A Stakeholder Analysis of the Disaster Risk Reduction Policy Subsystem in Mozambique

Abstract

Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and magnitude of climate related hazards in many countries. Due to this, disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy has gained a lot of attention in recent years. DRR policies address complex problems that require inputs from a variety of stakeholders and hence a multi-stakeholder approach has been advocated widely. However, the practice of DRR policymaking is challenging and therefore new tools are needed to better understand the political context of DRR policymaking. This article utilizes an Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) approach to describe the political context of the DRR policy subsystem in Mozambique. Through a stakeholder analysis, the article seeks to empirically define subsystem boundaries and to identify belief systems and key actors therein. The results indicate that the actors can be divided into two advocacy coalitions, formed around extant approaches to DRR: disaster management and development. The article concludes with reflections on the applicability of an ACF approach to stakeholder analysis and as a tool for understanding policy disputes and coordination challenges in complex settings, such as DRR governance.KEY WORDS: risk policy and management, disaster risk reduction, advocacy coalition framework, stakeholder analysis, Mozambique

“Government Doesn't Have the Muscle”: State, NGOs, Local Politics, and Disaster Risk Governance in Malawi

“…Most community‐based DRR and adaptation practices in Malawi have been introduced or championed by NGO networks. The majority of DRR activities are embedded within broader adaptation projects since, as also shown by Koivisto () in neighboring Mozambique, adaptation attracts more international funding than DRR. Some of those observed during fieldwork included community mapping, participatory vulnerability and capacity assessments, simulation exercises, community‐based early warning systems, and community grain silo.…”

“…DRM and climate change management functions are often handled by different government ministries, though they often overlap (Birkmann & von Teichman, ; Ireland, ; Koivisto, ; Schipper & Pelling, ). In Malawi, climate change falls under the Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy, and Mining while DRM is under the Office of the Vice President through the Department of Disaster Management Affairs (DoDMA).…”

A user-centred design framework for disaster risk visualisation

“…The types of feedback elicited should consider the DRM context in which the visualisation will be used. End-users should be asked to act as though they are using the visualisation under the same real-world conditions as they will use the final visualisation; and designers should bear in mind this context with every design element decision When using a visualisation during the preparedness, mitigation planning or policy development phases of DRM, users are likely to be able to cross-reference with other information sources, and take time deliberating over decisions [127,128]. By contrast, during the response and early recovery stages of DRM, end-users are likely to be distressed and making quick decisions, potentially leading to different design decisions.…”

The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Lessons from Applications in African Countries

“…Chekole (2020), studying urban land administration processes in Ethiopia, finds two opposing coalitions solely consisting of administration bodies, with the government playing a broker role. Also, Chikoto-Schultz and Uzochukwu (2016), analyzing civil society organizations in Nigeria (hybrid) and Zimbabwe (authoritarian), came to the conclusion that the policy processes are In addition, they show that the "actors' landscape" is lately changing in authoritarian systems as well, where (international) NGOs and donor institutions take their position in the subsystem (see Koivisto 2014). Second, and related to the last point above, this relatively high number of international organizations potentially suggests that these organizations are actively involved in shaping policy processes in Africa.…”