Risk reduction through community-based monitoring: the vigías of Tungurahua, Ecuador

Abstract

Since 2000, a network of volunteers known as vigías has been engaged in community-based volcano monitoring, which involves local citizens in the collection of scientific data, around volcán Tungurahua, Ecuador. This paper provides the first detailed description and analysis of this well-established initiative, drawing implications for volcanic risk reduction elsewhere. Based on 32 semi-structured interviews and other qualitative data collected in June and July 2013 with institutional actors and with vigías themselves, the paper documents the origins and development of the network, identifies factors that have sustained it, and analyses the ways in which it contributes to disaster risk reduction. Importantly, the case highlights how this community-based network performs multiple functions in reducing volcanic risk. The vigías network functions simultaneously as a source of observational data for scientists; as a communication channel for increasing community awareness, understanding of hazard processes and for enhancing preparedness; and as an early warning system for civil protection. Less tangible benefits with nonetheless material consequences include enhanced social capital -through the relationships and capabilities that are fostered -and improved trust between partners. Establishing trust-based relationships between citizens, the vigías, scientists and civil protection authorities is one important factor in the effectiveness and resilience of the network. Other factors discussed in the paper that have contributed to the longevity of the network include the motivations of the vigías, a clear and regular communication protocol, persistent volcanic activity, the efforts of key individuals, and examples of successful risk reduction attributable to the activities of the network. Lessons that can be learned about the potential of community-based monitoring for disaster risk reduction in other contexts are identified, including what the case tells us about the conditions that can affect the effectiveness of such initiatives and their resilience to changing circumstances.

The Dilemmas of Risk-Sensitive Development on a Small Volcanic Island

“…Measures that build longer-term resilience to volcanic hazards, particularly the low-intensity ones, include livelihood adaptations and alternatives. These adaptations are based on traditions and lay knowledge and monitoring of the hazards [46,47], as well as having access to-and control of-natural resources and using these in a sustainable way [38,47].…”

Fostering Participation of Local Actors in Volcanic Disaster Risk Reduction

“…This is especially necessary during long term crises characterized by shifting political, cultural and scientific landscapes (Donovan and Oppenheimer 2014). Scientific knowledge can be enhanced by the participation of local actors as citizen scientists (see Irwin 1995) and observers of volcanic activity (e.g., Stone et al 2014). 11.…”

Cultural Differences and the Importance of Trust Between Volcanologists and Partners in Volcanic Risk Mitigation

“…No, decisions must still be made, sometimes even controversial decisions, and the more transparent and democratic the scientific process, the more trust will be established. One excellent example of civic volcanology is the network of vigías around Tungurahua Volcano in Ecuador, where an early overestimation of hazard created distrust of volcanologists that had to eventually be reversed, and an important part of that reversal was inclusion of local residents as scientific observers and alerters (Stone et al 2014).…”

“…Perhaps the biggest challenge is to develop trust between the various players. More specifically, trust between scientists and those who use scientific information is essential if that information is to be accepted and used (Paton 2007;Haynes et al 2008a, b;Donovan et al 2014;Stone et al 2014). Trying to understand and accept the cultural differences among the various groups, and involving users in the scientific process whenever feasible, are the best ways I know to develop this trust.…”