Disaster risk reduction policy and practice require knowledge for informed decision making and coordinated action. Although the knowledge production and implementation processes are critical for disaster risk reduction, these issues are seldom systematically addressed in-depth in disaster studies and policy programs. While efforts and improvements have been made with regard to data and information, only limited resources are committed to improving knowledge management structures and integrating knowledge systems at different spatial levels. The recently adopted Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 addresses knowledge-related issues and provides the opportunity to highlight the critical role of knowledge in disaster risk reduction. This article presents insights into potential conceptualizations of knowledge that would advance disaster research and policy. We use cases from France to illustrate challenges of and pathways to disaster risk reduction. We suggest to further strengthen efforts that improve our understanding of the connections between disaster risk, knowledge, and learning. A better integration of multiple scales, different societal actors, various knowledge sources, and diverse disciplines into disaster risk research will increase its relevance for decision-makers in policy and practice. Well-targeted incentives and political backing will improve the coherence, coordination, and sharing of knowledge among various actors and arenas.
Given the recent development of a so-called geography of natural hazards, the notion of natural hazards has been given different definitions, which all try, not always without contradictions, to solve the dilemma posed by the hazard/ vulnerability opposition. This paper discusses the epistemological issues raised by those definitions, whose evolution is better accounted for by using a method derived from the system analysis of risk in geography. It has lead us to propose a redefinition of risk through an integrative notion of damaging. Likewise, the relevance of a posteriori phenomenological approach is noted, in spite of the numerous difficulties which arises when dealing with the damage evidences that are essential to this method.
Based on a literature review and two case studies, this article presents the difficulties inherent in the main disaster risk reduction conceptual models. The method used to highlight such evidence is to compare two programs on disaster risk reduction with mainstream conceptual models. The authors participated in these programs, which were confronted with the need to integrate contributions and insights from both earth and social sciences. Our analysis found that the existing main conceptual models were unable to do justice to disaster risk reduction needs. This finding encouraged us to critique these models. Further effort led us to present possible solutions to compensate for the shortcomings of current models while taking into account the contextualization and dynamics of phenomena, as well as grappling with the more explicit integration of hazards and hazard risk into model design.
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.