Towards an integrated approach of disaster and environment management: A case study of Thua Thien Hue province, central Viet Nam

GIS and local knowledge in disaster management: a case study of flood risk mapping in Viet Nam

“…Standard disaster management plans are no longer issued in a top-down way; instead, each village develops its own specific plans. The study provided a potential alternative for local governments to consider as they develop disaster management programmes: currently in central Viet Nam most disaster risk reduction plans are prepared by leaders without the communities' participation, and consequently may not take community needs and interests into account and may be unfeasible to implement (Tran and Shaw, 2007).…”

Ecological knowledge and sustainable planning in Nigeria: a reflection on the Yorubas of South-Western Nigeria

“…According to Dekens 2007) cited in Mercer et al (2009), rather than neglecting indigenous knowledge has it is often the practice, empowering communities to identify the most applicable and effective indigenous knowledge and integrate this with the most applicable and effective scientific knowledge to develop new practical approaches to tackling environmental concerns and promote development at the local level (Tran and Shaw, 2007).…”

Integrated risk identification, analysis, and assessment: A dynamic household economy analysis methodology and example

“…The types of integration discussed in the literature include: bridging community risk reduction plans spatially with those of neighboring communities and upscaling with those of higher government levels (Daly et al 2010); mainstreaming risk reduction into development plans (Mitchell 2003); including all internal subcommunity vulnerable groups and involved external stakeholders (Schmuck-Widmann 2001; Cronin et al 2004; RTF-URR, UNISDR, and Kyoto University 2010; Mercer et al 2010); considering all sectors and basic societal functions (Sundnes and Birnbaum 2003;Tran and Shaw 2007); utilizing biophysical and socioeconomic approaches in multidisciplinary studies (McEntire 2004;Larsen 2006;Kelman 2010); employing quantitative and qualitative methods (Wisner et al 2004;Birkmann and Wisner 2006;Alexander, Bahnipati, and Rahman 2010); bridging across all risk factors (Louis 2007); and dynamically incorporating past, present, and future risks (Birkmann and Wisner 2006;Alexander, Bahnipati, and Rahman 2010). To address this confusion, Alexander and Mercer (2012) developed the framework in Figure 1, which incorporates all eight integration types to optimize for community risk identification, analysis, and assessment, while also allowing for evaluation and enhancement of the methodologies used to address integration.…”