Ecosystems play a potentially important role in sustainably reducing the risk of disaster events worldwide. Yet, to date, there are few comprehensive studies that summarize the state of knowledge of ecosystem services and functions for disaster risk reduction. This paper builds scientific evidence through a review of 529 English-language articles published between 2000 and 2019. It catalogues the extent of knowledge on, and confidence in, ecosystems in reducing disaster risk. The data demonstrate robust links and cost-effectiveness between certain ecosystems in reducing specific hazards, something that was revealed to be particularly true for the role of vegetation in the stabilization of steep slopes. However, the published research was limited in geographic distribution and scope, with a concentration on urban areas of the Global North, with insufficient relevant research on coastal, dryland and watershed areas, especially in the Global South. Many types of ecosystem can provide sustainable and multifunctional approaches to disaster risk reduction. Yet, if they are to play a greater role, more attention is needed to fill research gaps and develop performance standards.
Floods are a known natural hazard in Germany, but the amount of precipitation and ensuing high death toll and damages after the events especially from 14 to 15 July 2021 came as a surprise. Almost immediately questions about failure in the early warning chains and the effectiveness of the German response emerged, also internationally. This article presents lessons to learn and argues against a blame culture. The findings are based on comparisons with findings from previous research projects carried out in the Rhein-Erft Kreis and the city of Cologne, as well as on discussions with operational relief forces after the 2021 events. The main disaster aspects of the 2021 flood are related to issuing and understanding warnings, a lack of information and data exchange, unfolding upon a situation of an ongoing pandemic and aggravated further by critical infrastructure failure. Increasing frequencies of flash floods and other extremes due to climate change are just one side of the transformation and challenge, Germany and neighbouring countries are facing. The vulnerability paradox also heavily contributes to it; German society became increasingly vulnerable to failure due to an increased dependency on its infrastructure and emergency system, and the ensuing expectations of the public for a perfect system.
Drinking water supply is at the core of both, humanitarian action in times of crisis, as well as national policies for regular and emergency supply. In countries with a continuous water supply, the population mostly relies ingenuously on the permanent availability of tap water due to high supply standards. In case of a disruption in the drinking water infrastructure, minimum supply standards become important for emergency management during disasters. However, wider recognition of this issue is still lacking, particularly in countries facing comparably fewer disruptions. Several international agencies provide guideline values for minimum water provision standards in case of a disaster. Acknowledging that these minimum standards were developed for humanitarian assistance, it remains to be analyzed whether these standards apply to disaster management in countries with high supply standards. Based on a comprehensive literature review of scientific publications and humanitarian guidelines, as well as policies from selected countries, current processes, contents, and shortcomings of emergency water supply planning are assessed. To close the identified gaps, this paper flags potential improvements for emergency water supply planning and identifies future fields of research.
Abstract. Increased attention has lately been given to the resilience of critical infrastructure in the context of natural hazards
and disasters. The major focus therein is on the sensitivity of critical infrastructure technologies and their management
contingencies. However, strikingly little attention has been given to assessing and mitigating social vulnerabilities
towards the failure of critical infrastructure and to the development, design and implementation of minimum supply
standards in situations of major infrastructure failure. Addressing this gap and contributing to a more integrative
perspective on critical infrastructure resilience is the objective of this paper. It asks which role social vulnerability
assessments and minimum supply considerations can, should and do – or do not – play for the management and governance of
critical infrastructure failure. In its first part, the paper provides a structured review on achievements and remaining
gaps in the management of critical infrastructure and the understanding of social vulnerabilities towards disaster-related
infrastructure failures. Special attention is given to the current state of minimum supply concepts with a regional focus
on policies in Germany and the EU. In its second part, the paper then responds to the identified gaps by developing
a heuristic model on the linkages of critical infrastructure management, social vulnerability and minimum supply. This
framework helps to inform a vision of a future research agenda, which is presented in the paper's third part. Overall, the
analysis suggests that the assessment of socially differentiated vulnerabilities towards critical infrastructure failure
needs to be undertaken more stringently to inform the scientifically and politically difficult debate about minimum supply
standards and the shared responsibilities for securing them.
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.