Disaster Resilience and Sustainability: Adaptation for Sustainable Development

By Sangam Shrestha and Rajib Shaw

Disasters undermine societal well-being, causing loss of lives and damage to social and economic infrastructures. Disaster resilience is central to achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, especially in regions where extreme inequality combines with the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters.

Disaster risk reduction and resilience requires participation of wide array of stakeholders ranging from academicians to policy makers to disaster managers. Disaster Resilient Cities: Adaptation for Sustainable Development offers evidence-based, problem-solving techniques from social, natural, engineering and other disciplinary perspectives. It connects data, research, conceptual work with practical cases on disaster risk management, capturing the multi-sectoral aspects of disaster resilience, adaptation strategy and sustainability. The book links disaster risk management with sustainable development under a common umbrella, showing that effective disaster resilience strategies and practices lead to achieving broader sustainable development goals.

• Provides foundational knowledge on integrated disaster risk reduction and management to show how resilience and its associated concept such as adaptive and transformative strategies can foster sustainable development
• Brings together disaster risk reduction and resilience scientists, policy-makers and practitioners from different disciplines
• Case studies on disaster risk management from natural science, social science, engineering and other relevant disciplinary perspectives

• Language: English
• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Release date: Jun 24, 2021
• ISBN: 9780323851961

Book preview

Chapter 1: Toward sustainable development: Risk-informed and disaster-resilient development in Asia

Indrajit Pala; Rajib Shawb; Sangam Shresthac; Riyanti Djalanted; Ratu Apenisa W.C. Cavuilatia    a Disaster Preparedness, Mitigation and Management, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Khlong Nueng, Pathum Thani, Thailand

b Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Fujisawa, Japan

c Water Engineering and Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Pathum Thani, Thailand

d United Nations University-Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), Tokyo, Japan

Abstract

It has been observed that a single disaster can destroy the investment and years of work led by communities, governments, and development organizations. Therefore, to achieve the goals of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda’s central focus should lie on disaster resilience. Increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters in Asia have become a huge challenge to achieve sustainable development. Disasters undermine societal well-being by causing loss of lives, injuries, damaging social and economic infrastructure, and disrupting livelihoods. Journey toward disaster risk reduction and resilience requires the participation of a wide array of stakeholders ranging from academicians to policy makers to disaster managers. Given the multifactorial and interdependent nature of disasters, disaster risk reduction and resilience require multidisciplinary problem-solving and evidence-based techniques from natural, social, engineering, and other relevant sciences. In this regard, the main purpose of this chapter is to capture the multidisciplinary and multisectoral aspects of disaster resilience, adaptation strategy, and sustainability, and connect existing data, research, conceptual work, and practical cases on disaster risk management and its linkage with sustainable development under a common umbrella.

Keywords

Sustainability; Asia-Pacific; Resilience; Governance; SDG

Chapter outline

1Introduction

2Disasters and development

3Strengthening resilience frameworks

4Conflict impacts on resilience

5Promoting sustainability through disaster risk management

5.1First dividend

5.2Second dividend

5.3Third dividend

6Regional progress in achieving sustainable developing goals

7Outline of this book

7.1Policy, resilience, and sustainability

7.2Disaster risk science and engineering

7.3Climate hazards and resilience

7.4Socio-economic factors in disaster governance

7.5Trending issues in natural disaster risk reduction

7.6Education, capacity development, and disaster resilience

8Conclusion

References

1: Introduction

The Asia-Pacific region over the years has been subject to various major natural hazards that have experienced catastrophic disaster impacts. According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) sustainable paper report series, 41,426,991 lives have been lost resulting from the occurrence of natural hazards over a 10-year period from 2005 to 2014 in the region, representing 52% of the global total. As a consequence of hazards, an estimated 1.4 billion people have been affected, 85% of the global tally. Losses from the reported direct physical loss accumulated to over $0.7 trillion, somewhat equivalent to an average loss of $198 million a day (Benson, 2016). In spite of the innovative approaches and improvements in disaster risk management, there is still no concrete evidence of a long-term decline in human life loss in the region, although there are short-term trends to promulgate that the loss of human as a result of hazards is decreasing (Benson, 2016). However, physical losses have increased substantially primarily over the years due to increased exposure of people and property as a cascading effect of unplanned development of homes and infrastructure in hazard-prone areas with very little or without resilient disaster capacity. Trends for the future depict an increased loss over the next decades arising from development and economic expansion in high-risk areas with little consideration on resilience (Benson, 2016). As documented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, the predicted increase in frequency and intensity in certain areas as a consequence of climate change will add fuel to this inclination.

The ADB in its working paper series 41 reports that the region of Asia-Pacific faces an average annual loss of $157 billion due to natural hazards. ADB’s categorized developing member countries (DMC) on its own face annual losses of $78 billion. This is worth considering since 11 of the ADB’s DMC face average annual losses, which are equivalent to or more than 2% of their respective country GDP (Benson, 2016). The countries encompassed within the region dominate statistics related to hazards and climate change-related risks. Bangladesh, Japan, China, and the Philippines have more than half of the 100 cities most exposed to natural hazards situated in them, where 8 of the top 10 alone are situated in the Philippines. These risks have been increased particularly due to the geography that have attracted development and settlement attributed to factors such as the proximity to the coasts and rivers for easier trade access and available low-lying flat land. However, as these unprecedented rates are predicted to continue, collaborative disaster reduction efforts need to be strengthened to build resilience and coping capacity particularly for the marginalized and economically deprived inhabitants (Pal & Bhatia, 2017). As predicted by the UN Habitat and UNESCAP 2015 report, population density in urban areas of the Asia-Pacific region will account for an estimated 60% by 2040 (Thanvisitthpon, Shrestha, & Pal, 2018; UN-Habitat and UNESCAP, 2015).

2: Disasters and development

Due to its geoclimatic location, the Asia-Pacific region is the most disaster-prone region in the world. From 1970 to 2011, approximately two million people have been killed due to natural hazards accounting for 75% of the global fatality (UNESCAP, 2012). Hydrometeorological events occurring frequently have the tendency of affecting people and creating great economic loss compared with other natural hazards. As reported in the Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2012, China, the United States, Philippines, India, and Indonesia were the most hit countries by natural hazards in the 10 years prior to when the report was tabulated. For example, in 2012, disaster victims in Asia accounted for nearly 65% of the global tally, while 75% of disasters occurring were of hydrometeorological origin (Guha-Sapir, Hoyois, & Below, 2015).

Despite the destruction that natural hazards may inflict on property and the environment, disasters also create an opportunity for development in the long term (Tran, Sonak, & Shaw, 2009). Having said that, there is also a linkage between disasters and the environment. The degradation of the environment as a result of disasters impacts natural processes and thus increases vulnerability that lessens the overall resilience and challenges the existing coping strategies. The International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) term had also concluded that in order to ensure the prevention and mitigation of natural disasters, environmental protection as a component of sustainable development was necessary (Tran et al., 2009).

Globally, the changes that have been constantly made through land use are inevitably eroding the natural ecosystems that act as buffers for communities. These ultimately erode the capacity of its inhabitants to cope or recover from the onslaught of future disasters (Tran et al., 2009). As a result, these natural systems are left poorer. Several disasters in the past have showed the linkage between disaster and environment impact not only in developing countries but also in developed countries as well (Tran et al., 2009). For example, typhoons 21 and 23 that hit Japan in September and October, respectively, in 2004 caused a significant environment degradation. The waste produced by typhoon 23 from Toyooka city in the Hyogo prefecture totaled 48,000 tonnes in just a few days, an amount equivalent to one-and-a-half-year waste products. Not only did this pose a threat to the city’s management system but also had implications on the environment and the economy (Tran et al., 2009).

The impacts of the Indian Ocean 2004 tsunami also destroyed many natural ecosystems such as mangroves and coral reef habitats. Land areas that were inundated from water that breached the coastlines deteriorated the quality of soil for agricultural purposes as salt particles had settled, making it impracticable to grow food. The debris additionally brought in by the tsunami caused great pollution impacting the environment in the process (Tran et al., 2009).

Disasters are considered an important part of development since they affect the capacity of a community in terms of its preparedness and recovery (Shaw & Krishnamurthy, 2009). Integration between these two contrasting life-changing scenarios to bring about positive change is not something that can be implemented simply through a legislative policy or the forming of a department that deals with these challenges. However, there needs to be an approach shift toward support for development and environment management. Sustainable disaster risk reduction would therefore focus on the priority areas: development management, environment management, and disaster risk management (Shaw & Krishnamurthy, 2009).

There is no community that want disasters to occur but when it does, these events can create opportunities to improve development options, social conditions, infrastructure, or measures to reduce the risks and create economic opportunities (Skidmore & Toya, 2002). These can also offer low-income countries a window of opportunity to access grants that are provided focused toward the disaster risk reduction. An existing poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP) system provides the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank lending for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative. This system has also been used by most of the donors for basing their support to countries that meet the criteria (Tran et al., 2009). The PRSP system enables a country through its social and structural programs that are owned by governments through consultations with civil society and respective partners in development to reduce poverty by encouraging growth. Considering that PRSPs in the HIPC governments focus on addressing poverty, the cross-sectoral approach creates an opportunity to integrate disaster risk reduction concerns into the nationally associated poverty-development assistance context (Tran et al., 2009).

3: Strengthening resilience frameworks

The term resilience has come into prominence in recent years where there has been a paradigmatic shift in approach from the risk management rather than the crisis aspects of management in the disaster cycle. Resilience puts into perspective processes that need to be changed with the long-term objectives that can build coping capacity within a system, in disaster context, communities. This involves the ability to absorb disturbances while maintaining the same functions and at the same time allowing development.

Adaptation has the potential to change the components and relationships within a given system, which can thus have certain implications on its resilience. In perspective of reducing risks, adaptation focuses on short term and within a local context or scale. Resilience envisions the sustainability of a system on a much broader scale. For example, a sea wall that is built to preserve the coastal shore is an adaptation at the point of its construction. However, this same wall can potentially influence the morphology and increase vulnerabilities in other localities (Eakin & Lemos, 2006).

In the Asia-Pacific region, countries have over the years through the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Action (SFDRR) turned focus toward building resilience. An example of a sector implementing these changes is the agricultural sector. As a result of natural hazards particularly of hydrometeorological origins, agricultural products supply is affected during these periods. This greatly impacts the lives of farmers who are subsistence or commercially oriented, the agricultural sector, the general public, and consumers. The impact on the agricultural sector can potentially increase the poverty status of the country considering that many are unable to put food on the table. As concerns are high, certain initiatives have been taken at the local level and within the region to try and find sustainable solutions for these challenges (UNESCAP, 2017).

The IPCC 2014 assessment stated that impacts of climate change could potentially increase the risks of malnutrition and hunger by up to 20% at the end of 2050. Most of the evidences as presented by the report show a very close correlation between the climate-induced risks and hunger affecting food insecurity. As a way forward for national governments particularly those frequently faced with these disasters, the future plans and investments of the agricultural sector must have DRR and resilience mechanisms embedded into them. In addition, alternative strategies for attaining resilience in agriculture could include increasing agricultural productivity with stress-tolerant variety of crops, adjusting planting dates based on seasonal forecasts, expanding water harvesting, storage, and acquiring protection insurance schemes for farmers (Pramanik, Diwakar, Dash, Szabo, & Pal, 2020). Regionally, options between trading countries can select for trade schemes and the reduction of food variability through food reserves (UNESCAP, 2017).

For example, on a local scale, Bangladesh, despite its constant exposure to hydrometeorological hazards and large population, has made considerable progress in the span of 40 years to achieve food security (Udmale, Pal, Szabo, Pramanik, & Large, 2020). The country had invested more than $10 billion to enhance community resilience, improvement in government emergency response, river embankments strengthening, the construction of cyclone evacuation shelters and resilient homes, reduction of salt intrusion in agricultural productive areas, and the implementation of early warning and emergency management systems. In Thailand, the country experienced one of its worst droughts in decades during 2015/2016. Fortunately, impacts were vastly reduced through the science-based actionable information, which was provided through satellite observations where forecasts were produced based on the analysis of information. Availability of this forecast allowed farmers to be informed about the emerging drought due to water insufficiency (UNESCAP, 2017).

Most of the disasters that happen in the region cut across national boundaries. According to the UNESCAP Disaster Report of 2017, there are on average 86 tropical cyclones occurring in a year. Out of these, 50–60 originate from the three Asia-Pacific ocean basins. Cyclones have the tendency to pass through many countries, though it may not be making landfall on all of them but causing impacts such as torrential rain and heavy flooding. Droughts and flooding also have a similar effect of spanning across river basins beyond national borders. For example, many of the largest rivers present in the region originate from Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayas. A considerable number of people living downstream who depend on the river as livelihood are impacted during droughts or flooding even though it might be occurring upriver. The interconnectedness of this whole system increases vulnerability if hazard occurs in one part (UNESCAP, 2017).

On a regional scale, measures have also been implemented. In 2015, a joint report on the 2015/2016 El Nino impact outlook was compiled by UNESCAP and Regional Integrated Multi-Hazard Early Warning System (RIMES). The report covered national and regional sectoral-specific risk profiles along with the country risk predictions. These also enabled forecasts into the effect of El Nino risks in Pacific Island Countries. Several of the projects involve the use of satellite technology and weather indices. For river basins that cut across borders, the improvement of science and technology has enabled forecasts of 5- to 8-day lead time (UNESCAP, 2017). Despite this, most communities on average receive only one day notification to evacuate. In conjunction with UNESCAP, RIMES had therefore developed a tool utilizing the real-time satellite feed and flood modeling to allow longer lead times for flood warnings and improving means of disseminating early warning information to end-users (UNESCAP, 2017).

For the Pacific, the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) had developed in 2016 the Framework for Resilient Development Framework (FRDP). It was an approach undertaken as an integrated guide for building resilience to climate change and disasters. Since both these cut across sectors locally and regionally, the framework was designed to embed actions for the agricultural sector which most of the SIDS depend on (UNESCAP, 2017).

4: Conflict impacts on resilience

Another aspect of disaster that weakens resilience in communities is the impact of human conflict. Most of the conflicts occurring in the region have been within states. According to UNESCAP 2017 Disaster Report, the region potentially has 15 areas of interstate conflict.

Compared with natural disasters, conflicts have the tendency of lasting longer. As a consequence, states affected by conflicts find it challenging responding effectively to disasters, safeguarding people from its adverse impacts, or even empowering people and communities in risk reduction activities (UNESCAP, 2017). Disasters can also intensify the existing conflict when there is competition for natural resources, fueled with degradation and mismanagement. For example, a drought can threaten local food security, feed for livestock, and also trigger the internal displacement of people (Mahmoud, Pal, & Ahmad, 2020). At times, it also breeds ground for sustained internal disputes. A global study that had been conducted according to the UNESCAP 2017 Disaster Report states that around a quarter of conflicts that occur in ethnical marginalized countries coincide with climatic disasters. Classic examples of countries within the region include Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, and Afghanistan (UNESCAP, 2017).

Countries in the region have also displayed that disaster management processes can initiate dialog between communities since cooperation and capacity development are lesser sensitive topics to openly discuss than trying to directly resolve conflicts (UNESCAP, 2017). For example, the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 destroyed a few of the coastal areas in Aceh Province of Indonesia which had been subject to conflict. The manner in which response was conducted enabled the success of peace talks. The postdisaster recovery through the build back better concept through the reconstruction process helped address postconflict ties as well. Implications of modern techniques for rapid postdisaster needs assessment is also one of the key areas that need more attentions (Munjuluri, Pal, & Tripathi, 2019). This also reiterates a statement made in the earlier subtopic that disasters at times create opportunities. After 29 years of conflict, the separatist movement signed an agreement with the Indonesian Government in 2005. Resolving these issues at national levels through mutual understanding can potentially boost countries as conflict negatively impacts progress toward achieving sustainable development goals (UNESCAP, 2017).

5: Promoting sustainability through disaster risk management

In a report written by Thomas Tanner et al. titled The Triple Dividend of Resilience, it focuses on the three aspects that can support progress toward development goals through the multiple benefits of disaster risk management. These include avoided losses (first dividend), unlocking economic potential (second dividend), and generating development co-benefits (third dividend).

Investing in DRM has a wide span of yielding benefits both in the short and in the long term. It allows the possibility of loss reduction, saving lives and support for community to bounce back after a disaster. The system of DRM allows to plan for the future in terms of investment, which generates social, environment, and economic gains such as trade and employment or even the upgrading of road infrastructure, and improvement of sewage and water systems (Tanner et al., 2015) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

Fig. 1 Expression of the Triple Dividend of Resilience. (Modified from Tanner, T. M., Surminski, S., Wilkinson, E., Reid, R., Rentschler, J. E., & Rajput, S. (2015). The Triple Dividend of Resilience: Realising development goals through the multiple benefits of disaster risk management. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) at the World Bank and Overseas Development Institute (ODI).)

5.1: First dividend

Measures undertaken through DRM under this first category target loss and damage reduction (Tanner et al., 2015). These include the following:

•Saving lives and reducing numbers of people affected

•Reducing direct damages to infrastructure and other assets

•Reducing economic and nonmonetary losses (direct and indirect)

According to the UNESCAP (2017) report, the improvement of DRM mechanism in certain countries has reduced the number of lives lost from natural hazards. For example, in Bangladesh, due to improved preparedness and mitigation systems implemented such as robust cyclone shelters and coastal defenses with the combination of early warning systems, deaths resulting from the impacts of cyclones have reduced considerably when comparing the lives lost in the previous 1970 (TC Bhola) and 1991 (TC Gorky) cyclone to the most recent in 2007 (TC Bhola) when the report was tabulated (Tanner et al., 2015). Another classic example of DRM that needs recognition is of the success story of the state of Odisha, India. There are two cyclones that are compared: Odisha super cyclone in 1999 and cyclone Phailin in 2013 (Pal, Ghosh, & Ghosh, 2017). The cyclone triggered a long-term, strategic plan to promote DRR in all the levels of society. It raised the importance of DRR while encouraging multilevel links between different departments and across local communities. The bottom-up approach encouraged engagement from all levels of community (Mohanty, Hussain, Mishra, Kattel, & Pal, 2019). This allowed the state as a whole to be better prepared in 2013 when Cyclone Phailin struck.

The other aspect of the first dividend involves reducing damages. Planning, infrastructure, and early warning systems are the three critical areas, which have significantly boosted DRM in loss reduction. Infrastructure losses can potentially lead to business losses depending on disaster severity, which ultimately impacts the security of employment for people. For example, the Tohoku, Japan earthquake in 2011 caused the reduction of local car part production for the automobile industry. This led to lesser exports of these goods as input for cars that led to the loss of production from the Toyota Indian subsidiary. Insufficient DRM practices on infrastructure can force drop in revenue for businesses and industries. Encouraging best practices and implementing resilience strategies pave a way for sustainability (Tanner et al., 2015).

5.2: Second dividend

DRM measures that reduce the risks through this second means of unlocking economic potential include benefits such as:

•Economic gains from positive risk taking (e.g., entrepreneurship and innovation)

•Investments in productive assets (e.g., in small-scale agriculture)

•Extending planning horizons (e.g., for building up savings)

•Increase in land values after DRM investment (Tanner et al., 2015).

This focuses on a perspective that DRM has the potential of opening windows of opportunity for households, communities, private sector, and government. For example, evidence from poor households in rural settlements who depend on agriculture as a source of revenue indicates that strengthening ex ante DRM allows the households to earn more and thus improve their living standards. These four above points are interrelated and all share a common feature, which includes forward-looking planning that builds resilience irrespective of field you are predominantly engaged in whether it be risk taking in investments, business, or agriculture (Tanner et al., 2015).

5.3: Third dividend

The final dividend focuses on generating development co-benefits, which can be social, economic, or environmental. The nature of these co-benefits can vary; however, they all play significant roles in having an effective DRM design. Benefits include:

•Economic co-benefits, (e.g., flood protection supporting fisheries)

•Social co-benefits, (e.g., improved transparency or social cohesion)

•Environmental co-benefits (e.g., watershed protection) (Tanner et al., 2015).

As discussed by the author, DRM has a lot of benefits, some of which are not intentional. There are also certain examples to show that designing certain measures can help enhance DRM while delivering development opportunities. These can be viewed as linking the DRM goals through providing some of the undersupplied services such as transport networks or public space in cities. The idea of using multipurpose design in DRM infrastructure is increasingly becoming common now. According to Khan (2008), cyclone shelters that are constructed in Bangladesh have a long history of being designed for multiple uses so that it can be utilized particularly during the periods outside the cyclone months. In the Tinputz District of Papua New Guinea, resilient infrastructures designed for education and health are temporarily converted and used as shelters when a disaster hits the community.

There have also been efforts toward ecosystem-based co-benefits. It has gained attention over the years while illustrating the relationship between having a good environmental system to reduce the potential risks and ultimately reducing the losses and damages that could have been incurred (Table 1) (Environmental Resources Management (ERM), 2005). Additionally, ecosystem protection in the absence of disasters can generate other benefits such as biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration and mitigation, land erosion and degradation prevention, habitat creation, and restoration and mitigation of microclimate variability. Services offered extend not only to disaster risk reduction such as flood regulation by dams or storm surges by coastal retaining walls but also to include enhanced livelihood through increasing resource utilization, consistent water supply and food security (Jones, Hole, & Zavaleta, 2012).

Table 1

Modified from Environmental Resources Management (ERM). (2005). Natural disaster and disaster risk reduction measures. London: Department of International Development.

In a flood-prone coastal province of Vietnam, a mangrove plantation and DRM project has proven to produce significant benefits (IFRC, 2012). The project was more than a decade long, which cost around $88 million and spread over 9.462 ha, encompassing a protected area of 100 km of dyke lines benefitting 166 communities directly and indirectly. It has also been observed in Myanmar for Ayeyarwady Delta Community that to increase the community social resilience to floods, it is essential to develop a local-level conceptual approach to measure social resilience and to identify the significant factors that contribute to social resilience, particularly in the context of flood-vulnerable communities from LDC economies in East Asia (Lwin, Pal, Shrestha, & Warnitchai, 2020). Similarly, one of the World Banks projects for flood management in Colombo, Sri Lanka, illustrates that protecting these wetlands because of their importance extends beyond just the normal flood defense or natural buffers. However, these basins serve additional valuable roles such as providing livelihoods and economic buffer through rice cultivation and fishing while additionally being used as recreational areas. According to the World Bank report 2015, the potential economic gain from co-benefit services such as flood protection, natural waste water treatment, climate regulation through reduced use of air conditioning near wetland areas along with recreational activities in this area could be worth $113–$127 million if a dollar value was tagged onto these.

There are also co-benefits linked to DRM investments within the transport system. Flood embankments not only protect property from damage but also support the road infrastructure as well. This makes it resilient to floods which can allow the movement for transportation of needed supplies and equipment after a disaster. An example of this resilient system in Asia-Pacific region is the Smart Tunnel Scheme in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (Fig. 2). This engineering marvel combines flooding waters from cyclones/storms with tunnels for vehicles under the city. With the presence of flood detection systems, adequate warning and time is provided to drivers allowing evacuation without much traffic disruption (Seang, 2009).

Fig. 2

Fig. 2 Smart tunnel design in Malaysia. (Courtesy: Tanner, T. M., Surminski, S., Wilkinson, E., Reid, R., Rentschler, J. E., & Rajput, S. (2015). The Triple Dividend of Resilience: Realising development goals through the multiple benefits of disaster risk management. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) at the World Bank and Overseas Development Institute (ODI).)

In addition, there are also agricultural-oriented co-benefits. This can even be transferred to interconnected sectors such as fisheries and water sectors. In Vietnam, for example, as part of the Natural Disaster Risk Management, to sustain the development of the fisheries sector, sea port shelters were constructed. In addition to the provision of a port for local boat owners reducing its exposure to direct waves and winds, the fisheries industry now has a more improved infrastructure and additional services such as electricity, water, and other logistical requirements to meet their activities. Similarly, a World Bank Mekong Integrated Resources Management project has also gained recognition for its outcomes. What initially was designed for water resource and flood plain management led to the rehabilitation of 10 floodgates and 40 irrigation schemes in the PDR of Laos. Supplementing the flood protection benefits were reflected in an increased fish catch which provided food for communities.

6: Regional progress in achieving sustainable developing goals

The 2030 SDGs had established a mandatory to Leave no one Behind. This also remains a focus on how the Asia-Pacific region will continue to build resilience frameworks to achieve these targets. These regional frameworks are drawn from the six different yet linked agreements:

•Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030

•2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

•Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

•Agenda for Humanity

•New Urban Agenda

•Addis Ababa Action Agenda under the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (UNESCAP, 2017).

As most of the countries in the region are developing countries, resilience can be strengthened through international and regional cooperation. The six global frameworks established through the United Nations emphasize cooperation and support from international, regional, subregional, or bilateral partners to vulnerable developing countries. In Asia and the Pacific, there have been regional initiatives that have been translated to regional plans for implementation. These include the following:

•Regional road map for implementing the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific—ESCAP member states adopted this regional plan in March 2017 where DRR and resilience are identified as one priority area.

•Regional action plan—the Asian Ministerial Conference for DRR had adopted the regional plan and road for map for the implementation of Sendai framework.

•Pacific framework—the Pacific community had adopted the Pacific Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific (PFRDP) focusing on addressing climate change and DRM in the Pacific island countries.

•ASEAN declaration—adoption of a declaration on institutionalizing resilience of ASEAN, its communities and people to climate change and disasters by ASEAN member countries (UNESCAP, 2017).

There are considerable inequalities between countries which may vary in capacity such as access to information and technology or even the ability to use them. Fortunately, some of these can be shared as regional services such as early warning information particularly for transboundary hazards. With the assistance of capable UNESCAP member countries, they can assist low-capacity countries through partnerships and cooperation. The regional platforms can act as a medium for learning lessons successful in other countries. One typical example is the early warning system, which has notably enhanced warnings for countries such as India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Philippines, and Vietnam. Albay Province in the Philippines is frequently hit by typhoons. In recent years, space applications at the global level have been recognized as an important component. ESCAP’s Regional Space Applications Programme for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific (RESAP) have been supporting low-capacity countries with high risks. One of the programs under RESAP is the regional drought mechanism. This links the space applications, the policies, and ground data to provide cross-sectoral information that can be utilized to prepare for or address issues such as drought while building national capacity of developing countries. Since countries are at different stages of building resilience based on their capacity, there needs to be a guideline that enables all relevant sectors to develop and implement sustainable plans.

7: Outline of this book

7.1: Policy, resilience, and sustainability

This edited book aggregates the 33 interesting chapters from the scholars across Asia-Pacific and beyond. There are six major thematic areas the chapters have been clustered in this book: (1) Policy, Resilience, and Sustainability; (2) Disaster Risk Science and Engineering; (3) Climate hazards and Resilience; (4) Socio-Economic Factors in Disaster Governance; (5) Trending Issues in Natural Disaster Risk Reduction; and (6) Education, Capacity Development, and Disaster Resilience. The chapter named "Role of public policy in disaster risk reduction: A review by Subir Sen and others discussed on the relationship between the economic theory and public policy. There are evidences that the same government changed its perspective and subsequently related policies in different periods, based on the changes in the context or circumstances. A culture of preparedness and of risk reduction may yield better outcomes for sustainable development. There is a need for a precautionary approach, where DRR as a public policy is framed, implemented, and practiced. Rahman and others in their chapter titled Transboundary Water Risk Governance Frameworks in Deltaic Socio-Economic Regions: A Case Study of River Deltas in Bangladesh, India, and Vietnam aimed at two of the world’s most populated river deltas—the combined Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) delta in Bangladesh and India, and the Mekong (MK) delta in Vietnam, which are more vulnerable to climate-induced disasters. Given the key role of environmental issues for the sustainability of tropical deltas, as well as their wider interlinkages with other factors affecting sustainable development, such as disaster risk governance (DRG), it is critical to undertake thorough assessments of specific disaster laws and risk governance frameworks on a case-by-case basis. The chapter Framing the Determinants of Drought Vulnerability in Malawian Communities: An Exposure, Susceptibility and Capacity Perspective from Karonga District discusses on the vulnerability indicators from various pieces of literature on drought vulnerability in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and adapts the Community-Based Disaster Risk Index approach in the analysis. Satabdi Das in her chapter Disaster-resilience and sustainability in South and South East Asia: The politico-diplomatic equations of regional cooperation" discussed on the disaster-resilient development, which underscores mainstreaming concerns for climate variability. The study concentrates on the South and South-East Asian region as the case in point and throws light on the recent trends, impacts, and status of disaster risks in these regions and how they have impacted the development frameworks of the countries.

7.2: Disaster risk science and engineering

Mohan and others in the chapter "Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment Model for GIS-based Seismic Risk Study of Thiruvananthapuram City analyzes the seismic potential of Peninsular India. From the analysis of earthquake data, it can be observed that, apart from these recent major earthquakes, widespread occurrences of mild earthquakes (with Mw ≤ 3.5) also indicate that there is an ongoing seismic activity in the Peninsular India. The chapter Assessment of groundwater vulnerability in highly industrialized Noyyal basin using AHP-drastic and geographic information system by Saranya and others describes the effect of industrialization and urbanization that has led to an overall decline in water resources. The study assessed the aquifer vulnerability of the Noyyal basin by DRASTIC-AHP method. Another interesting study by Jana and others in the chapter GIS perspective hazard risk assessment—A study of Fiji Island describes that the conventional disaggregated concept of disaster risk, technology, and disaster planning has been agglomerated in this research especially in Fiji Islands. This research harmonized the use of GIS/RS to demarcate hazard zonation simultaneously reducing the risks through proper proactive planning. Study by Ghosh and others in their chapter Interannual and intra-annual comparative study of sea surface temperature distribution over the Bay of Bengal, the Arabian Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea within the time frame of 2003–18 explains that sea surface temperature (SST) is a significant attribute to study marine ecosystems, weather prediction, and atmospheric model simulation; it also provides fundamental information on the global climate system. This study has represented an attempt to examine temporal variations of sea surface temperature (SST) derived from MODIS and NOAA/NCEP Sea Surface Temperature Anomaly (SSTA) over three different oceanic bodies (the Bay of Bengal, the Arabian Sea (Yellow), and the Mediterranean Sea) in two different heat zones, during the time span of 2003–2018. The chapter Flood damage assessment with multi-temporal earth observation SAR satellite images" by Dadhich and others presents a framework of rapid estimation of flood damage using SAR earth observation satellite data. This study encompasses the three isolated geographic extents with varied environmental and climatic conditions.

7.3: Climate hazards and resilience

Parven and others explained in their chapter "Ecosystem for disaster risk reduction in Bangladesh: A case study after the cyclone ‘AILA’, Poor science-policy interaction and ambiguous information on the ecosystem role for DRR is also another reason that discourages the use of ecosystem-based DRR. The chapter Climate risk information as a basis for adaptive spatial planning: A case study from Thailand by McMillan and others found that there is information available about climate change, related hazard, exposure, and vulnerability on the Andaman Coast. Dealing with climate change requires an understanding of expected changes and an understanding of how these changes affect the urban and regional system. The chapter Characterization of meteorological droughts in the Upper Bhima Catchment of Maharashtra State, India by Udmale and others focuses on the characterization of meteorological droughts in a representative drought-prone catchment of the state—the Upper Bhima Catchment. The chapter Challenges in Main Streaming Climate Resilience in Land Use Planning: A Case Study in Malaysian Local Government by Kanasan and others explains that the impact of climate change has undoubtedly adversely impacted countries worldwide, and consequently having a profound, if not, a deep impact on humanity as well. Sankriti and others explained in the chapter Identification of drought intensity and development of drought resilience in the Rayalaseema region of Andhra Pradesh, India" that, in spatial analysis of the 3-month and 6-month SPI result data and RDI result data, the different mandals were identified as under moderate drought, normal drought, and mild drought conditions based on the intensity.

7.4: Socio-economic factors in disaster governance

The chapter "Assessing the impact of 2018 tropical rainfall and the consecutive flood-related damage for the state of Kerala, India by Parthasarathy focused on an overview of the 2018 Kerala flood that occurred on the month of August, and assessed the socio-economic vulnerability of the state due to the disaster. Roy and others in the chapter Coastal ecosystems and changing economic activities: Challenges for sustainability transition explain that coastal storms were identified as a major threat in the fisheries sector (75%), while sea water intrusion was identified as a major threat in the fisheries (95%), hospitality (55%), and agriculture (25%) sectors. The chapter Conceptualizing an integrated framework for natural hazards, insurance, and poverty nexus by Poontirakul and others explains that the significant social and economic consequences of natural hazards pose a concern on the development agenda. Thanvisitthpon in the chapter Pre- and postdisaster human settlements in flood-prone urban areas: A focus on Thailand investigates the pre- and postflood vulnerability of residents in flood-prone Ayutthaya Province of Thailand. The flood-related vulnerability includes physical, social, economic, and environment vulnerability. The chapter Estimation of district-wise livelihood vulnerability index for the four coastal states in India by Bahinipati and others attempts to estimate the LVI score for 93 districts from the four coastal Indian states, namely, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Maharashtra. The chapter Assessing the role of a rehabilitated polder in sustainable agricultural development: A case study from Bangladesh," by Mahmood and others explained that selected rehabilitated polder provided more favorable conditions to sustain existing crop agriculture, except Boro rice.

7.5: Trending issues in natural disaster risk reduction

Sharma and others in the chapter "Risk reduction and resilience build-up in railroad transport explain that the integrated resilience cum risk framework enables mitigation of risks and also enhances systems’ adaptive capacities. Ahmad and others in their chapter Salinity and the health of the poor in coastal Bangladesh explain that the policy-makers should be aware of the increased risk of saline water consumption on human health in coastal areas in order to incorporate it into their strategic plans. The chapter Assessing the impact of damage and government response towards the cyclone Gaja in Tamil Nadu, India by Devanantham and others describes that health and nutrition needs to be focused more in relief camps. The chapter 2017 Flash Flood in Bangladesh: Lessons learnt by Chakraborty and others explains that the surface runoff generated from monsoon rainfall occurring in the hills of Meghalaya state (India) flows southward through the local rivers and Haors (Bangladesh) and finally goes to the Bay of Bengal. Udayakumara and others in their chapter Effects of soil erosion on water quality: A case study from Uma Oya Catchment, Sri Lanka" explain that human-induced land-use practices without proper soil and water conservation measures are the main reason for high soil erosion rates of the study area.

7.6: Education, capacity development, and disaster resilience

The chapter "Citizen sciences for smart water solution in southwestern part of Bangladesh by Kibria and others raised the concern on new technological developments to support novel and more efficient methods for data collection and processing, visualization, and communication toward smart water solution for coastal areas of Bangladesh. Vishal in his chapter Social capital and disaster risk reduction in a periurban context explores the relevance of the concept of social capital in improving periurban water security and building resilience in periurban contexts to draw on ethnographic and action research in Gurgaon, a city in the North-West Indian state of Haryana. The chapter In pursuit of a taxonomical definition of disaster diplomacy—An empirical scientometric analysis by Papp and others examines the academic embeddedness of disaster diplomacy as an evolving discipline based on the empirical scientometric analysis. Shaikh and others in the chapter Formal and nonformal disaster education interventions in Pakistan assess the importance and demand of formal and nonformal education for disaster risk in Pakistan. Shrestha and others in the chapter Last mile communication of multi-hazard early warning—A case study on Bangladesh" attempt to map strength and weakness in the current practices of early warning communication with an emphasis on how effectively EW and required efficacy are communicated to people at the last mile of the network.

8: Conclusion

From the wide span of literature and lessons learnt from the successful and unsuccessful implementation of countries in the region, there are considerable opportunities to explore on actions that need to be undertaken to build on resilience and work toward achieving sustainable development goals. The risks involved with disaster act as a barrier in attaining these sustainability ambitions.

The Asia-Pacific region despite its exposure due to its geographical conditions is also blessed to have countries who may be considered capable in terms of information and technology, a critical element in risk reduction. Their capability enables them to support the lower-income-earning countries who do not have the capacity to access this critical information or possess technology required to improve preparedness through the international and regional frameworks that have been discussed earlier. The initiatives implemented in individual countries have been aligned from these regional and international platforms. The many disasters occurring within the region such as the Indian Ocean 2004 tsunami, 2010 Haiti earthquake, 2011 Tohoku tsunami generating earthquake, and the 2011 Thailand floods to name a few have also been triggering mechanisms for more robust and transformative governance in these countries, and also generated food for thought on the regional and international scale (Thanvisitthpon, Shrestha, Pal, Ninsawat, & Chaowiwat, 2020). Asia-Pacific region has been able to address cross-cutting sectoral complexities from agriculture, to food security, poverty, waste and water management, and natural hazards. However, there are still gaps that need to be addressed. Some countries tend to be on par in achieving the 2030 agenda, while some are struggling to cope with the challenges that have caused them to lag behind. As a region, support rendered to these states to ensure that no one is left behind will pave the way forward. The regional platforms available should also provide a common playing field where all states are given equal opportunity irrespective of country size, economic status, or capacity. Sharing the burden and cooperation among countries within the region will boost disaster resilience that can add on to the many success stories that have evolved from this thriving region ultimately achieving progress toward the sustainable development goals.

References

Benson C. Promoting sustainable development through disaster risk management: ADB sustainable development working paper series no. 41. Asian Development Bank; 2016.

Eakin H., Lemos M.C. Adaptation and the state: Latin America and the challenge of capacity-building under globalization. Global Environmental Change. 2006;16(1):7–18. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2005.10.004.

Environmental Resources Management (ERM). In: Natural disaster and disaster risk reduction measures. London: Department of International Development; 2005.

Guha-Sapir D., Hoyois P., Below R. Annual disaster statistical review 2014: The numbers and trends. 2015.

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). Case study: Mangrove plantation in Viet Nam: measuring impact and cost benefit. 2012.

Jones H.P., Hole D.G., Zavaleta E.S. Harnessing nature to help people adapt to climate change. Nature Climate Change. 2012;2(7):504–509. doi:10.1038/nclimate1463.

Khan M.S.A. Disaster preparedness for sustainable development in Bangladesh. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal. 2008;17(5):662–671. doi:10.1108/09653560810918667.

Lwin K.K., Pal I., Shrestha S., Warnitchai P. Assessing social resilience for flood-vulnerable communities in Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2020;51:101745doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101745.

Mahmoud E.M., Pal I., Ahmad M.M. Assessing public health risk factors for internally displaced households in North Darfur, Sudan. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal. 2020;doi:10.1108/DPM-04-2019-0105.

Mohanty A., Hussain M., Mishra M., Kattel D.B., Pal I. Exploring community resilience and early warning solution for flash floods, debris flow and landslides in conflict prone villages of Badakhshan, Afghanistan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2019;33:5–15. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.07.01.

Munjuluri K., Pal I., Tripathi N.K. Geo-spatial techniques for rapid post disaster needs assessment (rPDNA). International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE). 2277-38782019;8(4):doi:10.35940/ijrte.D8017.118419.

Pal I., Bhatia S. Disaster risk governance and city resilience in Asia-pacific region. In: Science and technology in disaster risk reduction in Asia: Potentials and challenges. 2017:137–159. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-812711-7.00009-2.

Pal I., Ghosh T., Ghosh C. Institutional framework and administrative systems for effective disaster risk governance—Perspectives of 2013 cyclone Phailin in India. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2017;21:350–359. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.01.002.

Pramanik M., Diwakar A.K., Dash P., Szabo S., Pal I. Conservation planning of cash crops species (Garcinia gummi-gutta) under current and future climate in the western ghats, India. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2020;doi:10.1007/s10668-020-00819-6.

Seang S.H. A case study of mitigating flooding in city center of Kuala Lumpur. In: Innovative strategies towards flood resilient cities in Asia-Pacific. Bangkok: UNESCAP; 2009:21–23.

Shaw R., Krishnamurthy R. In: Disaster management: Global challenges and local solutions. India: CRC Press; 2009.

Skidmore M., Toya H. Do natural disasters promote long-run growth?. Economic Inquiry. 2002;40(4):664–687. doi:10.1093/ei/40.4.664.

Tanner T.M., Surminski S., Wilkinson E., Reid R., Rentschler J.E., Rajput S. The Triple Dividend of Resilience: Realising development goals through the multiple benefits of disaster risk management. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) at the World Bank and Overseas Development Institute (ODI); 2015.

Thanvisitthpon N., Shrestha S., Pal I. Urban flooding and climate change: A case study of Bangkok, Thailand. Environment and Urbanization ASIA. 2018;9(1):86–100. doi:10.1177/0975425317748532.

Thanvisitthpon N., Shrestha S., Pal I., Ninsawat S., Chaowiwat W. Assessment of flood adaptive capacity of urban areas in Thailand. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2020;81:doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106363.

Tran P., Sonak S., Shaw R. Disaster, environment and development: Opportunities for integration in Asia-Pacific region. In: Shaw R., Krishnamurth R.R., eds. Disaster management: Global challenges and local solutions. India: Universities Press (India) Private Limited; 2009.

Udmale P., Pal I., Szabo S., Pramanik M., Large A. Global food security in the context of COVID-19: A scenario-based exploratory analysis. Progress in Disaster Science. 2020;doi:10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100120.

UNESCAP. Statistical yearbook for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCAP; 2012.

UNESCAP. Disaster resilience for sustainable development: Asia-Pacific disaster report. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCAP; 2017.

UN-Habitat and United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP). The state of Asian and Pacific cities 2015: Urban transformations—Shifting from quantity to quality. 2015.

Chapter 2: Role of public policy in disaster risk reduction: A review

Subir Sen; Ashish Sharma    Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India

Abstract

This chapter presents a review of the key concepts in disaster risk reduction, their relevance, and the existing disaster management policies and practices in selected developing and developed countries. Data reveal that disasters caused significant economic damages in the developing countries. The developing countries are likely to face more frequent and intense natural hazards, as they remain exposed with limited preparedness, increasing the risk to economy further. The existing disaster management policies being reactive are inadequate to reduce human and economic losses. Therefore, a policy focused on risk reduction is important and urgently needed for sustainable economic growth. This chapter in addition reveals that under uncertainty and risk, individuals’ decisions often remain irrational and inadequate, driven by biases, overconfidence, and nudge. Therefore, behavioral issues should be given due recognition while developing disaster reduction policies for better results. The study concludes with few recommendations, linking disasters with development plans, adequate ex-ante budgeting towards mitigation measures, efficient governance, and developing the insurance market in developing countries for improved outcomes.

Keywords

Public policy; Natural disaster; Disaster risk reduction; Mitigation; Behavioral biases

Chapter outline

1Introduction

2Concept of disaster risk reduction

3Relevance of disaster risk reduction policy for economy

4Disaster reduction policy and behavioral issues

5Policy prescriptions for disaster risk reduction

6Concluding remarks

References

1: Introduction

The relationship between the economic theory and public policy as a cause-and-effect relationship is a subject debated extensively at different times in distinguishable contexts by academicians and policy practitioners (Wilcox, 1960). The critics argue that the central problem in policy-making is how the logic and intellect behind the traditional economic theories be imbibed while developing the public policy (Woodbury, 2000). Economists recommend actions for consideration by the government and those involved in policy-making, after evaluation and validation of the relevance of the suggested policy with adequate data. Though the approach remains evidence-based, value judgment does matter and affect policy design to policy implementation. Different governments adopt different policy frameworks for similar problems and circumstances. There are instances where the same government changed its perspective and subsequently related policies in different periods, based on the changes in the context or circumstances (Evans, 2004). The process of policy-making is messier than it appears, and though the link between theory and evidence exists, adoption of a particular policy is even more tenuous. In practice, conflict of interests, political motives, environment, and events also dictate the good welfare intentions of economic theory to become policy. With this background, the primary objective of this paper is to analyze the existing policies towards disaster risk reduction (DRR). The secondary issues are to highlight the role of policy in fostering both prevention and postdisaster relief, and the challenges that the developing countries face with regard to addressing the international best practices.

Banking, housing, environment, trade, and disasters, among others, are few areas where economic theory complements the policy in practice, delivering visible results. Given the threat of disasters, it is timely to understand the disaster risks first and then ponder on the ways to reduce it. The reactionary approach of reliance on post-disaster response is an ineffective way of disaster management. A culture of preparedness and risk reduction may yield better outcomes for sustainable development. There is a need for a precautionary approach where DRR as a public policy is framed, implemented, and practiced. However, it is also important to highlight and consider human behavioral factors that might affect the efficiency of such policies. This chapter has five sections. The first section presents the conceptualization of DRR with a special reference to natural hazards. The second section discusses the gradual progression of the disaster risk management and the policies adopted in line with the Hyogo Framework 2005–2015 and the Sendai Framework, 2015–2030. There is a discussion in the third section on the role played by policy to reduce the impact of disasters and its limitations towards building disaster resilience. The success of any policy is dependent on the behavior of the targeted beneficiaries of the policy. The fourth section presents a brief overview of how behavioral understanding may help refine policies towards DRR. The section following the behavioral issues proposes alternative policy prescriptions to foster DRR. The last section summarizes the observations in the foregoing sections.

2: Concept of disaster risk reduction

United Nations define natural disasters as "the consequences of events triggered by natural hazards that overwhelm local response capacity and seriously affect the social and economic development of a region" (Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), 2006).

Globally around 11,918 natural catastrophes affected 7.4 billion people during the period 1970 to 2018, resulting in USD 3.2 trillion in economic damages (EM-DAT-2018; Refer Fig. 1). Floods, droughts, earthquakes, and other extreme weather events accounted for approximately 50% of damages. According to Kahn (2005), floods, earthquakes, and tropical cyclones contributed to approximately 90% of the total economic losses. These direct losses caused by natural disasters mostly affected the developing countries. During the years 1970 to 2018, 4129 extreme events alone contributed a combined economic loss of USD 1.29 trillion affecting around 1 billion individuals (EM-DAT, 2018).a With reference to natural disasters, the developed countries face 20 times lesser per-capita cost when compared with the projected estimates for the developing countries (Gilbert & Kreimer, 1999). It is important to mention that Asia witnessed 40% of all natural disasters worldwide, highest among any other region (Freeman, 2004).

Fig. 1

Fig. 1 Trends of Economic damages, Population affected Loss of lives, and Frequency of events. Source: EMDAT, 2018.

IPCC (2014) predicts that developing countries may face higher economic losses due to an increase in frequency and intensity of natural hazards. The increase in the growth rate of economic damages necessitates designing of a sound public policy towards reducing risks due to natural disasters. Policies should be proactive to reduce risks through an organized approach via policy implementation and governance. Therefore, there is emphasis on DRR and on improved governance almost simultaneously. For example, Lam and Kuipers (2019) in the context of Nepal and Walch (2019) explored adaptive governance systems in the Indian state of Odisha; Warner (2019) explored issues for Canada; Pal and Shaw (2018) and Pal and Singh (2018) presented an elaborate discussion in the developing countries context; (Guragain, Pradhan, Maharjan, & Shrestha, 2018) highlighted the problems with poor building code implementation in Nepal in the absence of effective local governance; Raju and da Costa (2018) presented a brief on governance in the SFDRR; Fernandez (2017) discussed issues of governance in Chile; Forino, von Meding, and Brewer (2015) presented the problems with governance in streamlining climate change adaptation (CCA) and DRR; Jones, Oven, Manyena, and Aryal (2014) presented a comparison of governance practices in India and Nepal considering a common natural hazard; Dash and Punia (2019) assessed the land use policy in the Indian state of Uttarakhand that faced a major flood in 2013; Pelling (2011) presented the perspective of urban governance; Djalante, Holley, and Thomalla (2011) highlighted the relevance of adaptive governance towards increasing resilience to natural hazards, to mention few. There is a requirement to appraise and analyze the standard policies and practices, and their implementation in selected developed and developing countries. An analysis of policy gaps in practice, especially for developing countries such as India, may allow one to suggest suitable policy actions for implementation.

Management of disaster has the following four essential components: preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery (Godschalk, 1991; Mileti, 1999). The disaster management policy framework guides these interrelated components. In the past three decades, the world has witnessed a remarkable progress in the designing of policy guidelines with more emphasis towards the reduction of the disaster risk (Fig. 2). Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World (United Nations, 1994) may be considered in this context as the first such guiding principle. It was the outcome of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR,b 1990–2000) and the World Conference on International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) (1994). The focus of Yokohama strategy was on response rather than DRR. The strategy emphasized coping, adaptation, and management of emergencies. However, the period 1990 to 2000 witnessed a significant economic and human loss occurred that necessitated redesigning of the DRM framework.

Fig. 2

Fig. 2 Progression of disaster risk management framework. Source: Adopted from United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR