Integrating DRR across multiple sectors, including health, environment, etc.

Simulation exercises (SIMEX) play an important role in promoting a culture of disaster risk reduction and
they are a preparedness activity. More information can be found here

Activities for reducing risk can be described as structural, for instance land use planning and
implementation of building codes, and non-structural, for instance awareness raising, policy-making and
legislation. How governments, civil society and other actors organise DRM, for example through
institutional arrangements, legislation and decentralisation, and mechanisms for participation and
accountability is termed risk governance. There is clear evidence to suggest that low-income countries
with weak governance are more vulnerable and less resilient to disaster risk.

Fundamentally, DRR succeeds in reducing risk by building the strengths, attributes and resources
available within a community, society or organization – collectively known as their capacity. DRM
activities are designed to increase the resilience of people, communities, society and systems to resist,
absorb, accommodate and to recover from and improve well-being in the face of multiple hazards.
Activities for reducing and managing risks can therefore provide a way for building resilience to other
risks. In addition to development, DRM should therefore be integrated across a number of sectors,
including climate change and conflict.
Identifying and understanding risk: the foundation of risk reduction

Awareness, identification, understanding and measurement of disaster risks are all clearly
fundamental underpinnings of disaster risk management (UNISDR, 2015b). Disaster risk
reduction is about decisions and choices, including a lack of, so risk information has a role in five
key areas of decision making:

Risk identification

Because the damages and losses caused by historical disasters are often not widely known, and because
the potential damages and losses that could arise from future disasters (including infrequent but high-
impact events) may not be known at all, DRM is given a low priority. Appropriate communication of robust
risk information at the right time can raise awareness and trigger action. See a related story: GEM
releases five national and three regional earthquake models for public good application.

Risk reduction

Hazard and risk information may be used to inform a broad range of activities to reduce risk, from
improving building codes and designing risk reduction measures (such as flood and storm surge
protection), to carrying out macro-level assessments of the risks to different types of buildings (for
prioritizing investment in reconstruction and retrofitting, for example). See a related story: 4 ways to
reduce disproportionate flood risk and build resilience for all communities.

Preparedness

An understanding of the geographic area affected, along with the intensity and frequency of different
hazard events, is critical for planning evacuation routes, creating shelters, and running preparedness
drills. Providing a measure of the impact of different hazard events—potential number of damaged
buildings, fatalities and injuries, secondary hazards—makes it possible to establish detailed and realistic
plans for better response to disasters, which can ultimately reduce the severity of adverse natural events.
See a related story: Indian cities prepare for floods with predictive technology and on SIMEX as a
preparedness activity.

Financial protection

Disaster risk analysis was born out of the financial and insurance sector’s need to quantify the risk of
comparatively rare high-impact natural hazard events. As governments increasingly seek to manage
their sovereign financial risk or support programs that manage individual financial risks (e.g., micro-
insurance or household earthquake insurance). See a related story: Micro insurance company’s
evacuation insurance against disasters.

Resilient reconstruction

Risk assessment can play a critical role in impact modelling before an event strikes (in the days leading
up to a cyclone, for example), or it can provide initial and rapid estimates of human, physical, and
economic loss in an event’s immediate aftermath. Moreover, risk information for resilient reconstruction
needs to be available before an event occurs, since after the event there is rarely time to collect the
information needed to inform resilient design and land-use plans. See a related story: 3 ways to build
back better after a tsunami.

Source: adapted from GFDRR, 2014a

Participatory mapping Horacio Marcos C. Mordeno, MindaNews CC BY 2.0

If those exposed to hazards are unaware of the risks they face, it is difficult to see how or why
households, businesses or governments would invest in reducing their risk levels. However, while risk
awareness may be a precondition, the importance people attach to managing their risks can only be
understood in the context of the full range of social, economic, territorial and environmental constraints
and opportunities they face - see the story of Ratnapura and the Chao Phraya River below.

We have over 30 years of research into disaster risk, but much of this is not available in a form that is
understandable or useful to those who need it the most. There is therefore a need for risk scientists and
researchers to shift their focus to the production of risk information that is understandable and actionable
for different kinds of users: in other words, risk knowledge. Such a shift requires more collaboration and
partnerships between scientists and researchers and those involved in DRR, ranging from governments
to local communities.

Governments need to invest in the collection, management and dissemination of risk information,
including disaster loss and impact statistics, hazard models, exposure databases and vulnerability
information. At the same time, they need to put standards and mechanisms in place to ensure openness
and transparency so that users not only have access to the information they need but are aware of its
underlying assumptions and limitations. The generation of understandable and actionable risk information
needs to be particularly sensitive to extensive risk, which, because it is configured to a large extent by
social, economic and environmental vulnerability, can be reduced effectively through risk management
and sustainable development practices.
Α walk through DRR history

Discover the early experiences and works of the disaster risk reduction pioneers between 1970 and 2000.

Are we reducing disaster risk?

While we have made some progress in reducing disaster mortality associated with intensive risks,
increasing exposure of people and economic assets means that mortality and economic losses from
extensive risk are trending up and absolute global economic losses from disasters are increasing,
although not relative to GDP. Some low and middle-income countries may not have the financial
resilience to accommodate the likely average annual losses from future disasters, which threaten the very
economic existence of many small island development states.

We’ve been generating risk faster than we have been reducing it.

More needs to be done to prevent new risks, which are already emerging owing to increasing
urbanisation, the threat of climate change and other risk drivers. In an increasingly interconnected world,
we are seeing that disasters can also result in synchronous failures. Development can be sustainable, it is
just a question of whether we can change our approach in time to prevent disaster risk from reaching
dangerous levels.

We have made more progress in managing disasters than in reducing our disaster
risk.

Over the last 10 years, there has been significant progress in strengthening disaster preparedness,
response and early warning capacities and in reducing specific risks, according to the HFA Monitor.
However, progress has been limited in most countries when it comes to managing the underlying risks.

Although we know how to reduce disaster risk, there is often a lack of incentive to do
so.

Both individuals, governments and businesses tend to discount low-probability future losses and seem
reluctant to invest in DRM. Despite the magnitude of disaster costs, reducing risks is often perceived as
less of a priority than fiscal stability, unemployment or inflation. New evidence demonstrates, however
that the opportunity cost of disasters is high and that many low and middle-income countries, and small
island development states are financially unable to cope with the predicted future losses from disasters
while also maintaining their capacity to develop. In other words, they are not resilient.

The costs and benefits of disaster risk management need to become fully encoded into public
and private investment at all levels, into the financial system and into the design of risk-sharing
and social protection mechanisms. Cost-benefit analyses can be expanded to highlight the trade-
offs implicit in each decision, including the downstream benefits and avoided costs in terms of
reduced poverty and inequality, environmental sustainability, economic development and social
progress. They can also help to identify who retains the risks, who bears the costs and who reaps
the benefits. Such a broad approach to cost-benefit analysis can increase the visibility and
attractiveness of investments in disaster risk reduction.
The good news is that we can achieve great things when we invest in DRR. There
are countless success stories of reducing disaster risk ranging from community-
based participatory approaches to the global reduction in disaster mortality
associated with intensive risks.

However, we need to recognize that the impact of some DRM measures may not be immediate. It may
take decades for the outcome of improved planning regulations and building standards to translate into
reduced disaster losses, as a critical mass of new, risk-sensitive building and urban development has to
be achieved.

The future of DRR requires that we assess the costs and benefits of DRM, reform risk governance, move
from risk information to knowledge and strengthen accountability.
https://www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/key-concepts/disaster-risk-reduction-
disaster-risk-management

Overview

The frequency and intensity of natural hazards is increasing, leading to the escalation of disasters and contributing to
conflicts. According to the Emergency Events Database, in 2021 alone there were 432 disasters related to natural
hazards worldwide, accounting for 10,492 deaths, affecting 101.8 million people and causing approximately USD
252.1 billion of economic losses. In the same period there were 23.7 million new displacements in the context of
disasters, including those not related to climate. Although most people displaced by disaster move temporarily – often
on a pendular basis or as part of pre-emptive evacuation – and usually remain close to home, these population
movements have significant long-term demographic and socioeconomic implications. Looking ahead, the scenarios
are not encouraging. The World Bank estimates that an additional 216 million people could become internal climate
migrants by 2050 if efforts are not made to strengthen climate action and development investments.
Disaster displacement can have devastating cascading effects, including the loss of lives, property and livelihoods. It
can also increase insecurity, which further influences people’s mobility decisions and shapes the pattern of protracted
crises. In areas of destination, unmanaged population flows lead to overcrowding and limit access to services,
housing and livelihoods. In areas of origin, displacement results in a loss of adaptive capacity, reverses development
gains and contributes to insecurity – which is experienced most acutely by women and children. Disasters, climate
change and environmental degradation also increase the risk of human trafficking and raise protection issues for
children, women and those crossing borders.
Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation and resilience building interventions aim to reduce and
mitigate the risk of displacement and increase the resilience of communities to cope with disasters. More broadly,
DRR is defined as the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and
manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of
people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse
events.
DRR is closely linked to building the resilience of crisis-affected people, which IOM has defined as the capacity of a
system (an individual, household or community) exposed to pressures to avoid, resist, and recover from their impacts
in an efficient manner, without compromising its essential basic structures and functions. Careful consideration of
risks and incorporation of risk-reducing and resilience-building measures into the broader emergency response effort
need to begin at the earliest possible stage, generally from the very outset of the humanitarian response and, where
possible, build on pre-existing initiatives.

Information from UNDRR on hazard types

Key Considerations
For some groups, mobility as a strategy to respond in disaster is not a viable option. Significant physical and financial
resources are required to move, and cultural obstacles (e.g. discrimination based on gender or ethnicity), the lack of
supporting social networks and the absence of adequate infrastructure can prevent people from moving.
So called ‘trapped populations' – that is, the most vulnerable groups, who have insufficient means for coping with a
disaster and are forced to remain in areas exposed to hazards – represent a significant humanitarian challenge in
crisis response. Global environmental changes are expected to further exacerbate this vulnerability, both by eroding
the resource base required for moving and by increasing the incidence of natural hazards. IOM's emergency
response needs to pay particular attention to identifying, assisting, and reducing the risk exposure of trapped
populations.

Relevance to IOM’s Emergency Operations

Crisis-affected populations are frequently concentrated in hazard-prone areas, climate change hotspots, and in
places characterized by exposure to security risks. Therefore, crisis-affected populations face a great deal of risk to
secondary or recurrent displacement that perpetuate and prolong crisis and generate new protection risks. At the
same time, local communities begin a recovery process immediately after a crisis event and often adopt strategies
that expose communities to the same risk conditions that caused displacement in the first place, thereby increasing
the likelihood of them being affected by shocks and stresses in the future.
Further, starting risk sensitive programming early on provides an entry point to integrate DRR and resilience-based
principles more comprehensively into the longer-term recovery process to help build back better and safer, address
underlying risk factors, and thereby enable the strengthening of community capacity to respond to future hazard
threats and risks. In the context of IOM's emergency response, IOM should promote DRR, adaptation and resilience
building through standalone activities and as a cross-cutting theme that is incorporated into multiple sectors across
the response, wherever relevant and technically feasible.
Within IOM, DRR programming at HQ level is now located within the Migration, Environment, Climate Change and
Risk Reduction Division (MECR). DRR works closely with the emergency preparedness, camp coordination and
camp management, shelter support, WASH support, environmental sustainability units, as well as the Transition and
Recovery Division and the Global Data Institute.

Coordination

In designing and delivering DRR and resilience-based programming in crisis contexts, IOM will need to actively
engage with and seek technical support from relevant national and local authorities in ensuring coordination and
complementarity of initiatives, and build on existing DRR programming, policies, and coordination architecture. Given
the multi-sectoral nature of DRR and resilience-based work, it will be important that programming operates within
inter-agency processes and works in conjunction with civil society, local NGOs, and the private sector.
Of specific relevance for coordination around DRR and resilience at the global level, IOM is a signatory to the UN
Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, a mechanism to help coordinate and accelerate progress of
the Sendai Framework for DRR targets by all the main DRR actors in the UN and international system at global and
national levels. IOM leads the global Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) Cluster for disaster
displacement. IOM contributes to annual organization reporting to the UN Plan of Action.
In 2022-23, IOM is also working to support the Mid-Term Review (MTR) process of the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction including via regional interview processes and through a centralized written submission.
Under the UN Senior Leadership Group for DRR for Resilience, IOM is also a member of a task team to develop a
series of recommendations from Sendai MTR submissions that will inform the revised workplan of the DRR Focal
Points Group. Presently, IOM is working with UNDRR, OCHA, UNICEF, UNDP, FAO and UNHCR on mainstreaming
DRR into humanitarian action inclusive of the roll out of risk informed planning workshops in countries with
humanitarian response plans and working with ODI on a financing study on access to DRR finance in South Sudan
and Mozambique.
More information on the Sendai Midterm Review Process
In addition, IOM is a party to the Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s sub-group on climate change, where participant
organizers seek to establish common messages about the role of humanitarians within the climate crisis specifically
for dissemination in high level global events inclusive of COP28 in UAE in November/December 2023 and within the
scope of agency submissions to the UNFCCC.

Operations
 Low-cost, community-owned solutions: a multi-dimensional approach to disaster risk management
The impacts of climate change on human mobility have particularly significant implications for States with limited
resources. This key consideration informs the response of the Organization, which has developed an innovative
approach to programming involving low-cost prevention and preparedness measures that are selected and owned by
communities. The goal is to provide communities with advance warning of incidents that could rapidly become
disasters, ensuring that they can make informed decisions to move or shelter in place in order to protect their families
and property.
IOM supports communities to identify environmental risks and community actions that could lead to disasters. These
efforts include work on ecosystem restoration alongside communities to identify key risk behaviours that have direct
negative impacts on the environment and living conditions. For example, the Organization is actively contributing to
reforestation to combat desertification, and to the restoration of coastal mangrove forests to reduce the impacts of
coastal flooding. It also supports work on drainage systems in urban and peri-urban areas affected by flooding, rapid
population growth and limited mitigation infrastructure in cities such Dakar, Freetown, Port-au-Prince, Bangui,
N’Djamena, Dili and Beira (Mozambique).
In South Sudan, IOM is using community-based disaster risk management to foster resilience and improve
the ability of communities to sustainably prevent and respond to flooding. This approach centres on
strengthening knowledge and the capacity for an effective community response to climate-related shocks,
while enhancing resilience through strategic infrastructure interventions. By building dikes and other
protective infrastructure to address the consequences of more regular and intense flooding along the Nile, it
has been possible to recover hundreds of hectares of land – which is home to tens of thousands of people –
from flood waters. As a result, local residents have been able to return and quickly resume their livelihood
activities, which include farming as well as market-based activities. Land reclamation programmes have also
helped curtail outbreaks of water-borne diseases by removing standing water from communal areas.
In Somalia, competition over access to land and water is the structural driver of most violent conflict. Climate change
and environmental degradation are further reducing already scarce water resources, forcing communities to migrate
and generating confrontations over diminishing yields. Through multisectoral, multidisciplinary collaboration, IOM, the
United Nations Environment Programme and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute are implementing
and advancing policy through a pilot project on breaking the climate–conflict cycle in Galmudug, Somalia. The aim is
to reduce displacement and conflict in target locations through tangible investments in water infrastructure and
practical innovations for water and energy capture in the agropastoral sector, bolstered by sustained dialogue, conflict
mediation and enhanced natural resource management.
Adequate preparedness will be essential to ensuring that mobility can be tapped as a viable life-saving strategy for
people exposed to continued risk. Preparedness will help ensure that people can make informed choices in the event
of crisis and remain mobile for the shortest period possible in order to facilitate a swift recovery.
IOM's emergency response can incorporate community-based preparedness measures in displacement sites as well
as in host/return communities in several ways:

 Support hazard monitoring and vulnerability assessment to expose local risk conditions and capacities.
 Promote participation in disaster management and preparedness planning: establish roles & responsibilities of local
disaster preparedness organizations; support evacuation planning and risk mapping; assist in the identification of
escape routes; prepare transportation arrangements, evacuation sites and stockpiling.
 Promote periodic disaster preparedness, response and recovery exercises - including evacuation drills, training, and
awareness-raising.
 Support communication systems and infrastructure for enhanced disaster coordination.
 Capitalize on indigenous knowledge, techniques and capacity to define and enhance understanding of disaster
management actions.
At COP27 in November 22, the UN Secretary-General launched the Early Warning for All Initiative (EW4ALL) to
extend universal coverage to multi-hazard early warning systems to 2027. There are 4 pillar working groups as
follows:
Pillar Group 1 - UNDRR lead - Disaster Risk Knowledge
Pillar Group 2 - WMO lead - Observations & Forecasting
Pillar Group 3 - ITU lead - Dissemination & Communication
Pillar Group 4 - IFRC lead - Preparedness & Response
 IOM is a party to all four pillars and will support the amplification of global level work to national and community-level
contexts specifically through the delivery of ‘last mile’ community level risk dissemination and preparedness and
response actions under Pillars 3 and 4. EW4ALL will cover the following hazards: floods, heatwaves, drought,
cyclones, and storms (focusing on these hydromet hazards is anticipated to also benefit some geo-physical hazards
like tsunamis and volcanic eruptions).
Strengthening early warning/early action is an important component of preparedness. By supporting access to timely
and accurate information on hazards, exposure, and vulnerability IOM can help communities to plan for and roll out
an efficient response. Enhancing communication and information management in crisis contexts - in particular
between the affected population and concerned authorities - will enable better risk identification and facilitate
informed choices.
Given the dramatic rise in humanitarian needs, cost-effective, locally owned solutions are more critical than ever. To
this end, IOM is strengthening a variety of early warning systems in multiple countries around the world. The
Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM)'s Transhumance Tracking Tool (TTT) combines different tools including Flow
Monitoring, early warning systems, return surveying and drought modelling. As of early 2023, IOM is working with a
region-wide network of partners, the regional pastoralist organization Reseau Billital Maroobe (RBM), which
represents 750,000 herders in 12 countries in West and Central Africa. IOM currently implements 13 projects in 11
countries, integrating the Transhumance Tracking Tools in West and Central Africa and most recently Somalia, with
most programming being cross border in nature. The TTT has mapped out the movements of 10,000s of herders and
millions of livestock in an effort to share early warnings related to these movements including movement schedules
and routes/destinations and vulnerabilities to enable conflict resolution and management between affected
communities and herder groups as a changing climate has impacted these movements as water and feed become
more scarce. Between 2020-2022, over 6,000 real time alerts were sent via IOM's Displacement Tracking Matrix
programme and its partners related to these movements to inform community-based conflict prevention.
In Bangladesh, another early warning system has been developed by IOM and the Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) to tackle rainfall-triggered landslide risks affecting Rohingya refugees in the Cox’s Bazar district, while support
has also been provided to host communities under the Government’s Cyclone Preparedness Programme. Other
examples of IOM’s work in this area include the establishment of disaster management committees linked to a
national disaster management information system in 25 provinces in Afghanistan, and the development of early
warning systems in the Federated States of Micronesia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines and Vanuatu.
Since June 2021, an upsurge in armed attacks by gangs has caused widespread insecurity in Port-au-Prince
Metropolitan Area (Zone Métropolitaine de Port-au-Prince – ZMPP in French) and displaced tens of thousands of
people. Insecurity in the capital, which has accelerated since the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse in July
2021, has exacerbated the already difficult economic and political conditions facing Haiti.
To provide a holistic view of the displacement situation in the ZMPP, the Haitian Directorate General of Civil
Protection (DGPC) and DTM, launched regular site and neighbourhood assessment activities in August 2022. From
October 25 to November 23, 2022, data was collected by telephone from key informants. The results indicate that
155,166 people (39,623 households) were displaced in the ZMPP as of November 23, 2022, representing a 77
percent increase from Round 1. This is primarily due to the worsening security situation in the ZMPP observed during
September 2022. Via phone surveys IOM has built a displacement early warning system to pre-inform humanitarian
stakeholders about the scale of needs and specific vulnerabilities within neighbourhood population groups that are
likely to be displaced by gang warfare as well as delivery on the timely assessment of displacement locations. Via the
provision of displacement alerts, security perception information, service impacts, and mobility restrictions, IOM is
supplying information to conflict affected neighbourhoods in an effort to inform their mobility decisions out of harm
and to areas of the city where supportive services can be received by humanitarian stakeholders like IOM and local
government authorities.
Example activities on early warning/early action include:

 Promote small-scale early-warning and information dissemination systems (e.g. community-based drought and floods
monitoring) based on local capacities and technologies; and on community knowledge of relevant hazards and risks,
warning signals and their meanings, and actions to be taken when warnings are issued.
 Promote risk-awareness and readiness to react to warnings; address hindering factors for early warning/early action
(e.g. linguistic and cultural barriers; obstacles to mobility; and issues of trust).

Early Warnings for All Initiative

Planned Relocation
IOM programmes in many situations in which no in situ risk reduction intervention is viable. In such situations,
planned relocation is an option to pursue as a means of reducing the exposure of vulnerable populations to hazards.
 IOM's experience in three core areas of mobility management - population movements; land, property and housing;
and livelihoods and reintegration - enables the organization to bring a distinct approach and added value in
supporting and implementing planned relocation programmes in crisis contexts as a prevention and risk reduction
strategy.
Example activities:

 Identify persons in need on the basis of their particular needs, risk exposure, and other characteristics; identify
potential, suitable, settlement sites.
 Establish information dissemination, consultation, and participation mechanisms that enable relocated persons and
other affected populations to contribute, have ownership of, and make informed choices about, each stage of the
relocation process.
 Plan and oversee the safe, dignified, and timely movement of persons and their belongings and assets to settlement
sites.
 Provide support to local integration and access to services; support resumption or creation of livelihood opportunities
in resettlement sites; assist on issues related to land, property and reparations.

For further reference please see:

 Guidance on Protecting People from Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocation
 TOOLBOX: PLANNING RELOCATIONS TO PROTECT PEOPLE FROM DISASTERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CHANGE
 Environmental Migration, Disaster Displacement and Planned Relocation in West Africa
 Finding Safer Ground: Planned Relocation Policies and Processes in The Caribbean
Environmental Protection
There is a strong link between environmental degradation and increased risk from natural hazards. Poor
management of natural resources and destruction of the eco-system make disasters and secondary displacement
more likely. Displaced people depend on ecosystems in the host community or around displacement sites to meet
their basic needs and for absorbing their waste, potentially impacting negatively the environment upon which local
communities already depend.
Emergency responders will therefore need to understand and be sensitive to the impacts of displacement and
associated crisis response activities on the hosting environment. Apart from generating new disaster risks,
environmental degradation can also spur conflict between newcomers and the host community resulting from
dwindling resources if not properly anticipated and managed. IOM emergency response should, in this light, respect
the limit of the carrying capacity of host ecosystems and incorporate environmental protection or renewal measures
as needed.
Example activities:

 Bring together host and displaced communities into risk assessment and resource sharing planning processes to
mitigate tensions over diminishing natural resources.
 Identify and prevent/mitigate environmental risks and impacts when supporting agricultural activities or livelihoods
dependent on intense resources extraction.
 Identify and prevent/mitigate environmental risks when planning and managing displacement sites, from the moment
a site is selected until after it has been responsibly closed.
 Support measures that manage and replenish natural resources through water conservation, waste management,
environmentally sustainable farming, and grazing practices and structural protection measures (e.g. building
protective stone and earthworks to prevent rapid water run-off) amongst others.
 Implement environmental awareness-raising and training initiatives targeting displaced people.
Disaster Displacement Data
Internal displacement data provides vital insights, guiding the work of humanitarian, development and peace actors.
Indeed, understanding the scale and characteristics of internal displacement within a country helps prevent, prepare
for and respond to crises. IOM is therefore leveraging its global leadership on displacement data to ensure effective
early warning and early action by providing crucial information regarding internally displaced persons. The IOM
Global Data Institute, which houses the Displacement Tracking Matrix, is expanding its data collection and analysis
work on climate change. The Displacement Tracking Matrix, the world’s largest repository of displacement data, is
operational in more than 100 countries and tracked over 31 million displaced persons in 2021.
Data scarcity in many hazard-prone areas is a major and pressing challenge, requiring investment in national
hydrological and meteorological services. Gaps in available resourcing, reporting and data collection systems
represent additional areas to be addressed by IOM, which works alongside communities in vulnerable locations to
understand historic, current and changing conditions, collect data and assess the accuracy of forecasts. This
approach supports the improvement of monitoring and warning systems, and builds dialogue and trust between
stakeholders in demonstrating how forecasts can guide early action.
Given the lack of displacement-related metrics among the indicators that countries use to monitor progress of the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, IOM and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre
have launched a joint project to develop a set of indicators for monitoring disaster displacement, its impacts and
related risks. Similarly, to cover the gap in indicators to monitor implementation of the Global Compact for Safe,
Orderly and Regular Migration, IOM and the Platform on Disaster Displacement have developed an indicator
framework to assess the progress made by States on implementing the Global Compact objectives related to
disasters, climate change and environmental degradation. This framework has already been piloted to produce a
baseline analysis for 21 countries. Both sets of indicators are intended to support countries in measuring progress in
relation to their commitments.
Information on IOM-IDMC Disaster Displacement Indicators programming
DRR as a cross-cutting theme
Sector-specific DRR and resilience-building measures will also need to be incorporated into the emergency relief
sectors of the MCOF, wherever feasible. Table 1 provides examples of such measures within camp management and
displacement tracking (MCOF Sector 1); shelter and non-food items (MCOF Sector 2); health support (MCOF Sector
4); and land and property support (MCOF Sector 9).

Camp management and Shelter and non-food Land and property

displacement tracking items Health support support

Ensure safe Ensure multi-hazard Strengthen health Find, secure and recover
displacement sites by resistant emergency systems; enhance land records
identifying and mapping shelters in order to access to water,
hazards exposure minimize disaster risk sanitation and hygiene
facilities; and increase
awareness of health
risks and prevention
measures

Carry out environmental Use transitional shelter Ensure that key health Incorporate questions on
impact assessments at design as a platform for facilities are safe from land tenure in a rapid
displacement sites; communicating disaster hazards and have livelihoods assessment
identify resources, e.g., risk reduction capacity to address the
ground water and techniques, that increased demand for
forests, that need to be includes host services in crisis
protected; develop communities
community-based
environmental action
plans and establish and
train environmental
committees with
representatives from
host and camp
communities
Camp management and Shelter and non-food Land and property
displacement tracking items Health support support

Ensure that the Plan sites by taking into Identify vulnerable Undertake rapid
procurement and account the location of individuals whose assessment of damage
disposal of materials alarms, such as a bell or health status and loss to cadastral
necessary for siren, as well as muster represents an obstacle infrastructure and land
constructing settlements points, routes for to mobility and assist records
and the provision of evacuation and them in managing
water, sanitation and evacuation areas their relocation or
energy facilities evacuation
considers environmental
impact

Ensure waste collection Provide retaining walls, Assist contingency Undertake land
and disposal, water drainage and other planning for health availability and hazard
conservation and the engineering works in services and risk mapping
systematic use of energy shelter sites to prevent commodities with
efficient stoves landslides health authorities and
other stakeholders

Ensure that, upon Provide training of Promote disaster risk Educate people living in
closure of temporary authorities, labourers, awareness among hazard-prone areas
settlements, any waste contractors, and health workers about land rights
produced is disposed of humanitarian
responsibly and the sites organizations in hazard-
where these settlements prone settlements to
were located are understand and
environmentally incorporate risk
restored reduction into shelter
response

Build on/develop Provide access to

existing community information, legal
preparedness capacity counselling and
in planning and representation in
implementing NFI relation to land and
distributions property rights

Manage community
conflicts stemming from
land distribution, by
promoting dialogue and
participatory decision-
making processes
 Camp management and Shelter and non-food Land and property
displacement tracking items Health support support

Voluntary resettlement
of people in hazard-
prone areas where
appropriate

IOM's Role

Partnerships

IOM is an active member in multiple DRR-related inter-agency partnership efforts. These include but are not limited
to:

 The Capacity for Disaster Reduction Initiative (CADRI) where IOM is the global co-chair with UNDP and also the
co-facilitation agency in West and Central Africa and Eastern and Southern Africa.
 The Center of Excellence for Climate and Disaster Resilience (COE)
 Risk-Informed Early Action Partnership (REAP)
 Camp Coordination Camp Management Cluster (CCCM)
 Climate Risk and Early Warning Systems Initiative (CREWS)
 The UN Senior Leadership Group for DRR for Resilience and the UN DRR Focal Points Group
 The Platform on Disaster Displacement
 The Secretary General’s Action Agenda on Internal Displacement - the Solutions Agenda
 The Secretary General’s Early Warnings for All Initiative (EW4ALL)

https://emergencymanual.iom.int/disaster-risk-reduction

Disaster risk management insight on

school emergency preparedness – A case
study of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
Author links open overlay panelAshfaq
Ahmad Shah , Zaiwu Gong , Indrajit Pal , Ruiling Sun , Wahid Ullah , Gowhar
a a b c d

Farooq Wani e

Show more
Add to Mendeley
Share
Cite
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101805Get rights and content
Abstract
Pupils constantly face risks as they spend most of their time in schools and
become easy victims of natural hazards. It is also important for schools in
countries like Pakistan where disaster preparedness is subject to a choice
rather than a compulsory obligation to provide a robust disaster risk reduction
(DRR). The current research employs a pragmatic approach, analyzing the
disaster risk management insights on school emergency preparedness in
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province (namely, Peshawar, Charsadda, Nowshera,
and Dera Ismail Khan) of Pakistan. Thematic analysis was used to organize
the views and responses from interview data. 100 individuals with different
roles (senior primary headteachers and teachers), across the twenty schools
interviewed through semi-structured individual interviews. The current study
identified recurrent responses, which enabled the development of six main
themes included 1-alert; 2-emergency planning; 3-preparation
measures/protective actions; 4-school building design for safety; 5-school
planning for continuation; and 6-hazard education and training. The findings
reveal that schools are still vulnerable to flood risk as disaster risk
management measures were lowly implemented. The study calls for
policymakers to design and upgrade current school buildings to ensure the
appropriate protection of students and teachers in the event of disasters. The
schools collaboratively develop emergency plans and scenarios, in
conjunction with the local institutions and disaster response organizations to
build resilience and self-efficacy in times of crisis. In addition to this, enable
school authorities (including teachers and other staff) to enhance
their professional development on emergency response and management
and strategies for school-based disaster response and recovery.
Introduction
Natural hazards have negative effects on people [1,2] particularly in
underdeveloped countries [56]. Children are also at risk and easy to suffer
from disasters [1] because they spend much of their time in the school
environment. The safety of children at school has, therefore, become a global
priority. Hyogo Framework Action (2005–2015) urge countries to ensure
school safety for children. Therefore, school authorities need to have a
comprehensive disaster risk management (DRM) strategies to manage
catastrophes and their associated risks in schools [3]. Natural hazards require
a well-coordinated, prompt response to minimize adverse effects (injuries,
death rates, and other losses), and provide a forum for a faster recovery [54].
In recent years, the world over schools have been exposed to numerous
catastrophes and events [3] including the worst of the Rita and Katrine
hurricanes in the United States [4], the worst earthquakes and nuclear crisis
in Japan [5], and other catastrophes such as flooding, hurricanes, and
influenza outbreaks forcing the schools to shut down [6].
A well-coordinated response can lower the tension, injury, and impacts [55], and
may help schools, families, and local communities to return to normalcy after a
disaster. However, literature does not reflect how students are kept safe during an
emergency event. Existing studies contain little, if any, discussion of safety actions,
evacuation protocols, student supervision, or family reunification requirements.
Rather, research concentrates on how students and teachers will deal with the
emergency when they return to school (several weeks or months) [6,7]. The present
research analyses the immediate response to an emergency, which is aimed at
saving lives and keeping students’ safety and preparing for their needs. It can also
be argued that in an emergency in school the response time is from the start of the
emergency to the end of the physical threat posed by the emergency [4]. This "end"
occurs when students can return safely or rejoin their families if necessary.
Therefore, the early stage of recovery is what many studies describe as the
emergency response [6]. In addition, studies at times do not outline lessons that can
enhance school readiness and responses. Once the boundaries of what constitutes
the emergency response stage are identified, the practices that can be taken into
consideration concerning how schools respond to emergencies are much easier to
decide [7].
Research on school response to emergencies is rather limited with a large emphasis
on large-scale community disasters. Yet, smaller but relatively frequently occurring
events also provide learning experiences [8]. In addition, schools are more likely to
be ready for bigger, more complex community emergencies if they prepare for small
emergencies [9]. The lack of research into smaller incidents can derive from the
belief that if nobody was hurt or "it was all right," the response was good and that
experience could not be gained. Another important factor is that school leaders at
times hesitate to talk about mistakes and shortcomings. Cornell and Sheras [10]
analyzed a variety of emergencies in schools, demonstrating that schools can better
prepare themselves to respond to emergencies in the future by assessing and
learning from mistakes. Different climate-induced disasters have severely affected
Pakistan [[11], [12], [13]]. The devastating flood in 2010 destroyed more than 10,000
schools throughout the country [13]. Of the total affected educational institutions,
more than 9000 primary schools have been partially or entirely damaged [14].
School governing bodies in Pakistan are responsible for the safety of teachers and
students and maybe persecuted and punished by the Primary and Secondary
Education (DE&SE) Directorate (fines and/or imprisonment) if they do not take all
"reasonable measures (assessment of emergency response programs to determine
how future protection efforts can be strengthened because of the possible danger to
students)" to limit risk, including risk from natural hazards. Vast literature (e.g. Ref.
[5,13,15]) mainly focuses on what are the prerequisite actions undertaken by
schools to deal with catastrophic effects. But the literature on emergency
preparedness [16] and gathering lessons learned from relatively frequently occurring
emergencies is rare. In recognition of the limited research available in this field, the
current study aims to look at lessons learned from the experiences of relatively
common emergencies (floods) at schools in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province of
Pakistan to identify emergency response stages. This study is guided by the main
question; how do primary schools in disaster-prone areas prepare and respond to
flood emergencies? In exploring how schools respond in cases of flood emergency,
the research intends to provide insights into what could be considered the key
preparedness and response practices that could inform school-based emergency
management efforts in Pakistan and other countries facing similar disasters.
This paper consists of four parts. The research methodology is presented in section
2. Section 3 describes the study's findings and discussion. In section 4 describes the
concluding remarks of our findings.
Section snippets

Study area description

Geographically Pakistan is located at 23.35–37.50 North and 60.50–77.50 east,
which covers a total area of 881,913 square kilometers (km ) having more than 210
2 1

million population (Figure-1). Pakistan shares its border with neighboring countries
2

like Iran, Afghanistan, China, and India. The country has an extensive coastal line
which provides access to the Arabian sea. Due to vast geographical location,
Findings and discussion
Although schools look after the well-being of their pupils, it is unclear whether school
leaders are informed of the importance of safeguarding their pupils in emergencies.
The following findings and discussion give a summary of the disaster response
activities at school. The findings are discussed under six themes including “alert
stage; emergency planning; preparedness actions; safe school facilities; school
planning for the continuation, and hazard education and training” (Figure-2).
Concluding remarks
In the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, flood disasters are occurring with depressing
regularity, and it is important to establish advanced standardized processes,
policies, and plans for their handling. School emergency response is mainly
designed to shield children until they reach their respective families. Research
reconnoitering the responses of primary schools in emergencies to identify
strengths, weaknesses, and differences in current emergency preparedness and
response practices. However,
Funding
This research is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (71971121, 71571104), NUIST-UoR International Research Institute,
the Major Project Plan of Philosophy and Social Sciences Research in Jiangsu
Universities (2018SJZDA038), the 2019 Jiangsu Province Policy Guidance Program
(Soft Science Research) (BR2019064), the impact of Weather Conditions on
the Spread of Large scale Influenza Virus (2020xtzx001), the Postgraduate
Research & Practice Innovation Program of
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in
this paper
Acknowledgments
We are very grateful to Dr. George Tonderai Mudimu for his constructive criticism on
the thematic analysis and English language editing.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212420920313078

6. Every disaster event provides new knowledge and information to improve risk management
process. Given that floods are the most frequent disaster in Cambodia, and given the close inter-
linkages between disaster risk management and climate change adaptation measure, it is
essential to explore the effects of climate change on the flooding regimes. This requires
research to determine its likely effects on the magnitude and frequency of flooding. Relevant
information would need to be fed into disaster risk management plans, as it relates to each of
the 3 above element of flood risk. One example of structural risk reduction measure may entail
adapting stronger design standards3 3 The proposed GMS
Flood and Drought Risk Management Project includes activities to review and update of
hydraulic design guidelines for water infrastructure in the Mekong Delta in response to climate
change to be coordinated by the Mekong River Commission Flood Management and Mitigation
Program, with studies in Cambodia and Viet Nam. of infrastructure in order to reduce the
hazard, or the levels of exposure and vulnerability might have to be increased to account for the
effects of climate change

7. Paras 3 to 6 illustrate that there is a wide diversity of actions required for disaster risk
management. Overall, this requires a highly integrated approach with stakeholders at all levels
from senior central government down to village communities. At every level, it is essential there
is a clear understanding of disaster risk situations and capacity to do what is needed to reduce
the risk and manage the residual risk. This highlights the enormity of the task, and the need for a
comprehensive disaster risk management framework for the country.

9. Since 2000, activities to address disaster risk management in general, and some more
specifically for flood risk management, have increased. More details of the various activities are
presented in Attachment 1 of this document, while some of the key ones are outlined as follows:
(i) The Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology (MOWRAM) plays a significant role in
managing floods, and of particular importance is weather and flood forecasting so that early
warnings can be issued through its department of Hydrology and Meteorology. It also has
responsibility for implementation of various structural measures that reduce the impacts of
floods. (ii) The Mekong River Commission (MRC) has recently establishment of a fully
operational regional flood forecasting center in Phnom Penh, and also provided related
technical products and services. (iii) Under an ADB TA (2005-2008) implemented by MOWRAM,
a strategy for community based disaster risk reduction was prepared. (iv) A series of small scale
 community based projects have been implemented in selected locations to build capacity at
provincial, district and commune level in flood preparedness, funded by the European
Commission’s Humanitarian department (ECHO), and other NGOs.

Given NCDM’s mandate, and its composition with the most senior government decisionmakers,
it is the most appropriate organization to take the lead in disaster risk management. To
effectively undertake its tasks involves many organizations that must coordinate their efforts to
effectively function during the three major phases of the disaster as described above in para 3.

17. As described in the preceding paras, disaster risk management demands a multidisciplinary
and multi-jurisdictional approach. The success therefore depends totally on past experience
(information available on successes and failures as well other related data) and the institutional
arrangements designed to manage risk. In the case of Cambodia, neither of the above, currently,
seems adequate to save lives and reduce physical impacts during even the most common flood-
disaster related emergencies. The FDERP-AF therefore aims to systematically improve the
country’s disaster risk management capacity, with efficient coordination among ongoing
interventions and thereby fully utilizing past experiences. 18. At present NCDM has limited
capacity and resources to carry out its core responsibilities of coordinating a multi-agency effort
required for disaster risk management. However, given that this is its clearly stated mandate,
there is a strong and urgent need to support a program of strengthening the capacity of the
NCDM. It is therefore recommended to provide support to strengthen NCDM’s capacity to
effectively harness the resources and expertise of the relevant line ministries and other
organizations, and provide a cohesive and robust approach manage future flood risk. It should
develop a long term plan to progressively build its institutional capacity (from central to the
local level). To assist the NCDM establish an institutional development plan, it is recommended
to consider a program of emergency simulation exercises with detailed “after-action:
assessments. These simulations and assessments, facilitated by specialists, will enable the
members of the NCDM to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of existing procedures to
identify institutional development required to ensure the NCDM is able to respond effectively
and efficiently to future crisis events. Recommendations will involve further training, including
additional simulation exercises, strengthening of policy and legal frameworks to support the
NCDM’s mandate, and assistance in processing the Law on Disaster Management and its
linkages to climate change. 19. It is also recommended to provide support to build a strategic
framework for coordinating community-based interventions to reduce vulnerability of at-risk
communities to floods risk, to develop a knowledge base for this work, and undertake training
activities for staff. It would aim to have NCDM take a lead role for implementing these activities,
which at present are being done independently of NCDM. The support should provide for
community-based flood risk management (CBFRM) to be implemented under service contracts
with suitable NGOs or

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-
documents/46009-003-sd-02.pdf
 Disaster Risk Management

When a hazard event (such as a drought, flood, cyclone, earthquake or tsunami) occurs, triggering a loss of life and
damage to infrastructure, it highlights the reality that society and its assets are vulnerable to such events. When
discussing disaster risk management, a disaster can highlight the following in a community:

 The geographical area where the community is settled is exposed to such a hazard.
 The society (including individuals) and its infrastructure, assets and other processes - as well as services which
may have experienced damage or destruction - are vulnerable.

Disaster Risk

According to the terminology of UNDRR, disaster risk is defined as “the potential loss of life, injury, or destroyed or
damaged assets which could occur to a system, society or a community in a specific period of time, determined
probabilistically as a function of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and capacity. In the technical sense, it is defined through the
combination of three terms: hazard, exposure and vulnerability.

For example, when a settlement is established on the shores of a river, hydrologists can identify and characterise flood
hazard by carrying out a hydraulic analysis. According to the UNDRR definition, a hazard is characterised by its "location,
intensity or magnitude, frequency and probability”. In some countries, such hazard areas outline the geographic extent of
floods that have a 100 year period of possible return. Any people, assets, infrastructure, and ecosystems located inside the
area are all exposed to potential damage from floods. The degree of potential damage is then characterised by the area's
vulnerability. For example, this can be defined by the physical structure of a building, as well as by the social and economic
characteristics of a system. Additionally, hazard vulnerability can be characterised by the capacities of a society to cope with
a hazard.
Definitions and Terminology

Hazard is defined as “a process, phenomenon or human activity that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts,
property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation”. Hazards may be single, sequential or
combined in their origin and effects. Each hazard is characterized by its "location, intensity or magnitude, frequency, and
probability".

Exposure is defined as “the situation of people, infrastructure, housing, production capacities and other tangible human
assets located in hazard-prone areas”. As stated in the UNDRR glossary, “measures of exposure can include the number of
people or types of assets in an area. These can be combined with the specific vulnerability and capacity of the exposed
elements to any particular hazard to estimate the quantitative risks associated with that hazard in the area of interest”.

Vulnerability is defined as “the conditions determined by physical, social, economic and environmental factors or processes
which increase the susceptibility of an individual, a community, assets or systems to the impacts of hazards”. Vulnerability is
multi-dimensional in its nature, and next to the four dimensions above, some authors also include cultural and institutional
factors. Examples include, but are not limited to: poor design and construction of buildings, inadequate protection of assets,
lack of public information and awareness, high levels of poverty and education, limited official recognition of risks and
preparedness measures, disregard for wise environmental management or weak institutions, and governance (e.g. including
corruption etc.).

Disaster Risk Reduction is aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual
risk, all of which contribute to strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable
development". The UNDRR definition further annotates that “disaster risk reduction is the policy objective of
disaster risk management, and its goals and objectives are defined in disaster risk reduction strategies and plans".
 Disaster Risk Reduction strategies and policies define goals and objectives across different timescales, with
concrete targets, indicators and time frames.

Disaster Risk Management is the application of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies, to prevent new
disaster risks, reduce existing disaster risks, and manage residual risks, contributing to the strengthening of
resilience and reduction of losses. Disaster risk management actions can be categorized into; prospective disaster
risk management, corrective disaster risk management and compensatory disaster risk management (also referred
to as residual risk management).

Information management in Disaster Risk Reduction

In recent years, researchers and experts have been developing methods to conduct the assessment of hazards,
vulnerability, and coping capacities; as well as techniques to combine such assessments in order to present them in risk
map format. Such maps are essential in developing strategies to reduce the level of existing risks, and as a way to avoid a
generation of new risks due to underlying social and economic risk drivers. Read more about it.

The UN and Disaster Risk Reduction

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the United Nations has been promoting efforts to change the paradigm of disasters,
advocating for the incorporation of disaster risk reduction efforts worldwide as a way to reduce the effects of natural hazards
on vulnerable communities. In 2015, UNDRR facilitated the negotiations amongst Member States, experts and collaborating
organizations; which led to the adoption of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Between 2015
and 2030, Member States around the world will conduct a variety of efforts within the context of the four Priority
Areas contained in the Sendai Framework, as a way to reduce risks with the goal of minimizing losses due to the
manifestation of hazards of natural origin. The four Priority Areas are:

Priority 1: Understanding disaster risk

Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk

Priority 3: Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience

Priority 4: Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and
reconstruction

https://www.un-spider.org/risks-and-disasters/disaster-risk-management

Disaster risk reduction and resilience

Contents
 What is the Sendai Framework?
 What will the Midterm Review of the Sendai Framework achieve?
 What is disaster risk reduction?
 How do disasters impact our region?
 Why does Australia provide aid for disaster risk reduction?
 How does Australia support countries to reduce disaster risk?

Australia’s new International Development Policy commits Australia to build regional resilience by supporting
partner governments and communities in our region to lead their own climate adaptation and disaster risk
reduction efforts.
What is the Sendai Framework?

In 2015 United Nations (UN) Member States, including Australia, agreed on the Sendai Framework for Disaster
Risk Reduction 2015-2030 - the global blueprint for building the world's disaster resilience. It was adopted
alongside the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to address pressing global
challenges, recognising the need for coherence across these efforts to achieve the 2030 Agenda.

The Sendai Framework guides Australia's approach to disaster risk reduction, both domestically in Australia (led
by the National Emergency Management Agency) and internationally through Australia's overseas development
assistance program.

For further information visit:

 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

 Australia's National Emergency Management Agency

What will the Midterm Review of the Sendai Framework achieve?

The report of the midterm review of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 confirmed
that the world is off track to achieve the Sendai Framework global targets by 2030 – further threatening our
region’s resilience and the achievement of the 2030 Agenda. Australia's Voluntary National Report informed
both the global midterm review reports and Australia’s Second National Action Plan for disaster risk reduction.

Australia was pleased to co-facilitate (with Indonesia) negotiations on the political declaration of the high-level
meeting on the midterm review of the Sendai Framework. The political declaration, which reaffirms Member
States’ commitment to the full implementation of the Sendai Framework by 2030, was adopted by consensus at
the UN General Assembly in New York on 18 May 2023. Supporting its full implementation is the development
of a Gender Action Plan for the Sendai Framework to promote gender responsive DRR activities focused on
enhancing data and women’s participation in disaster risk governance The political declaration also secured the
commitment to deliver risk-informed sustainable development, access to funding (including disaster risk
financing and anticipatory action), capacity building and improved collaboration, coordination, and disaster risk
governance.

For further information visit:

 Midterm Review of the Sendai Framework

 Midterm Review of the Sendai Framework Submissions and Reports
 2022 Voluntary National Report for the Midterm Review of the Implementation of the Sendai
Framework
 The political declaration of the high-level meeting on the midterm review of the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

What is disaster risk reduction?

Disaster risk reduction (DRR) is aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risks as well as
managing residual risk. DRR contributes to strengthening resilience and the achievement of risk-informed
sustainable development. Every 1 dollar invested in DRR can save up to 8 dollars in post disaster recovery and
loss.1
How do disasters impact our region?

The Indo-Pacific region is one of the most disaster-prone regions in the world. Australia is working alongside
our neighbours to build the resilience of our region by strengthening preparedness, improving disaster
response systems, and making risk-informed decisions for long-term economic planning. Pacific communities
have developed well-honed resilience to hazards over generations, but the social and economic impacts are
being compounded by increasingly frequent disasters linked to climate change.

The Indo-Pacific region has made progress in developing resilience to disasters, but it has been incremental.
Ongoing efforts are needed to build the local, national and regional governance systems and institutions
necessary to incentivise, monitor and enforce risk-informed development.

Recent disaster events:

In 2022, our Indo-Pacific region experienced:

 The powerful eruption of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai undersea volcano and the ensuing tsunami
that led to significant ashfall and flooding in Tonga, causing loss of life and major damage to
infrastructure, as well as displacing almost 3,000 people.
 Acute water shortages resulting from the La Nina weather pattern and low rainfall in Kiribati. In
Indonesia (West Java Province) lives were lost due to the 5.6 magnitude earthquake, 22,000 homes
were damaged and 58,000 people displaced. Another 6.1 magnitude earthquake hit the province a
month later causing more damage.
 In Australia, catastrophic floods in 2022 impacted the northern and eastern region with more than
20,000 homes and businesses flooded in Queensland, and more than 5,000 homes damaged in New
South Wales following heavy rains and flooding in February and March. Further flooding continued in
the country with 15,000 people displaced in Victoria.

In 2019-20 the Australia Black Summer bushfires were the worst on record, burning through 24 million hectares
of land, claiming lives, and destroying ecosystems, homes and livelihoods.

In 2020, Tropical Cyclone Harold impacted Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and Tonga, causing loss of life, and
significant damage to buildings, crops and infrastructure, including the destruction of over 17,000 homes. Later
that year, Fiji faced further significant losses from Tropical Cyclones Yasa and Ana (World Bank, 2022) 2

Why does Australia provide aid for disaster risk reduction?

Disasters undermine efforts to build prosperity, stability and resilience, claiming lives, disrupting essential
services, eroding assets, undoing hard-won development gains and increasing inequality and poverty. Investing
in disaster risk reduction is essential to save lives, but also to protect health, livelihoods, services, ecosystems
and infrastructure - all essential for achieving the SDGs.

We are in a new era of disaster risk management, facing complex and interconnected systemic
challenges. With increasing strategic competition in the region, our region's security and resilience will
be best enhanced when we work together, when we listen and respond to Pacific-led priorities, and
when we respect Pacific institutions and peoples. Effective disaster risk reduction minimises the human
and economic losses that can set back a country's development progress. It also reduces the need for
external assistance and the chance of displacement. Globally, for every US$100 of disaster-related
 official development assistance (ODA), only 50 cents is invested in protecting development from the
impact of disasters (International Cooperation in Disaster Risk Reduction: Target F, Report 2021).

Between 2010 and 2021, people in Asia and the Pacific were displaced more than 225 million times due to
disasters triggered by natural hazards (Asian Development Bank, 2022). Australia's total contribution to disaster
risk reduction through Australia's development program has consistently exceeded the target of 1 per cent of
ODA since it was recommended at the 2009 Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction.

How does Australia support countries to reduce disaster risk?

Australia works with partner countries in the Indo-Pacific, and particularly our Pacific Island neighbours, to help
improve resilience to disasters, including:

 Assisting partner governments to meet their global commitments under the Sendai Framework and
committing to locally-led action.
 Ensuring women and girls, people with disabilities, young people, the elderly, Indigenous Peoples and
individuals of all communities are involved in decision making on risk-informed development and
disaster risk reduction is essential.
 Working to ensure essential infrastructure is climate and disaster resilient, including through our
support to the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure and its Infrastructure for Resilient Island
States initiative.
 Strengthening disaster risk financing mechanisms in the region and integrating anticipatory action into
policy, financial and operating systems to strengthen disaster preparedness and response, and to save
lives, protect assets, strengthen adaptive social protection mechanisms, and safeguard development
gains.
 Supporting the integration of inclusive anticipatory prevention in policy, financial and operating
systems to strengthen disaster preparedness and to save lives, protect assets, and safeguard
development gains, including through development programs, multilateral humanitarian partnerships
and through the Australian Humanitarian Partnership and Disaster READY.
 Connecting high quality climate and geo-hazard data with decision-making for resilient development
through the Australia Pacific Climate Partnership.
 Working with the UN Women to grow the Women's Resilience to Disasters (WRD) Program to
empower women in Fiji, Kiribati, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands to lead Pacific solutions to disaster risk
reduction, prevention, preparedness and recovery.
 Supporting the Women's International Network on Disaster Risk Reduction (WINDRR), in partnership
with UNDRR to enhance women's roles in decision making and empower them to attain leadership.
 Contributing to global pooled funding mechanisms, such as the UN's Central Emergency Response
Fund and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Disaster Relief
Emergency Fund, UNDRR and the World Bank's Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery.
 Supporting science, technology, and indigenous knowledge to ensure hazard mapping, modelling,
climate projections, forecasting and multi-hazard early warning systems to inform locally led disaster
risk reduction planning, preparation, response and recovery.

For further information visit:

Science for disaster risk management 2020:

Acting today, protecting tomorrow
Source

European Commission

Upload your content

Publication Year

2020

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

978-92-76-18181-1 (ISBN)

Number of pages

687 p.

This publication is a Science for Policy report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s
science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European
policymaking process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European
Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is
responsible for the use that might be made of this publication.
For information on the methodology and quality underlying the data used in this publication for which the
source is neither Eurostat nor other Commission services, users should contact the referenced source. The
designations employed and the presentation of material on the maps do not imply the expression of any
opinion whatsoever on the part of the European Union concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city
or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
This report approaches the disaster risk management cycle through the potential impacts suffered by several
assets at risk, such as population, the environment and critical infrastructures, among others. The focus is then
on the asset at risk, emphasizing the causes and drivers that lead them to be exposed and vulnerable to
different threats and hazards. The information provided would be accompanied with good practices and case
studies that are relevant for European stakeholders. The idea behind these is to illustrate best practices and
ways to manage risk and to promote the use of research results.
https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/science-disaster-risk-management-2020-acting-today-
protecting-tomorrow?fbclid=IwAR1B2azwXFXqyzLM9UD-
P1wv8b6L4TO8oLdwG1H3C5S9KQesU02YgrOXvFY

Disaster risk reduction & disaster risk management

The policy objective of anticipating and reducing risk is called disaster risk reduction
(DRR). Although often used interchangeably with DRR, disaster risk management
(DRM) can be thought of as the implementation of DRR, since it describes the actions
that aim to achieve the objective of reducing risk.

Adapted from UNISDR Global Assessment Report 2015

People making sandbags in Bangkok, Thailand. Source: pornvit_v/Shutterstock

Disaster risk is an indicator of poor development, so reducing disaster risk requires

integrating DRR policy and DRM practice into sustainable development goals.

What is disaster risk reduction?

Historically, dealing with disasters focused on emergency response, but towards the end of the 20th century it
was increasingly recognised that disasters are not natural (even if the associated hazard is) and that it is only
by reducing and managing conditions of hazard, exposure and vulnerability that we can prevent losses and
alleviate the impacts of disasters. Since we cannot reduce the severity of natural hazards, the main opportunity
for reducing risk lies in reducing vulnerability and exposure. Reducing these two components of risk requires
identifying and reducing the underlying drivers of risk, which are particularly related to poor economic and
urban development choices and practice, degradation of the environment, poverty and inequality and climate
change, which create and exacerbate conditions of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Addressing these
underlying risk drivers will reduce disaster risk, lessen the impacts of climate change and, consequently,
maintain the sustainability of development.
We need to manage risks, not just disasters.

DRR is a part of sustainable development, so it must involve every part of society, government, non-
governmental organizations and the professional and private sector. It therefore requires a people-centred and
multi-sector approach, building resilience to multiple, cascading and interacting hazards and creating a culture
of prevention and resilience. Consequently DRM includes strategies designed to:

 avoid the construction of new risks

 address pre-existing risks
 share and spread risk to prevent disaster losses being absorbed by other development
outcomes and creating additional poverty

Although DRM includes disaster preparedness and response activities, it is about much more than managing
disasters.

Successful DRR results from the combination of top-down, institutional changes and strategies, with bottom-up,
local and community-based approaches. DRM programmes should not be standalone but instead be integrated
within development planning and practice, since disasters are an indicator of failed or skewed development, of
unsustainable economic and social processes, and of ill-adapted societies. Approaches need to address the
different layers of risk (from intensive to extensive risk), underlying risk drivers, as well as be tailored to local
contexts. There is no ‘one-size fits all’ approach to DRM, but there exist a number of approaches and
frameworks, which have been effectively implemented to reduce disaster risk. But, before being able to reduce
risk, we need to understand the hazards, and the exposure and vulnerability of people and assets to those
hazards.
How do we reduce risk?

Disaster risk management involves activities related to:

Prevention

Activities and measures to avoid existing and new disaster risks (often less costly than disaster relief and
response). For instance, relocating exposed people and assets away from a hazard area. See a related
story: Managed retreat of settlements remains a tough call even as homes flood and coasts erode.

Mitigation

The lessening or limitation of the adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters. For instance, constructing
flood defences, planting trees to stabilize slopes and implementing strict land use and building construction
codes. See a related story: Mitigation saves: A resilient runway at Portland International Airport could save up
to $50 for every mitigation dollar invested.
Transfer

The process of formally or informally shifting the financial consequences of particular risks from one party to
another whereby a household, community, enterprise or state authority will obtain resources from the other
party after a disaster occurs, in exchange for ongoing or compensatory social or financial benefits provided to
that other party. For instance, insurance. See a related story: Developing disaster risk finance in Morocco:
Leveraging private markets for sovereign risk transfer.

Preparedness

The knowledge and capacities of governments, professional response and recovery organisations,
communities and individuals to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from the impacts of likely,
imminent or current hazard events or conditions. For instance, installing early warning systems, identifying
evacuation routes and preparing emergency supplies. See a related story: New Minecraft world from NRMA
Insurance teaches Aussie kids the importance of bushfire preparedness.

Source of text: UNDRR, 2017Simulation exercises (SIMEX) play an important role in promoting a culture of disaster
risk reduction and they are a preparedness activity. More information can be found here

Implementation of these activities and measures is rarely done in isolation and includes a number of associated
activities, including:

 Identification and measuring disaster risk

 Education and knowledge development
 Informing people about their risk (awareness raising)
 Incorporating DRM into national planning and investment
 Strengthening institutional and legislative arrangements
 Providing financial protection for people and businesses at risk (finance and contingency planning)
 Integrating DRR across multiple sectors, including health, environment, etc.

Simulation exercises (SIMEX) play an important role in promoting a culture of disaster risk reduction and they
are a preparedness activity. More information can be found here

Activities for reducing risk can be described as structural, for instance land use planning and implementation of
building codes, and non-structural, for instance awareness raising, policy-making and legislation. How
governments, civil society and other actors organise DRM, for example through institutional arrangements,
legislation and decentralisation, and mechanisms for participation and accountability is termed risk governance.
There is clear evidence to suggest that low-income countries with weak governance are more vulnerable and
less resilient to disaster risk.

Fundamentally, DRR succeeds in reducing risk by building the strengths, attributes and resources available
within a community, society or organization – collectively known as their capacity. DRM activities are designed
to increase the resilience of people, communities, society and systems to resist, absorb, accommodate and to
recover from and improve well-being in the face of multiple hazards. Activities for reducing and managing risks
can therefore provide a way for building resilience to other risks. In addition to development, DRM should
therefore be integrated across a number of sectors, including climate change and conflict.

Identifying and understanding risk: the foundation of risk reduction

Awareness, identification, understanding and measurement of disaster risks are all clearly fundamental
underpinnings of disaster risk management (UNISDR, 2015b). Disaster risk reduction is about decisions and
choices, including a lack of, so risk information has a role in five key areas of decision making:
Risk identification

Because the damages and losses caused by historical disasters are often not widely known, and because the
potential damages and losses that could arise from future disasters (including infrequent but high-impact
events) may not be known at all, DRM is given a low priority. Appropriate communication of robust risk
information at the right time can raise awareness and trigger action. See a related story: GEM releases five
national and three regional earthquake models for public good application.

Risk reduction

Hazard and risk information may be used to inform a broad range of activities to reduce risk, from improving
building codes and designing risk reduction measures (such as flood and storm surge protection), to carrying
out macro-level assessments of the risks to different types of buildings (for prioritizing investment in
reconstruction and retrofitting, for example). See a related story: 4 ways to reduce disproportionate flood risk
and build resilience for all communities.

Preparedness

An understanding of the geographic area affected, along with the intensity and frequency of different hazard
events, is critical for planning evacuation routes, creating shelters, and running preparedness drills. Providing a
measure of the impact of different hazard events—potential number of damaged buildings, fatalities and
injuries, secondary hazards—makes it possible to establish detailed and realistic plans for better response to
disasters, which can ultimately reduce the severity of adverse natural events. See a related story: Indian cities
prepare for floods with predictive technology and on SIMEX as a preparedness activity.

Financial protection

Disaster risk analysis was born out of the financial and insurance sector’s need to quantify the risk of
comparatively rare high-impact natural hazard events. As governments increasingly seek to manage
their sovereign financial risk or support programs that manage individual financial risks (e.g., micro-insurance
or household earthquake insurance). See a related story: Micro insurance company’s evacuation insurance
against disasters.

Resilient reconstruction

Risk assessment can play a critical role in impact modelling before an event strikes (in the days leading up to a
cyclone, for example), or it can provide initial and rapid estimates of human, physical, and economic loss in an
event’s immediate aftermath. Moreover, risk information for resilient reconstruction needs to be available before
an event occurs, since after the event there is rarely time to collect the information needed to inform resilient
design and land-use plans. See a related story: 3 ways to build back better after a tsunami.

Source: adapted from GFDRR, 2014a

Participatory mapping Horacio Marcos C. Mordeno, MindaNews CC BY 2.0

If those exposed to hazards are unaware of the risks they face, it is difficult to see how or why households,
businesses or governments would invest in reducing their risk levels. However, while risk awareness may be a
precondition, the importance people attach to managing their risks can only be understood in the context of the
full range of social, economic, territorial and environmental constraints and opportunities they face - see the
story of Ratnapura and the Chao Phraya River below.

We have over 30 years of research into disaster risk, but much of this is not available in a form that is
understandable or useful to those who need it the most. There is therefore a need for risk scientists and
researchers to shift their focus to the production of risk information that is understandable and actionable for
different kinds of users: in other words, risk knowledge. Such a shift requires more collaboration and
partnerships between scientists and researchers and those involved in DRR, ranging from governments to local
communities.

Governments need to invest in the collection, management and dissemination of risk information, including
disaster loss and impact statistics, hazard models, exposure databases and vulnerability information. At the
same time, they need to put standards and mechanisms in place to ensure openness and transparency so that
users not only have access to the information they need but are aware of its underlying assumptions and
limitations. The generation of understandable and actionable risk information needs to be particularly sensitive
to extensive risk, which, because it is configured to a large extent by social, economic and environmental
vulnerability, can be reduced effectively through risk management and sustainable development practices.
Α walk through DRR history

Discover the early experiences and works of the disaster risk reduction pioneers between 1970 and 2000.

Are we reducing disaster risk?

While we have made some progress in reducing disaster mortality associated with intensive risks, increasing
exposure of people and economic assets means that mortality and economic losses from extensive risk are
trending up and absolute global economic losses from disasters are increasing, although not relative to GDP.
Some low and middle-income countries may not have the financial resilience to accommodate the likely
average annual losses from future disasters, which threaten the very economic existence of many small island
development states.

We’ve been generating risk faster than we have been reducing it.

More needs to be done to prevent new risks, which are already emerging owing to increasing urbanisation, the
threat of climate change and other risk drivers. In an increasingly interconnected world, we are seeing that
disasters can also result in synchronous failures. Development can be sustainable, it is just a question of
whether we can change our approach in time to prevent disaster risk from reaching dangerous levels.

We have made more progress in managing disasters than in reducing our disaster risk.

Over the last 10 years, there has been significant progress in strengthening disaster preparedness, response
and early warning capacities and in reducing specific risks, according to the HFA Monitor. However, progress
has been limited in most countries when it comes to managing the underlying risks.

Although we know how to reduce disaster risk, there is often a lack of incentive to do so.

Both individuals, governments and businesses tend to discount low-probability future losses and seem
reluctant to invest in DRM. Despite the magnitude of disaster costs, reducing risks is often perceived as less of
a priority than fiscal stability, unemployment or inflation. New evidence demonstrates, however that the
opportunity cost of disasters is high and that many low and middle-income countries, and small island
development states are financially unable to cope with the predicted future losses from disasters while also
maintaining their capacity to develop. In other words, they are not resilient.

The costs and benefits of disaster risk management need to become fully encoded into public and private
investment at all levels, into the financial system and into the design of risk-sharing and social protection
mechanisms. Cost-benefit analyses can be expanded to highlight the trade-offs implicit in each decision,
including the downstream benefits and avoided costs in terms of reduced poverty and inequality, environmental
sustainability, economic development and social progress. They can also help to identify who retains the risks,
who bears the costs and who reaps the benefits. Such a broad approach to cost-benefit analysis can increase
the visibility and attractiveness of investments in disaster risk reduction.

The good news is that we can achieve great things when we invest in DRR. There are
countless success stories of reducing disaster risk ranging from community-based
participatory approaches to the global reduction in disaster mortality associated with
intensive risks.
However, we need to recognize that the impact of some DRM measures may not be immediate. It may take
decades for the outcome of improved planning regulations and building standards to translate into reduced
disaster losses, as a critical mass of new, risk-sensitive building and urban development has to be achieved.

The future of DRR requires that we assess the costs and benefits of DRM, reform risk governance, move from
risk information to knowledge and strengthen accountability.

Related stories
Interview: Scenarios, an effective tool to understand and mitigate risk

"Scenarios provide a tool to help probe issues around risk. They are stories we tell in order to explore different
questions and angles about risk and risk assessments."

‘We always come last’: Deaf people are vulnerable to disaster risk but excluded from preparedness

"Deaf people are highly vulnerable to disaster risk but tend to be excluded from programs aimed at boosting
preparedness and resilience, new research has found."

Global fire outlook not good news, but mitigation is possible, analysis shows

"Wildfire is a natural process necessary to many ecosystems. But wildfires are getting worse and more
damaging, and it is our fault, according to new research."
https://www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/key-concepts/disaster-risk-reduction-
disaster-risk-management?fbclid=IwAR34x2JAWycVPQxm5nLu8zuAIaTEPm_p3cl3EgMe-
z1eBpjTdsAqCnNFC2E

Disaster risk management during COVID-19 pandemic

Shirsendu Nandi

Guest Editor (s): Mohammad Hadi Dehghani

Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health,

Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, Iran

Institute for Environmental Research, Center for Solid Waste Research,

Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Guest Editor (s): Rama Rao Karri

Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Brunei, Bandar Seri Begawan,

Brunei Darussalam

Guest Editor (s): Sharmili Roy

School of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA,

United States
Author information Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer

Go to:

Abstract

Disaster causing threats and damages to human lives and properties leading toward
economic losses can be classified as natural, biological, technological, and societal disasters.
Disaster risk management primarily include (i) limiting exposure to hazardous preagents
and reducing vulnerabilities and, therefore, chances for disaster to occur; (ii) formulating
strategies and preparedness in terms of gathering resources and making a blueprint of
actions; (iii) real-time response during a disaster, and (iv) recovery and rehabilitation of
affected people. The current pandemic in the form of COVID-19 has given rise to integrating
health into the overall disaster risk management strategies. The current chapter aims to
develop a framework for integrating health or biological disaster management into the
overall disaster risk management protocols and principles. It also suggests a shift from the
traditional approach of reactive response after the outbreak/occurrence of the health
disaster to a more proactive approach of health risk mitigation by building capabilities
across the nation through the development of healthcare services and infrastructure to
combat health disasters. Health emergencies or disasters occur due to outbreaks of
diseases and indirectly due to other natural calamities or disasters, causing disruption and
collapse of healthcare facilities and limiting the access of the majority of people to
healthcare services. Sustainable Development Goal-13 mentions the need of urgent actions
to be taken and sets targets to combat the impact of climate change causing natural
disasters. It is also discussed how to minimize risk and losses during COVID-19 and the
required preventive measures to be taken during pandemic in the light disaster risk
reduction (DRR) framework. Therefore the guidelines developed in this chapter aim at
building a resilient healthcare infrastructure alongside assuring the supply of basic needs
viz. water, medicine, food, electricity, and communication during emergencies. It also
estimates cost relative to the country’s budget or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) required
to build an appropriate healthcare infrastructure for disaster management and performs
an economic analysis of cost and benefit.

Keywords: Disaster, Risk management, Biological, Healthcare services, GDP, COVID-19

Go to:

Introduction 1.

COVID-19, originated in Wuhan, China,1, 2 has caused a serious threat by claiming millions
of human lives across the globe and posed serious social, economic, political, and
environmental challenges on a long-term basis.3 The disease is spreading daily4 and this
pandemic has been existing for the last 2 years or more across the world where some
countries are battling with its 2nd wave (India and other south Asian countries) and some
other countries have faced 3rd wave (European countries), and some are amid its 4th wave
(Japan).5 Recent pandemic caused by novel severe acute respiratory syndromes (SARS-CoV-
2) shows similarity to these earlier CoVs such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV by causing mass
mortality.6 Due to the longer period of the pandemic, it is expected that multiple disasters
and calamities will simultaneously hit areas already affected by COVID-19. 7 The urban
population in various regions of Central and South America, South Asia, and Africa are
more likely to be affected by flooding, and these flood-affected areas will, in turn, convert to
an epicenter of the pandemic explosion, making the overall situation and disaster
management far more challenging.8 The COVID-19 situation of cities in Ottawa and
Manitoba in Canada got worsened due to floods.9, 10 During the first wave of COVID-19,
flood-affected East Africa observed increased vulnerability among people in terms of the
death toll and rapid spread of the disease as social distancing and hygiene-related COVID-
19 protocols could not be followed.8, 11 Concurrent hits of disasters during pandemic
constrain and limit the effectiveness and application of prescribed mitigation strategies of
disaster management.12, 13 There have been several other instances of multiple disasters
during the current pandemic viz. COVID-19 coupled with cyclone in coastal areas of Cox’s
Bazar, Bangladesh14; COVID-19 coupled with cyclone (Yash) in coastal areas of West Bengal
and Orissa, India; COVID-19 coupled with a heat wave in Florida and other parts of the
United States. Multiple disasters have reportedly caused a higher rate of fatality and
comorbidity.15 When Japan was hit by typhoon Hagibis during the phase of COVID-19, the
disaster management, rehabilitation and recovery operation was jeopardized due to the
lack of volunteers required to carry out these operations.16, 17, 18, 19 Though
unprecedented or as extremely rare phenomena, governments and society at large across
the world are facing natural disasters (viz. flood, drought, and cyclone) alongside
combatting the pandemic COVID-19.20 Collaboration among various public departments
(viz. disaster management group, department of health, meteorology, irrigation,
agriculture, and finance) and preparedness among government, civil society, and private
sector are the keys to an integrated approach of mitigating the risk of disaster during
COVID-19.20, 21

The role of top government officials in the administration is pivotal in undertaking

appropriate policies in disaster risk management during this pandemic. However, at the
same time, successful implementation of those policies and strategies at an operational
level requires strengthening the local bodies, local administration, and local communities
by decentralization of power, particularly because of restrictions of travel during a
pandemic. Okura et al.22 describe how flood-prone rural areas of Nepal combatted
multidisaster environment during COVID-19 by effective dissemination of information
done through communication devices (mobile phone) and CDMC (community disaster
management committee) regarding resilience, preparation for coordination, and practical
action against hazards.

When COVID-19 is discussed concerning disaster management and lessons learned from
the current pandemic, the traditional disaster risk management practice should be
integrated via a bridge with a more resilient and modern 21st century disaster risk
management approach having the ability to tackle risk unknown in nature or not fully
understood.23 According to Mishra,23 this modern holistic disaster risk management
approach considers unknown and rare events (pandemic created by an unknown virus)
and the elements of risk inherent in our global system.

Disaster risk management in general, with greater priority during a pandemic, should not
only stick to risk mitigation and action during the shock of the disaster but also consists of
an effort of rehabilitation, reconstruction, and implementing of other relief measures
enabling the affected people and locality to bounce back to its original shape. With due
support of civil society and government, many localities and disaster-affected people have
been able to build a resilient and robust future for themselves. A comprehensive disaster
management plan must ensure timely help from the state and devise a method to
compensate affected people for their economic losses due to disaster causing damage in the
means of their livelihood. Similarly, in the context of health disasters like the current
pandemic, lessons learned during COVID-19 guide us to include strategy and scientific
recourse for the smooth recovery of affected people from COVID-19. The successful
implementation of a strategy for recovery and rehabilitation of affected people will lessen
the economic burden and promote a healthy social balance sheet on a long-term basis.

Disaster risk management as a discipline of interest both in the domain of academia and
the practicing world is constantly evolving. From relatively less rigor it has grown
tremendously, drawing heavily from STEM field, AI, and deep learning for more accurate
technology-based scientific forecasting, viz. the end-to-end early warning system based on
technology-based forecasting method launched in the Indian Ocean after the tsunami it
suffered. It also requires knowledge and application of social and behavioral science for
comprehensive management considering the human aspect.

The current chapter aims to develop a framework for integrating health or biological
disaster management into the overall disaster risk management protocols and principles. It
also suggests a shift from the traditional approach of reactive response after the
outbreak/occurrence of the health disaster to a more proactive approach of health risk
mitigation by building capabilities across the nation through the development of healthcare
services and infrastructure to combat health disasters. Sustainable Development Goal-13
mentions the need for urgent actions to be taken and sets targets to combat the impact of
climate change causing natural disasters. It is also discussed how to minimize risk and
losses during COVID-19 and the required preventive measures to be taken during the
pandemic in the light disaster risk reduction (DRR) framework.

Go to:
The Sendai framework on the convention of disaster risk
reduction 2.

The Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction (SFDRR) and sustainable development
goals (SDG) are two landmark achievements and steps the United Nations took in 2015.
The Sendai framework recommends actionable steps to scale up risk mitigation strategies
which in turn must build resilience against disasters across the world.24, 25

The Sendai Framework on the convention of disaster risk reduction classifies different
disaster events into two different categories of risk. (i) A hazardous event or disaster
occurring with high frequency, low severity, and relatively less devastating was classified
in an extensive risk category, e.g., landslides, localized draughts, and floods. (ii) A
hazardous event or disaster occurring with low frequency, high severity, and relatively
more devastating in nature, causing severe damage to lives and properties, was classified in
an intensive risk category, e.g., tsunami, earthquake, and nuclear disasters. The
convention opined that both these categories of events require comprehensive planning for
management. There was an agreement regarding the possibility of efficient management
and reduction of risk for these events as the risk is identifiable, quantifiable, and
measurable, and an appropriate probabilistic risk evaluation may be carried out. According
to the general disaster risk reduction principles, the impact of a disaster can be minimized
and effectively managed by a multilevel, multidimensional, multidisciplinary coordinating
approach.

However, the convention lacked broad-level discussion and fixing an effective protocol for
combatting a black swan event.26 A black swan event may be defined as a very rare event
and has an impact on a large scale with widespread severe consequences. 27 The impact is
extremely difficult to model as multiple disasters occur simultaneously in an almost
unpredictable manner. The world has already witnessed black swan events having a
catastrophic impact across the globe or inside a significantly large geographic region on
most occasions. The Indian tsunami and earthquake in 2004, claiming nearly 230,000 lives
and affecting countries like India, Maldives, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Thailand, is
one of the well-known black swan events. The subprime crisis in the United States in 2008
led to a global economic crisis worldwide and impacted most of the countries in the world.
Japan in 2011 faced a triple disaster one led to another, causing nearly 18,000 deaths. In an
almost unpredictable and unprecedented manner, an earthquake led to a tsunami which in
turn caused a nuclear disaster at the nuclear power plant at Fukushima.

Similarly, the COVID-19, which started during the latter half of 2019 in a small corner of the
world, gradually spread worldwide and turned into a pandemic. Many countries have
concurrently faced disasters like earthquakes, cyclones, chemical disasters, wildfire,
drought, and floods during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Australia, the event of bushfires
increased mortality and comorbidity during COVID-19.28 In the United States, the
firefighting to prevent wildfire was disrupted29 and in Zimbabwe, social initiatives to
combat the situation of lack of food grains caused by severe drought got hindered during
the pandemic.30 Although the probability of the individual disaster and the impact thereon
can be computed, the risk analysis of the concurrent occurrence of the disasters, and
therefore evaluating the larger impact of this event, is computationally very complex.

Go to:

Principle lessons for combatting biological disasters like COVID-

19 pandemic 3.

The COVID-19 pandemic disaster did not discriminate between rich and poor or among
people from different social strata and statuses. Effective management against this disaster
requires a collective effort from everybody. In big nations like India and the United States,
information sharing between the central government and state governments, among
different state governments, between public authorities and civil society, is crucial for the
exercise. While the hallmark of success in managing the pandemic disaster lies in the
crucial role played by doctors, nurses, and other public and private health workers, it is
equally important to engage community workers, civil society, and every citizen by
specifying their roles and responsibilities in containing the pandemic. Researchers have
established the necessity of building a resilient public health system to successfully
implement the public health disaster risk reduction (DRR) program.31, 32 The principles of
DRM (disaster risk management) must be integrated into the public health management
system on a long-term basis.33, 34 Few underlying basic principles that need to be
followed for this disaster management are as follows:

 i.

Acknowledging the role of government as a central body passing regulations and laws to manage
and control the pandemic

 ii.

Acknowledging the role of society and every citizen and ensuring their strategic participation

 iii.

Reorganizing and repurposing critical resources, including human resources, capacities (hospital
beds, medicine, medical equipment and aids, etc.)

 iv.

Repurposing and enhancing diagnostic and clinical management capacities

  v.

Appropriate use of technology within the constraints and focus on evidence-based research and
dissemination of knowledge for information sharing

3.1. Risk assessment and evaluation by advanced mathematical

modeling

One of the most important exercises of disaster prevention and mitigation is risk
assessment. For this purpose, advanced probability-based dynamic epidemiological models
(agent-based models or compartmentalized Markov chain-based models) may be used,
drawing heavily from other related STEM fields (deep learning, artificial intelligence,
advanced probability and stochastic process).35 As evident, since the source of risk, nature
of the virus, and many other things are unknown, it is extremely difficult to capture the
entire risk through these models. Therefore the untapped risk may be reduced by reducing
the vulnerability or enhancing people’s resilience and the region’s environment under risk.
The risk assessment should consider the hazard, exposure, vulnerability, emergency
response, and recovery capability for a catastrophic event like COVID-19. The tools used in
risk assessment use input variables such as rate of spread of the disease, infection doubling
rate, positivity rate, prevalence rate, demographic variables such as gender distribution,
and distribution of different age groups among the affected population. The impact and
consequence of the event may be analyzed by noting the mortality rate, rate of recovery,
classification of severity of the disease, availability of health infrastructure, etc. Higher
casualty and a less effective postdisaster recovery effort after Hurricane Katrina and
Haiyan in New Orleans in the United States and the Philippines may be attributed to the
fragile health infrastructure, lack of health insurance, and access of healthcare services to
the public.24, 36, 37 It is also important to enhance the capacity of providing healthcare
services and optimally allocate scarce resources and thereby minimize the fatality.

The purpose of risk analysis and evaluation of impact in the context of disaster
management is integrated planning and decision-making. Some major hindrances in the
planning and decision-making process during the management of COVID-19 were
observed.

 a.

Determination of a proper unit of analysis of a geographical area. It may be too small or too large. A
large unit of analysis loses its characteristics of granularity. For example, a complete restriction or
shutdown imposed in an entire subdivision might be useless since the actual source of infection
might lie in a small corner of that region. Similarly, a chosen unit that is too small might lack several
sufficient data points required for an appropriate decision.

 b.
Local factors or drivers of risk were dominant in determining the nature of spread and other
variables on COVID-19. A management information system which does not consider the variety of
controlling and risk factors specific to a particular zone or locality will lead to erroneous decision-
making.

 c.

Since the disease and the nature of the virus are very dynamic, real-time updates of information
need to occur within very small time intervals—failing which appropriate and timely decision-
making for disaster management becomes impossible.

3.2. Importance of local administration and community involvement

All countries have issued guidelines on COVID-19 (symptoms, testing, prevention,

quarantine and isolation, caregivers, treatments, etc.) and enacted laws and implemented
them through administrative surveillance to contain the spread of this pandemic. The
surveillance to contain the disease is largely done by using digital technologies. Tracking
needs usage of tools like data dashboard, machine learning, and migration maps; contact
tracing requires usage of global positioning systems and quarantine; and isolation makes
use of artificial intelligence, global positioning systems, real-time monitoring of mobile
devices, etc. Screening is done by using artificial intelligence, mobile phone applications,
and digital thermometers. However, the role of community-based surveillance is far more
important to contain the infection and manage this disaster. Areas where the community
played the roles of ears to the government have managed the spread of COVID-19
efficiently. Risk reduction programs organized by community groups have been greatly
beneficial for building awareness, scientific knowledge, and behavioral patterns as per
COVID-19 protocol. Wearing masks, usage of sanitizers, and disinfecting the residence of
infected people also helped to bring down the rate of infection to a great extent. Hence,
community leadership has been instrumental in efficient disaster management by
providing the authority with appropriate feedback from the ground level regarding any
hindrances and negative consequences of implemented actions.

3.3. Managing risk versus managing uncertainty in managing the

disaster of COVID-19

The current pandemic is known for a faster rate of spread of the disease, a differential rate
of mortality and recovery rate, and a higher rate of mortality among older people and
people with a weaker immune system.38 As discussed, computation and capturing entire
risk for managing the pandemic is extremely difficult since the scientific community is still
pursuing scientific investigations to reveal facts on source of the virus, the emergence and
characteristics of strains, etc. There exist uncertainty of effectiveness of various treatment
protocols on people of different age groups, uncertainty concerning the opinion expressed
by experts on acquired herd immunity, the effectiveness of different vaccines on generating
sufficient antibody, and the timeline a vaccine can protect from the disease. Due to a lack of
information on the virus and its different variants, most of the risk cannot be captured and
remains unquantifiable for every pandemic. Risk analysis on any disaster is performed on
past incidents and experience of that disaster, taking into account its impact, nature of
devastation, frequency etc., future strategies for managing the disaster are prepared.
Health hazards or biological disasters caused by pandemics require management of
uncertainty. Hence, the management of health disasters warrants the advancement of risk
analysis toward managing uncertainty and bridging the existing gaps.

3.4. Managing untapped global risk through reducing vulnerability or

building local resilience

Today’s open economy, the concept of the global village, and the interconnectedness within
the world through fast connecting modes of transport have significantly contributed
toward the fast spread of COVID-19 and ultimately turned into a pandemic. The impact and
mortality rate in different parts of the world vary depending on the robustness of the
public health system. Vulnerability in this context is defined as socioeconomic, physical,
environmental, and other factors contributing positively to the population’s susceptibility
to hazards. During the monsoon, people in slum areas in India faced the dual hazards of
flood and COVID-19 and were considered highly vulnerable under this pandemic. 39 Building
resilience means reducing the vulnerability and thereby reducing the risk of a community
from exposure to disaster. The vulnerable population, staff, and frontline warriors of
COVID-19 may be considered groups at high risk,17, 40, 41 and these groups must be given
additional attention to get protection against the disease.

Considering the scale of impact of COVID-19, a good starting point of building resilience
will be cooperation at a global level by sharing of information of outputs of research carried
out worldwide and based on them deciding good practices to be followed. Those good
practices might guide behavior and hygiene practices to be followed both at the individual
and at the societal level, treatment protocols, diagnostic norms, repurposing, and optimal
usage of resources. It is also further emphasized that resilience to health disaster decreases
because of lack of access to good housing facilities, proper education, basic sanitation, clean
water, social support, etc.42, 43 Role of communities and society, as well as individual
factors like awareness, integration, diversity, self-regulation, and adaptability, plays a
crucial role in building resilience.44

The branch of study called disaster risk management has come a long way. In the initial
phase, postdisaster recovery and rehabilitation were of primary interest. From
postdisaster recovery and crisis management, the branch evolved to disaster risk reduction
and risk mitigation. The latest focus lies in building resilience. Building resilience requires
building redundancy in social, economic resources, health system and infrastructure, and
other capacities. The shock-absorbing capability or degree of resilience also depends
greatly on systemic redundancy and modular approach—converting each locality to a self-
reliant modular entity.

Go to:

Planning, risk mitigation, resilience building: Methods of

protection against a rare event like COVID-19 4.

A pandemic in COVID-19 has disrupted planet earth which experienced the last pandemic
almost a century back in the form of Spanish flu. Since a biological disaster and pandemic
like COVID-19 is rare and highly improbable and uncertain, it may be termed a black swan
event. From the perspective of disaster management, it is important to note certain
characteristics of such disasters.

 i.

The highly unpredictable, unlikely, and high-profile event blows out of proportion very fast and
shows the catastrophic impact

 ii.

Profiling the risk of such events is difficult as it exhibits a very small probability

 iii.

Exploration of causality and other facts are revealed after the disaster

The principle behind protection against this uncertain black swan event is learning from
experience: investigating the source and main cause of the disaster. Extensive research and
investigation must take place to find out how it spread and caused outsized impact at a
global level, how it created disproportionate pressure on the existing medical resources
and capacities, etc. The spread of the Ebola virus in Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone
weakened the existing public health system and resulted in the death of a large number of
health workers.45, 46, 47, 48 Learning from the experience is not sufficient, but a forward-
looking progressive philosophy to best prepare ourselves for the future is the key to
prevent the disaster and limit its catastrophic impact. The latest philosophy lies in creating
an antifragile system that works beyond building resilience. Resilience provides shock-
absorbing capacity while the antifragile system promotes the evolution of the existing
system as a better system. The objective is to absorb the shock of the disaster and minimize
the damage and seek opportunities for the evolution of a new era of cultural changes; ideas;
behavioral practices; social, economic, and political systems; and scientific and
technological advancement. Because of the interconnected systems worldwide, penetration
causing disaster to a particular system leads to failure of other connected systems located
in other geographies very fast. (e.g., terrorized cyberattack). A country that wants to be
better prepared for disasters like COVID-19 has to promote local resilience and build
antifragile independent, modular, decentralized systems that can work as a self-sufficient
unit.

4.1. Reinforcing risk management by implementing nationwide IT

infrastructure, digitalization with local support

Digitalization nationwide is extremely important for managing risk arising out of a

pandemic like COVID-19. It is essential to digitally capture data on various patient- and
treatment-related information (demographics, symptoms, treatment protocols, test
reports, finding responses to treatment, etc.) while treating patients of COVID-19 by
creating and preserving relevant databases. The information may be used as inputs to
appropriate models on predictive analytics to build a decision support system (DSS)
necessary for strategic prioritization of resources and formulation of health policies. To
gather data on each individual, the government must build IT infrastructure across the
nation. People should have access to a device (smart phone or other handheld devices)
connected to the internet. Penetration of internet and IT infrastructure is the necessary
precondition for implementing tracking, tracing, and isolation—key steps to manage and
contain the disease. This is more challenging because the asymptomatic people are
spreading the disease without even knowing that they are transmitting it. 49 Community
workers, organizations, and health workers at the local level may be deployed to
successfully implement the digitalization process and establish a DSS. The local authority
for disaster management and other related organizations and health institutions should be
empowered for immediate response and recovery operations during postdisaster
rehabilitation.

4.2. Resilience in supply chain through building robust infrastructure

and redundancy

Keeping the supply chain disruption minimal is one of the important goals of disaster risk
management during COVID-19. The Supply of essentials such as food items, groceries,
medical equipment, and medicines was critical in combatting the disaster caused by
COVID-19. During the phase of Ebola, some African countries experienced disruption in the
supply and delivery of healthcare-related products and services due to weak supply chain
and information systems.50, 51, 52 During the outbreak of Yellow fever in countries like
Angola, Uganda, and Congo, political unrest and warlike situations in different parts of
Africa resulted in a larger death toll due to failure of supply chain
infrastructure.53, 54, 55, 56, 57 While restrictions in movement and lockdown created
hindrances in supply, resilient businesses and firms made suitable adjustments in their
operations including inbound and outbound logistics, inventory policies, and coordination
strategies to provide uninterrupted supplies of essential items. The supply chain’s
resilience is also possible through redundancy in the mode of transportation and
availability of strong infrastructural facilities to establish interconnectedness among
various parts of a large nation through alternative modes of transportation (roads,
railways, air, etc.). To ensure last mile delivery of food, vaccine at a doorstep government
needs to scale up the capacity of the public distribution system by engaging human
resources and efficient use of technology.

4.3. Economic, financial, and environmental resilience

During the phase of COVID-19, countries have faced natural disasters like floods, cyclones,
and earthquakes. It is important to build and maintain disaster-resilient infrastructure for
protecting life and properties from natural disasters. Building an economic resilience of a
nation or the financial resilience of an individual is important for disaster management. It is
more relevant in disaster management during COVID-19 because it has negatively affected
the economy worldwide with rising unemployment and economic slowdown. Disaster
management during COVID-19 requires financial resources to support the enhancement of
capacities of healthcare services, undertake cutting-edge research, vaccinate people,
provide food and economic support to marginalized, poor people. Instead of looking for
financial resources after the disaster, a country should provide economic resources meant
for disaster response as a part of long-term developmental planning. Countries that do not
include the allocation of financial resources for disaster risk mitigation and management as
a part of the national policy suffer from a financial crunch at the time of disaster. As
disasters have become more frequent and are inevitable, countries should consider the
financial allocation for disaster mitigation as the investment required to support long-term
sustainable growth.58 Literature is found on the impact of disasters on public health and
clinical management-related matters.

Governments, NGOs, and civil society have come forward 59 and taken welfare measures for
marginalized people, the weaker segment of the society, and people struggling for survival
and livelihoods; arrangements for food, basic hygiene materials, healthcare facilities, and
vaccination need to be done to extend support to people facing financial constraints due to
restrictions imposed during COVID-19. One of the important measures of building
economic resilience and providing social security is cash assistance and direct benefit
transfer. This initiative also helps to boost up the demand side to provide resilience against
economic slowdown. After due consultations with the central bank, the government may
provide subsidies or loans at a cheaper rate to keep the businesses and affected industries
running during the crisis period of COVID-19. Instead of looking for financial resources
after the disaster, a country should provide for economic resources meant for disaster
response as a part of long-term developmental planning (Table 1 ).
Table 1
Different disasters, nunmber of affected people, number of deaths and economic losses
from 1998 to 2017.
Type of disaster Affected people (million) Number of deaths Economic losses (billion $)

Flood 2000 142,088 656

Draught 1500 21,563 124

Storm 726 232,680 1330

Earthquake 125 747,234 661

Extreme temperature 97 166,346 61

Landslide 4.8 18,414 8

Wild fire, volcanic activity 6.2 2398 68

Open in a separate window

Source: UNISDR (2017): Economic Losses. Poverty and disaster 1998–2017.

4.4. Sustainability practices, green initiatives, and conservation of

scarce natural resources

It is well established that sustainability aspects are well connected in the prevention and
mitigation of disasters.60 Researchers may further explore the linkages of the current
COVID-19 pandemic with violation of sustainability practices, deviation from green
initiatives, and excessive consumption of scarce natural resources. However, urban areas
exposed to pollution and coastal areas prone to natural disasters need to integrate
sustainability initiatives on ecosystem restoration, plantation, hazard, risk mapping,
vulnerability reduction, eco-friendly policies for disaster risk management. Rampant
urbanization, indiscriminate use of natural resources, rapid industrialization, and
deforestation have led to the loss of natural balance by destabilizing the proportional
existence of natural gifts like rivers, mountains, springs, forests, and biodiversities.
Sustainability efforts to reduce pollution, carbon footprints, and limit human activities
causing the emission of greenhouse gases are welcome initiatives to reduce the risk of
disaster. These kinds of sustainable and green practices in consumption and production
naturally immune us from various risk factors.

Go to:
Intersection of health and disaster risk management 5.

There has been a lot of emphasis on research works, theory building, and policy
implementation-related works in the interdisciplinary area of health and disaster risk
management. In the context of disaster risk management, public health becomes a critical
factor. The world health assembly, through its resolution, has also urged for strengthening
of the disaster risk management system by integrating it into a national health policy. 61 A
weaker public health creates a hindrance in attaining national, regional, and global
developmental targets and goals.62, 63, 64 Literature is found on the impact of the disaster
on public health and clinical management-related issues, the commonalities and
coordination between public health and crisis management, the impact of strengthening
public health on disaster risk reduction, and the description of disaster management cycles
applicable in case of an epidemic affecting public health. The Sendai framework for disaster
risk reduction (SFDRR) has also given due consideration to health-related issues under
disaster management.65

Health is considered one of the important outcomes of disaster risk management

initiatives. In the context of the current pandemic COVID-19, health has emerged as a
matter of concern and one of the critical goals to be achieved. In the African context, it has
been strongly advised to use a strong public health system to mitigate the risk of health
vulnerabilities and inequalities arising from the disaster.66, 67, 68 Any natural disaster
damages the physical, mental, and psychological well-being of individuals. It also causes
significant morbidity and comorbidity among people affected by disasters. Therefore
“Health-Emergency disaster risk management (Health-EDRM),” after adopting the health-
related objectives from Sendai Framework, augments it further with its action and research
agenda to decrease the risk of health hazards as a result of the disaster. It primarily
encompasses focuses on the following:

 a.

A holistic approach to health-related interventions is required during all phases of disaster.

 b.

Cater to specific health needs of vulnerable sections of the population (people more likely to have
health hazards), viz. children, elderly, differently-abled, and people having comorbidity, during a
disaster.

 c.

Necessary steps to build health resilience among communities considering the entire spectrum of
health hazards.

 d.
Internationally acknowledged standard of case-based reporting for measuring different health
parameters during all phases of disaster (predisaster, during disaster, and postdisaster)

 e.

Agreed-upon guidelines regarding usage of terminologies and procedures for preparedness and
building health resilience among communities should be prepared.

Go to:

COVID-19: An economic disaster 6.

COVID-19 pandemic has caused mortality and morbidity that keeps people out of work for
a long period and slowed down the economy across the world. The pandemic also
disrupted the global supply chain due to the lack of availability of inputs from major
supplier countries caused by an interruption in production. Limited and restricted
transportation among countries disrupted the global supply chain and logistics network,
causing a further decline in economic activities. There has been supply and demand shock
for various products and services, and regular consumption and production patterns were
shattered due to the economic meltdown, lack of confidence among consumers, and other
related reasons. As a consequence of the pandemic, there is an estimated loss of
employment of 3%. Capital and labor being inputs of production, loss of confidence among
investors, and lack of availability of labor have resulted in a supply shock.

An initial estimate predicted an average of 7% shrinkage for advanced economies, 2.5%

contraction for developing countries and emerging economies, and an overall 4%
contraction in the entire global economy. The actual contraction/growth of the first 10
countries (concerning nominal GDP) in the world during 2020 has been presented in Table
2 . The contraction in economic activities in many countries worldwide has led to a huge
number of losses in jobs and livelihood, a decrease in per capita income. The vulnerability
was more impactful among low-wage earners.

Table 2
First 10 countries in terms of nominal GDP and their growth/contraction in GDP in 2020.
Country Rank (nominal GDP) GDP growth/contraction (in %)

United States 1 − 3.505

China 2 2.27

Japan 3 − 4.83
Country Rank (nominal GDP) GDP growth/contraction (in %)

Germany 4 − 4.903

United
5 − 9.92
Kingdom

India 6 − 7.965

France 7 − 8.232

Italy 8 − 8.871

Canada 9 − 5.403

Korea 10 − 0.958

Open in a separate window

Source: https://statisticstimes.com/economy/world-gdp-ranking.php.

In order to effectively manage the negative impact of COVID-19 on the economy and trade,
each country should administer certain steps on a short- and long-term basis. Fig. 1, Fig.
2 show global deflated and normalized losses due to natural disasters. While the disaster in
the form of a pandemic may continue its devastating impact for a longer period than
expected, the government, treasuries, and central banks are expected to implement policies
to continue their normal functioning. An initial response to combat this financial crisis may
be cutting the bank rates by the government and policymakers. It is also equally important
to determine appropriate monetary policy, health policy, and fiscal policy to regulate and
control planned and unplanned expenditures to manage the financial distress caused by
COVID-19. As long-term measures, the government has imposed restrictions on mass
gatherings in public and workplaces, mobility of the public, and thereby limiting economic
activities. Although these restrictions reflect efforts from the government to contain the
spread of the virus, it has impacted all sectors of the economy. There has been an increase
in the cost of imports and exports. Demand for travel and tourism dropped heavily.
Demands for many services requiring close physical proximity also saw a decline.
Fig. 1

Global deflated losses based on natural disasters. Note: based on 20,375 disasters.
(Source: Adopted from Neumayer E, Barthel F. Normalizing economic loss from natural disasters: a
global analysis. Global Environ Change 2011;21:13–24.)
Fig. 2

Global losses from all natural disasters normalized with the conventional approach (top)
and alternative approach (bottom). Note: based on 19,115 disasters.
(Source: Adopted from Neumayer E, Barthel F. Normalizing economic loss from natural disasters: a
global analysis. Global Environ Change 2011;21:13–24.)

The current pandemic has also demonstrated the need for an increase in healthcare
expenditures. Previous researches have shown that a health improvement improves GDP
and vice versa.69, 70, 71 Governments and policymakers must consider investment and
increase aggregate expenditure in healthcare as a long-term strategy to manage a disaster
like COVID-19. A nation consisting of a healthy population can cut down health expenses
and experiences an increase in the productivity and earning potential of
individuals.72, 73 Therefore the benefit of investment in healthcare can be observed both
at an individual (micro) and country (macro) level. Another significant benefit of higher
expenditure on healthcare is an increase in people’s life expectancy, leading to an urge or
motivation for future savings and investment in business activities resulting in economic
progress. Many researchers have been conducted to explore the relationship between
health and economic growth.74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 Various researchers have found a
positive correlation between healthcare expenditures and personal income, per capita GDP,
labor productivity, etc. Among the various predictors of per capita GDP, hospital
expenditures and expenditures on personal healthcare are the two most important
predictor variables of per capita GDP. However, there is debate regarding the optimal
amount of healthcare-related spending required to boost economic
growth.80, 81, 82 Careful investment in various healthcare domains can boost productivity,
income, and GDP of a country. It also promotes the general well-being of the population.
Researchers need to further explore theories of welfare economics to decide how the
scarce economic resources may be optimally allocated83, 84 after due consideration of
data on GDP, per capita GDP, healthcare expenditures of different countries, etc., as
provided in Table 3 .

Table 3
Data of top 10 countries in terms of healthcare expenditures as % of GDP.
Rank
Healthcare
(healthcare Growth/contraction Death/million Deaths
Countries expenditure as
expenditure as in GDP (%) in 2020 population (absolute)
% of GDP (%)
% of GDP)

USA 1 16.9 − 3.505 1838.57 603,491

Switzerland 2 12.2 − 2.983 1270.7 10,896

Germany 3 11.2 − 4.903 1096.41 91,148

France 4 11.2 − 8.232 1628.25 109,190

Sweden 5 11 − 2.818 1423.27 14,639

Japan 6 10.9 − 4.83 117.59 14,848

Canada 7 10.7 − 5.403 701.16 26,536

Denmark 8 10.5 − 3.287 436.02 2537

Belgium 9 10.4 − 6.424 2194 25,196

Austria 10 10.3 − 6.59 1207.49 10,719

Open in a separate window

 Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/268826/health-expenditure-as-gdp-percentage-in-
oecd-countries/.

Go to:

Conclusion 7.

7.1. Disaster risk management: Challenges ahead

The current disaster of COVID-19 has taught us various lessons, and it is evident that
disaster with its increased frequency and devastating capacity still poses a lot of challenges
at the local, regional, and global levels. Especially, the current pandemic has shown how
important it is to rethink the current approaches and mechanisms to combat and manage
the risk of disaster. Researchers, administrators, and practitioners need to work together
to find an efficient way of reducing the detrimental impact of disasters like COVID-19 on
socioeconomic progress, poverty, and parameters of the human developmental index,
security of life, livelihood, and property. The enormous pressure on healthcare facilities,
and financial resources due to COVID-19 necessitates scientific research to invent models
for intelligent usage of existing tools and methodologies to better forecast such events,
compute risks, and prescribe measures to control risk and minimize losses.

Modern disaster management encompasses all phases of disaster but places relatively
larger importance on disaster response and postdisaster rehabilitation and reconstruction.
A public health disaster like COVID-19 demands more emphasis on planning and risk
mitigation. There has been discussion on disaster management approach when there is a
flood situation during COVID-19.85, 86 It is equally important to compute and control risk
for concurrent multidisasters viz. COVID-19 is coupled with a flood, cyclone, drought, and
chemical disaster.

The entire world can learn from the experience of the current pandemic and apply those
learnings to build a better, comprehensive disaster management system12, 87 Gathering
from the experience of managing the risk of a pandemic like COVID-19, researchers and
experts have appreciated the importance of building modular, stand-alone, self-reliant,
independent systems so that restrictions may be imposed when required in a particular
region without affecting the normal functioning of other regions or systems. It restricts the
propagation of risk from one system to another and contains the disease at a smaller region
by allowing the independent functioning of individual systems.

Go to:
Future risk management 8.

The spread of COVID-19 has resulted in a heavy increase in mass mortality. While antiviral
drugs and immune-based treatment have been able to provide positive results to some
extent,88 the key to successfully mitigating the future risk lies in the design and
implementing vaccination among all. COVID-19 is a new disease and designing a vaccine
and making it available after completion of clinical trial consumes a good amount of time.
Therefore successful risk mitigation and management of health disasters like COVID-19
requires the usage of AI, deep learning, and other methods of predictive analytics to
forecast its advent, characteristics, and capacity of causing damage. It is also required to
successfully build probabilistic, AI, machine learning, or hybrid models to find the optimal
strategies to prior track, trace, isolate, and treat people affected by pandemics to minimize
the risk.

Go to:

Acknowledgment

The infrastructural support provided to the author by FORE School of Management, New
Delhi, in completing this Book Chapter is gratefully acknowledged.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9334997/?fbclid=IwAR0BEI_ObpXLRhcJbZvPU3H57lJgv-
FrZv5T74mj61GOpn45EPS3s_or6os

DRM, or Disaster Risk Management, aims to avoid the generation of new risks, improves
resilience to the effects of extreme events and contributes to sustainable development.

What is a disaster?
A disaster arises when extreme natural events (such as storms, tsunamis, earthquakes, flooding or
volcanic eruptions) but also technological, man-made or other hazards coincide with a vulnerable
society. Whether an extreme event turns into a disaster depends on social, ecological, economic
and political factors or processes in a society. In general, if individuals, households,
municipalities, and countries have lower levels of coping and adaptive capacities, their
vulnerability is higher.

What is risk?
In the context of DRM, risk is created from the interaction between an extreme event and a
vulnerable population, ecosystem or infrastructure. Risk is determined as a function of hazard,
exposure, vulnerability and capacity.

What is resilience?
DRM is considered an essential aspect of resilience, which refers to the capacity to withstand
extreme events and cope with their consequences. However, resilience is a popular term, which
finds an application in many fields and can therefore be defined quite differently. In the context
of DRM and from the perspective of German Development Cooperation, the definition reads:

Resilience is the ability of people, institutions – whether individuals, households, local

communities or states – to withstand acute shocks or chronic stress caused by fragile situations,
crises, violent conflict, or extreme natural events, and to adapt and recover quickly without
compromising their medium and longer-term prospects. (BMZ, 2013)
What is DRM?
Disaster risk management strives towards reducing the vulnerability of individuals, households
and the society as a whole by strengthening the capabilities of a community to respond to
hazards so that even if or when such an extreme event occurs, it will not become a disaster.
Natural events can generally not be prevented – but their impact can be mitigated.

Thus, DRM can be defined as:

The process of planning, implementing, evaluating and adapting strategies, procedures and
measures relating to the analysis, reduction and transfer of disaster risks, with the aim of
reducing hazards and vulnerability and strengthening the coping and adaptation capacities of
individuals, households, communities and state structures (BMZ, 2015).
DRM & Development
https://www.gidrm.net/en/gidrm/what-is-drm?fbclid=IwAR2z5CYx-fr23GRatareaugyyi97XdkTOB-
AilAy21wY_xAmLapg95ZeKIY

Disaster Risk Management

When a hazard event (such as a drought, flood, cyclone, earthquake or tsunami) occurs, triggering a loss of life and damage to
infrastructure, it highlights the reality that society and its assets are vulnerable to such events. When discussing disaster risk
management, a disaster can highlight the following in a community:

 The geographical area where the community is settled is exposed to such a hazard.
 The society (including individuals) and its infrastructure, assets and other processes - as well as services which may have
experienced damage or destruction - are vulnerable.

Disaster Risk

According to the terminology of UNDRR, disaster risk is defined as “the potential loss of life, injury, or destroyed or damaged assets
which could occur to a system, society or a community in a specific period of time, determined probabilistically as a function of hazard,
exposure, vulnerability and capacity. In the technical sense, it is defined through the combination of three terms: hazard, exposure and
vulnerability.

For example, when a settlement is established on the shores of a river, hydrologists can identify and characterise flood hazard by
carrying out a hydraulic analysis. According to the UNDRR definition, a hazard is characterised by its "location, intensity or magnitude,
frequency and probability”. In some countries, such hazard areas outline the geographic extent of floods that have a 100 year period of
possible return. Any people, assets, infrastructure, and ecosystems located inside the area are all exposed to potential damage from
floods. The degree of potential damage is then characterised by the area's vulnerability. For example, this can be defined by the physical
structure of a building, as well as by the social and economic characteristics of a system. Additionally, hazard vulnerability can be
characterised by the capacities of a society to cope with a hazard.
Definitions and Terminology

Hazard is defined as “a process, phenomenon or human activity that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property
damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation”. Hazards may be single, sequential or combined in their origin
and effects. Each hazard is characterized by its "location, intensity or magnitude, frequency, and probability".

Exposure is defined as “the situation of people, infrastructure, housing, production capacities and other tangible human assets located in
hazard-prone areas”. As stated in the UNDRR glossary, “measures of exposure can include the number of people or types of assets in an
area. These can be combined with the specific vulnerability and capacity of the exposed elements to any particular hazard to estimate the
quantitative risks associated with that hazard in the area of interest”.

Vulnerability is defined as “the conditions determined by physical, social, economic and environmental factors or processes which
increase the susceptibility of an individual, a community, assets or systems to the impacts of hazards”. Vulnerability is multi-dimensional
in its nature, and next to the four dimensions above, some authors also include cultural and institutional factors. Examples include, but
are not limited to: poor design and construction of buildings, inadequate protection of assets, lack of public information and awareness,
high levels of poverty and education, limited official recognition of risks and preparedness measures, disregard for wise environmental
management or weak institutions, and governance (e.g. including corruption etc.).

Disaster Risk Reduction is aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which
contribute to strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable development". The UNDRR definition further
annotates that “disaster risk reduction is the policy objective of disaster risk management, and its goals and objectives are defined in
disaster risk reduction strategies and plans". Disaster Risk Reduction strategies and policies define goals and objectives across different
timescales, with concrete targets, indicators and time frames.
Disaster Risk Management is the application of disaster risk reduction policies and strategies, to prevent new disaster risks, reduce
existing disaster risks, and manage residual risks, contributing to the strengthening of resilience and reduction of losses. Disaster risk
management actions can be categorized into; prospective disaster risk management, corrective disaster risk management and
compensatory disaster risk management (also referred to as residual risk management).

Information management in Disaster Risk Reduction

In recent years, researchers and experts have been developing methods to conduct the assessment of hazards, vulnerability, and coping
capacities; as well as techniques to combine such assessments in order to present them in risk map format. Such maps are essential in
developing strategies to reduce the level of existing risks, and as a way to avoid a generation of new risks due to underlying social and
economic risk drivers. Read more about it.

The UN and Disaster Risk Reduction

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the United Nations has been promoting efforts to change the paradigm of disasters, advocating for the
incorporation of disaster risk reduction efforts worldwide as a way to reduce the effects of natural hazards on vulnerable communities. In
2015, UNDRR facilitated the negotiations amongst Member States, experts and collaborating organizations; which led to the adoption of
the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Between 2015 and 2030, Member States around the world will conduct a
variety of efforts within the context of the four Priority Areas contained in the Sendai Framework, as a way to reduce risks with the
goal of minimizing losses due to the manifestation of hazards of natural origin. The four Priority Areas are:

Priority 1: Understanding disaster risk

Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk

Priority 3: Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience

Priority 4: Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and
reconstruction

https://www.un-spider.org/risks-and-disasters/disaster-risk-management?
fbclid=IwAR1WZCU4RTQdxViur0CSKhxw53zeCuujOZm4TVHvJDxiTd8JhoW1j0ivwKghttps://www.un-
spider.org/risks-and-disasters/disaster-risk-management?
fbclid=IwAR1WZCU4RTQdxViur0CSKhxw53zeCuujOZm4TVHvJDxiTd8JhoW1j0ivwKg