The future of disaster risk management

Lavell, Allan; Maskrey, Andrew

doi:10.1080/17477891.2014.935282

Cited by 135 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather than financing DRR properly, there is a reliance on post-crisis financing (Lavell and Maskrey 2014). A study by the Overseas Development Institute and GFDRR estimated that only 13 % of development assistance funds for disasters between 1991 and 2010 were invested in DRR in comparison to emergency response, reconstruction, and recovery (Kellett and Caravani 2013).…”

Section: Tool 4: Investing In Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Youth Participation at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Cumiskey¹,

Hoang²,

Suzuki³

et al. 2015

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tool 4: Investing In Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Youth Participation at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Cumiskey¹,

Hoang²,

Suzuki³

et al. 2015

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sin embargo tienen un impacto en los más pobres de manera desproporcionada en países ricos y pobres por igual. Sin lugar a dudas, los esfuerzos para reducir y controlar los daños y pérdidas son contrarrestados por los procesos que generan nuevos riesgos en nuestras sociedades (Lavell y Maskrey, 2014). La pregunta central es entonces: ¿Por qué sucede esto a pesar de la existencia de mayor conocimiento científico y capacidad técnica relacionada con problemas de riesgo y desastre?…”

Section: 1unclassified

Investigación Forense de Desastres. Un marco conceptual y guía para la investigación

Oliver‐Smith¹,

Alcántara-Ayala²,

Burton³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While the underlying premise for vulnerability is generally agreed on, there is a divergence on the interpretation and application (Weichselgartner 2001). This may stem from various actors' perceptions of hazards as discrete exogenous events (Lavell and Maskrey 2014), whereas vulnerability is a socially constructed continuum that hazards interact with (Weichselgartner 2001;Lewis 2014;Oliver-Smith et al 2016). Oliver-Smith et al (2016, p. 8) captures the latter position succinctly: ''disaster risk and eventual disaster are social constructs based on the presence of potentially damaging physical events but seriously and dominantly conditioned by societal perceptions, priorities, needs, demands, decisions and practices''.…”

Section: Towards a Causal Disaster Vulnerability Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The hazard paradigm continues to be dominant at international and national levels, with Lavell and Maskrey (2014) suggesting that globally many actors and institutions still equate disasters as natural as opposed to resulting from socially driven vulnerability. The conceptual difference between the hazard and vulnerability paradigms affects the way modern disaster risk reduction (DRR) is ultimately implemented.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Disaster Vulnerability in a Small Island in the Southwest Pacific: A Case Study of Emae Island, Vanuatu

Jackson

McNamara

Witt

2017

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The societal costs of disasters around the world are continuing to increase and Pacific Island countries are considered some of the most vulnerable. This is primarily due to a combination of high hazard exposure coupled with a range of social, economic, physical, and political vulnerabilities. This article contributes to the growing body of work that aims to understand the causal factors of disaster vulnerability, but with a specific focus on small island developing states. The article first develops a framework for understanding disaster vulnerability, drawing on extensive literature and the well-established Methods for the Improvement of Vulnerability in Europe (MOVE) framework, and second, applies this adapted framework using empirically-derived data from fieldwork on Emae Island, Vanuatu to provide a working understanding of the causal elements of disaster vulnerability. Drawn from a significant body of scholarship at the time, the MOVE framework was primarily developed as a heuristic tool in which disaster vulnerability is considered to be a function of exposure, susceptibility (socially, economically, physically, culturally, environmentally, institutionally), and a lack of resilience. We posit that this adapted framework for small islands should also include historical susceptibility, and we prefer livelihood resilience (as capabilities, social capital, knowledge, participation, and human rights) over lack of resilience. We maintain that understanding disaster vulnerability holistically, which is inclusive of both strengths and drawbacks, is crucial to ensure that limited resources can target the causal factors that produce vulnerability and help safeguard and improve livelihoods in both the short and long term.

show abstract

The future of disaster risk management

Cited by 135 publications

References 10 publications

Youth Participation at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Youth Participation at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction

Investigación Forense de Desastres. Un marco conceptual y guía para la investigación

A Framework for Disaster Vulnerability in a Small Island in the Southwest Pacific: A Case Study of Emae Island, Vanuatu

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About