The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015−2030’s (SFDRR) framing moved away from disaster risk as a natural phenomenon to the examination of the inequality and injustice at the root of human vulnerability to hazards and disasters. Yet, its achievements have not seriously challenged the long-established capitalist systems of oppression that hinder the development leading to disaster risk creation. This article is an exploratory mapping exercise of and a collective reflection on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and SFDRR indicators—and their use in measuring progress towards disaster risk reduction (DRR). We highlight that despite the rhetoric of vulnerability, the measurement of progress towards DRR remains event/hazard-centric. We argue that the measurement of disaster risk could be greatly enhanced by the integration of development data in future iterations of global DRR frameworks for action.
Post-earthquake cordons have been used after seismic events around the world. However, there is limited understanding of cordons and how contextual information such as geography, sociocultural characteristics, economy, and institutional and governance structures affects decisions and operational procedures, including aspects related to spatial and temporal attributes of cordon establishment. This research aims to fill the gap in cordon knowledge through a qualitative comparative case study of two cities: Christchurch, New Zealand (Mw 6.2 earthquake, February 2011) and L’Aquila, Italy (Mw 6.3 earthquake, 2009). Both cities suffered comprehensive damage to their city centers and had cordons established for extended periods of time. Data collection was done through purposive and snowball sampling whereby 23 key informants were interviewed in total. Research participants held expert knowledge in their roles and responsibilities, that is, council members, emergency managers, politicians, business/insurance representatives, academics, and police. Results illustrate that cordons were primarily established to ensure safety of people and to maintain security. The extent and duration of the cordons were affected by the recovery approaches taken in respective cities, that is, in Christchurch demolition was widely undertaken which supported recovery and allowed for faster removal of cordons. In contrast, authorities in L’Aquila placed high value on heritage buildings which led to recovery strategy based on preserving and restoring most of the buildings which extended the duration of cordon. Extended cordons have many similarities but evolve overtime. This evolution of cordons is affected by site-specific needs; thus, cordons should be understood and planned based on contextual realities.
Alternatives for sustained disaster risk reduction’ was published in 2010 by Francophone and Anglophone researchers as a critique on the way disasters were studied and disaster risk reduction handled in the Francophone sphere. The authors criticized the dominant Francophone approach for being heavily hazard-centred and called for more emphasis on vulnerability to understand disasters and foster disaster risk reduction – a shift that had already taken place in the Anglophone disaster literature. Twelve years later, this paper draws upon a bibliographic analysis to examine if the arguments developed in the 2010 publication have stem attention in the Francophone disaster literature.Contribution: The article finds that the shift towards the vulnerability paradigm has, to some extent, happened but took much longer in the French context than in the Spanish language and the Asian disaster literature. The article emphasises the need for a re-assessment of our practices and study of disasters, including reflections on what disasters are studied, how, by whom, and for whom. Eventually, alternatives for sustained disaster risk reduction now and in the future might include drawing upon more diverse ontologies and epistemologies that are pertinent locally, considering local people as co-researchers though participatory methods, and empowering local Francophone researchers to play a greater role in researching disasters and leading disaster risk reduction in their own localities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.