Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Disaster Risk Management Strategies [1st ed. 2022] 9783030721954, 9783030721961, 3030721957

Table of contents :
Preface
Contents
Part I: Building Disaster Risk Reduction Resilience
Chapter 1: Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction
1 Introduction
2 Global Natural Disasters
2.1 Global Economic Impacts of Natural Disasters
2.2 Strategic Response to Natural Disasters
2.3 Tsunamis
2.4 Earthquakes
2.5 Thunderstorms
2.6 Tornadoes
2.7 Heat and Drought
2.8 Wildfires
2.9 Cold and Ice Storms
2.10 Volcanic Eruptions
2.11 Flooding
2.12 Pestilence and Disease
2.13 Global Climate Change
3 Disaster Risk and Resilience Complexities
4 Risk Management Standards
5 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 2: Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective
1 Introduction
2 Climate Change, Disaster Risk, Resilience, and DRR (Background and Key Terminology)
3 Coherence of Global Legal Framework for DRR
4 Guidelines as the Sendai Framework and DRR Implementation Tool (Recommendation)
5 Examples of Guidelines
5.1 “Words into Action” Guidelines
5.2 Other UNDRR Guidelines Examples
5.3 Regional and Sectoral Examples of Guidelines
6 Guidelines (Examples of Implementations)
7 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 3: Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster
1 Introduction
2 Analysis Levels
2.1 National Governance
2.2 International Governance
2.3 Public, Private, and Third Sector
3 Methodology
4 Results and Discussions
4.1 State’s Legal–Political–Administrative issues
4.2 Federal, State, and Municipal Divergences
4.3 Vulnerabilities of Social Systems
4.4 Public Information and Risk Communication Issues
4.5 Productive and Economic Impacts
4.6 Difficulty on an Integrated International Action
5 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 4: Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience
1 Introduction
2 Conceptualizing Mining Hazards
2.1 Coping with Hazards. Legislative Framework for Mining Hazard Prevention
2.2 Classification of Mining Hazards
3 Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in the Mining Areas
3.1 Conceptual Frameworks Through Case Studies Around the Globe
3.2 Conservation and Rehabilitation: A Necessary Step for Mining Risk Reduction and Resilience
4 A Framework for Community Resilience to Mining Hazards
5 Summary and Conclusions
References
Part II: Resilience Strategies
Chapter 5: Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local Risk Management
1 Introduction
2 Risks and Urban Issues
2.1 The Challenges of Climate Change and Associated Risks
2.2 Urban Risks and Vulnerability
2.3 Vulnerable Urban Areas Facing Cascading Effects
3 Urban Resilience, Between Theoretical Adequacy, and Lack of Appropriation on the Part of Local Stakeholders
3.1 Historicity of Resilience Concept
3.2 Which Definitions for Resilience in Risk Management?
3.3 Tensions Related to the Concept
4 Involving Stakeholders, a Guarantee for the Adoption and Operationalization of the Concept of Resilience
4.1 Resilience Through Collaborative Approaches
4.2 The Collaborative Process in Risk Management
4.3 Involving Local Actors for a Better Acceptance
4.4 Participation or Collaboration?
4.5 Examples of Collaborative Approaches
5 Discussion
6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 6: Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction
1 Introduction
1.1 Spatial Planning as a Natural Risk Reduction Procedure
2 Green Infrastructure: A Good Tool for Sustainable Land Use Planning
2.1 Concepts
2.2 Green Infrastructure in Europe: A Firm Commitment
2.3 Green Infrastructure: A Good Tool for Sustainable Land Use Planning. A Proposal
3 Results: Spatial Planning and Green Infrastructure to Reduce Natural Risk and Climate Change
3.1 A Good Example of Climate Change and Climate Hazards Adaption Across Land Use Planning: The Valencian Region Coastal Spatial Plan (Spain)
4 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 7: Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System
1 Introduction
2 Barriers for Creating Resilient Health Systems
3 What Does a Resilient Health System Look Like?
4 Case Study 1 – Chernobyl Health Disaster
4.1 What Happened During the Chernobyl Incident?
4.2 How Is the Chernobyl Incident a Health Disaster?
4.3 What Methods Were Used in Researching the Chernobyl Health Disaster?
4.4 What Were the Physical Health Impacts of Chernobyl’s Health Disaster?
4.5 What Were the Other Health Impacts of the Chernobyl Health Disaster?
4.6 How Does Disaster Research Inform Disaster Risk Management for Health System Resilience?
5 Case Study 2 – Democratic Republic of Congo: Health Systems, Conflict and Ebola
5.1 Current Health Situation in the DRC
5.2 The 2018 Ebola Outbreak
5.3 Ways Forward in the DRC
6 Health Systems Resilience Priorities: Sendai Framework 2015–2030 Mapping
6.1 Expected Outcome and Aim
6.2 Priorities for Action
6.3 Targets
6.4 Guiding Principles
6.4.1 International Guiding Principles
6.4.2 National Guiding Principles
6.4.3 Regional Guiding Principles
6.4.4 Local Area and Communities Guiding Principles
6.4.5 Individuals Guiding Principles
7 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 8: Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local Scales
1 Introduction
1.1 Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat Island
2 Case Study 1: Regional Impact of Infill Development on the Variation of UHI: A Case Study in South East Queensland, Australia
2.1 Data
2.2 Methods
2.3 Results
3 Case Study 2: An Application of Digital Planning to Adapt to Urban Heat
3.1 Methods
3.2 Results
4 Case Study 3: Climate Change Resilience and Outdoor User Thermal Comfort: A Case Study in Melbourne, Australia
4.1 Resilience and Thermal Adaptation
4.2 Methods
4.3 Results: Meteorological Conditions and Thermal Adaptive Behaviour and Perception
4.4 Case Study Concluding Remarks
5 Summary and Conclusion
References
Chapter 9: Combining Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation for Greater Effectiveness: Lessons from Community-Level Interventions
1 Introduction
2 Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management Defined
3 Why Should Adaptation and Disaster Risk Be Integrated?
4 The Scales of Climate and Disaster Risk
5 Key Common Strategies for Managing Disaster Risk in a Changing Climate
5.1 Details of Selected Projects
5.2 Key Common Approaches that Lead to Effective Selection of Disaster Risk and Climate Change Adaptation Strategies
5.2.1 Design-Based DRR and CCA Solutions
5.2.2 Community-Based DRR and CCA (CBDRR and Cba)
5.2.3 Ecosystem-Based DRR and CCA, or Nature-Based Solutions (Eba-DRR and Eba-CCA)
5.2.4 Land-Use Planning for DRR and CCA
5.3 Integration of Scales and Approaches for the Implementation of Long-Term Disaster Risk Adaptation Strategies
6 Implementing Successful Disaster Risk and Adaptation Strategies on the Ground
6.1 Addressing Multiple Hazards Across Temporal and Spatial Scales
6.2 Promoting Multistakeholder Collaborations for Informing and Influencing Policy
6.3 Prioritizing Community Concerns
6.4 Integrating Gender and Inequality in Disaster Risk and Adaptation Strategies
6.5 Embedding Education and Training Within Strategy Implementation
7 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 10: Human Security in Times of Climate Change: Climate Diplomacy for Integrated Action
1 Introduction
2 The Discourse on Human Security and Environmental Concerns
2.1 Redefining Human Security
2.2 Broadening Human Security and Including ‘Freedom from Hazard Impacts’
2.3 Human Security: Traditional Notions and Criticisms
3 Climate Change–Human Security Nexus and Resilience Approach
4 Human Security Implications of Hazards and Disasters
4.1 Climate Security Risks and Disasters in South Asia
5 International Efforts Towards DRR at the Policy Level
5.1 Convergences Between CCA, DRR and SDGs
5.2 SDGs, Resilience and Human Security
6 Fragmentation in DRR, CCA, SDGs and Security Frameworks
6.1 Gaps in Regional and National Frameworks in South Asia
7 Mainstreaming Human Security Approach Through Climate Diplomacy
8 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 11: Case-Based Reasoning for Disaster Management: Structure Design for Cascading Disasters Case Base
1 Introduction
2 Literature Review
3 Design of Cascading Disasters Case Pedigree
3.1 Selection Reasons of Pedigree
3.2 Basic Concepts and Functions of CDCP
3.3 CDCP Structure
3.3.1 Longitudinal Dimension of CDCP
3.3.2 Horizontal Dimension of CDCP
3.3.3 Relationship Between the Two Dimensions and Building Process
4 Benchmark Comparison
4.1 Benchmark Comparison on Case Storage Capability
4.2 Benchmark Comparison on Case Storage Requirements
5 Conclusion
References
Part III: Case Studies Strategies
Chapter 12: Building Metropolitan Manila’s Institutional Resilience in the Context of Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
1 Introduction
2 Problem Statement
3 Research Methodology
4 Study Area and Institutional Context
5 Analysis, Results, and Discussions
6 Question of Authority
7 Question of Needs
8 Question of Capacities
9 Question of Formal Protocols Versus Ethical Judgment
10 Other Issues
11 Ways Forward and Concluding Remarks
12 Clear Authority
13 Bonding Relationships
14 Binding Instruments
15 Conclusion and Further Research
References
Chapter 13: Exploring Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies in the Sahel: A Multicountry Study of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal
1 Introduction
2 Disaster Risk Reduction: A Conceptual Framework
3 An Overview of Disaster Risks in the Sahel: Impacts on Livelihoods and the Environment
4 Disaster Risk Reduction in the Sahel: National and International Strategies
5 Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies in the Sahel: A Multicountry Study of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal
5.1 Burkina Faso
5.2 Chad
5.3 Mauritania
5.4 Niger
5.5 Senegal
6 Summary and Conclusion
References
Chapter 14: Nexus Between Flooding and Cholera in Nigeria: A Review of Occurrence, Consequences, and Mitigation
1 Introduction
2 Materials and Methods
2.1 Study Area
2.2 Data Collection
3 Results and Discussion
3.1 Risk Factors Associated with Cholera
3.2 Cholera Outbreaks in Nigeria
3.3 Relationship Between Flood and Cholera
4 Conclusions
References
Chapter 15: Sustainable Smart City Planning Using Spatial Data and Risk Reduction: A Case Study on Siliguri Municipal Corporation
1 Introduction
2 Study Area
3 Database and Methodology
3.1 Data Sources
3.2 Land Use and Land Cover Classification Method
3.3 Accuracy Assessment Method
4 Conceptual Framework of Smart City and Disaster Risk
5 A Case Study in Smart Growth of Siliguri Municipal Corporation
5.1 Spatiotemporal Expansion and Growth of Siliguri Municipal Corporation
5.2 Accuracy Assessment of LULC Map
5.3 Detailed Land Cover/Land Use Mapping
6 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 16: Social Representations and Climate Change Teaching in Trainee Social Sciences Teachers
1 Introduction
2 Methodology
2.1 Design of the Research
2.2 Context and Respondents
2.3 Questionnaire, Data Analysis and Procedure
3 Results
3.1 School Training on Climate Change
3.2 Proposals to Teach Climate Change at the School
4 Discussions
5 Summary and Conclusions
References
Chapter 17: Urban Vulnerability to Extreme Heat Events and Climate Change
1 Introduction
1.1 Method
2 Heat Wave Characteristics and Consequences in Urban Areas
2.1 Characteristics of Built Environment and the Impacts on Urban System
2.2 Consequences
3 Vulnerability to Climate Change: Definition, Approaches, and Drivers
3.1 Framing Vulnerability
3.2 Components of Vulnerability
3.3 Urban Vulnerability Research
3.4 Approaches to the Study
3.5 The Factors Contributing to Urban Vulnerability
3.6 Preexisting Vulnerability
4 Strategies and Adaptation Measures
4.1 Urban Vulnerability to Lethal Heat Waves
4.1.1 Rising Temperature
4.1.2 Humidity
4.1.3 When Heat Kills
4.1.4 Impact on Local Waterways
4.2 Heat Island Reduction Strategies
5 Heat Wave Observations from India
6 Conclusion
References
Chapter 18: Flooding in Informal Communities: Residents’ Response Strategies to Flooding and Their Sustainability Implications in Old Fadama, Accra
1 Introduction
2 Theoretical Points of Entry
2.1 Reasons Why Informal Settlement Residents Live Where They Are
2.2 Social Capital and Flood Strategies
2.3 Micro-Level Strategies to Tackle Flooding in Informal Communities
2.4 The Context of Flooding in Accra
3 Study Methodology
3.1 Overview of the Study Area
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Data Sources and Collection Methods
3.4 Data Processing, Analysis, and Presentation
4 Results
4.1 Overview of Respondents in the Study Area
4.2 Choice of Location
4.3 Experiences and Knowledge of Flooding in Old Fadama
4.4 Effects of Flooding in Old Fadama
4.5 Community Responses to Flooding in Old Fadama
4.6 Flood-Induced Eviction in Old Fadama
4.7 Community Responses to Anticipated or Actual Flood-Induced Eviction in Old Fadama
5 Discussion
6 Conclusion
References
Index

Citation preview

Saeid Eslamian Faezeh Eslamian   Editors

Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience Disaster Risk Management Strategies

Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience

Saeid Eslamian  •  Faezeh Eslamian Editors

Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience Disaster Risk Management Strategies

Editors Saeid Eslamian Isfahan University of Technology Isfahan, Iran

Faezeh Eslamian McGill University Montreal, QC, Canada

ISBN 978-3-030-72195-4    ISBN 978-3-030-72196-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

Disaster risk reduction (DRR) aims to prevent new and reduce existing disaster risk, strengthening the resilience of people, systems, and approaches. These disasters mainly include climate change, displacement, urbanization, pandemics, protracted crises, and financial systems collapse. The United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB), at its 2011 Spring Session, committed to mainstreaming disaster risk reduction in the programmes and operations of the UN system through the development of a common agenda, and to raise disaster risk reduction to the highest political support. UNISDR (United Nation Office for Disaster Risk Reduction) Strategic Framework 2016–2021 is guided by supporting countries and societies in its implementation, monitoring and review of progress, the prevention of new and reduction of existing disaster risk, and strengthening resilience through successful multi-hazard disaster risk management. The Sendai Framework aims to achieve the substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods and health and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets of persons, businesses, communities and countries by 2030. The Sendai framework includes seven targets and four priorities for action: The Seven Global Targets could be summarized as follows: (a) Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030 (b) Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030 (c) Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to GDP by 2030 (d) Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure, among them health and educational facilities (e) Substantially increase the number of countries with local disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020. (f) Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and sustainable supports (g) Substantially increase the availability of the access to multi-hazard early-­ warning systems by 2030 v

vi

Preface

The Four Priorities for Action for Sendai framework are as follows: Priority 1. Understanding disaster risk Priority 2. Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk Priority 3. Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience Priority 4. Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response The book series Handbook of Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience (HD3R) attempts to fill theory and practice gaps in the Sendai Framework through publishing the six proposed books. There is a big hope that learning Primary and Secondary Audiences of HD3R helps to meet several Sendai targets and priorities for action, and book series publications on HD3R could be continued beyond publishing these six books up to 2030. For assisting the UN objectives in disaster risk reduction, the 2021 handbook series Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience (HD3R-2021) has been contracted by Springer. The handbook volume titles are given below: I-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: New Frameworks for Building Resilience to Disasters II-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Disaster Risk Management Strategies III-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Disaster and Social Aspects IV-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Disaster Economic Vulnerability and Recovery Programs V-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Climate Change and Disaster Risk Adaptation VI-Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Disaster Hydrological Resilience and Sustainability This book is part of a six-volume series on disaster risk reduction and resilience. The series aims to fill in gaps in theory and practice in the Sendai Framework, and provides additional resources, methodologies, and communication strategies to enhance the plan for action and targets proposed by the Sendai Framework. The series will appeal to a broad range of researchers, academics, students, policymakers, and practitioners in engineering, environmental science and geography, geoscience, emergency management, finance, community adaptation, atmospheric science, and information technology. The current handbook, as the second book of this series, on management strategies of disaster risk includes 20 chapters as summarized below: This volume offers the international guidelines and global standards for resilient disaster risk reduction and lessons learned from disasters, particularly COVID-19 and cholera pandemic. A resilient health system and an effective disaster risk management index are then suggested. The book further emphasizes on the urban resilience strategies with local authorities; adaptation strategies for urban heat at regional, city, and local scales; and the kinds of lessons from community-level interventions and climate change teaching for trainee social sciences teachers.

Preface

vii

Also addressed are coastal erosion, displacement, and resettlement strategies. Land use planning and green infrastructure are suggested as tools for natural hazards reduction. Human security in times of climate change and urban heat at regional, city, and local scales is discussed for integrated action. The case studies on Manila, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Nigeria, India, Spain, and Ghana are also conducted. Structure design for cascading disasters like mining and flood is presented. Finally, sustainable smart city planning using spatial data is recommended. This book teaches the reader lessons from the past to prepare them for future disasters. The mainstreaming education into disaster management to facilitate sustainable development will also be an important issue in this book. Students at all three levels (and also short courses) and instructors, lecturers, and professors are the primary audiences. The secondary audiences include industry members (earthquake industries, pollution control industry, chemical factory, construction industry, transportation industry), policymakers, consulting engineers, researchers (civil engineering, geosciences, natural geography, environmental science and engineering, hydrologic engineering, atmospheric sciences, environmental sanitation, applied sciences, statistics, information technology), national hazard centres, national weather services, IPCC members, insurance companies, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, UNDRR, UNEP, community resilience centres, emergency management agencies, and disaster risk managers. Isfahan, Iran Montreal, QC, Canada

Saeid Eslamian Faezeh Eslamian

Contents

Part I Building Disaster Risk Reduction Resilience 1 Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction ������������������������������������    3 Tehmina Khan and Saeid Eslamian 2 Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective����������������������������������������������������������������   23 Katarzyna Cichos 3 Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster������������������������������������������������������������������������   41 Leandro Torres Di Gregorio, Silvia Midori Saito, Josep Pont Vidal, Vânia Rocha, and Delton Winter de Carvalho 4 Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience������������������������������������   73 Mihaela Sima and Gabriela Adina Morosanu Part II Resilience Strategies 5 Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local Risk Management��������������������������������������  103 Charlotte Heinzlef and Damien Serre 6 Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction��������������������������������������������������������������������  129 Jorge Olcina 7 Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System����������������������  147 Myles Harris and Gina Charnley 8 Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local Scales��������������������������������������������������������������  177 Kaveh Deilami, Salman Shooshtarian, Julie Rudner, Andrew Butt, and Marco Amati

ix

x

Contents

9 Combining Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation for Greater Effectiveness: Lessons from Community-Level Interventions������������������������������������������������������������  213 Mélanie Robertson 10 Human Security in Times of Climate Change: Climate Diplomacy for Integrated Action������������������������������������������������������������  261 Dhanasree Jayaram and Radhika Ajayan 11 Case-Based Reasoning for Disaster Management: Structure Design for Cascading Disasters Case Base��������������������������������������������  295 Feng Yu and Xiangyang Li Part III Case Studies Strategies 12 Building Metropolitan Manila’s Institutional Resilience in the Context of Disaster Risk Reduction and Management������������������  317 Kristine F. Aspiras 13 Exploring Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies in the Sahel: A Multicountry Study of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  333 S. A. Igbatayo, B. Afolabi, J. D. Danladi, B. O. Awoyemi, and O. O. Babalola 14 Nexus Between Flooding and Cholera in Nigeria: A Review of Occurrence, Consequences, and Mitigation������������������������������������������  361 Olusola-Ige O. Adetoro, Ayobami Salami, Olusegun O. Awotoye, and Jeremiah Oroboade 15 Sustainable Smart City Planning Using Spatial Data and Risk Reduction: A Case Study on Siliguri Municipal Corporation ������������  379 Rukhsana, Asraful Alam, Amir Khan, and Nilanjana Ghosal 16 Social Representations and Climate Change Teaching in Trainee Social Sciences Teachers������������������������������������������������������������  399 Álvaro-Francisco Morote 17 Urban Vulnerability to Extreme Heat Events and Climate Change ��  413 Sanober Naheed and Saeid Eslamian 18 Flooding in Informal Communities: Residents’ Response Strategies to Flooding and Their Sustainability Implications in Old Fadama, Accra����������������������������������������������������������������������������������  435 Matthew Abunyewah, Seth Asare Okyere, Stephen Kofi Diko, Michihiro Kita, Michael Odei Erdiaw-Kwasie, and Thayaparan Gajendran Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  463

Part I

Building Disaster Risk Reduction Resilience

Chapter 1

Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction Tehmina Khan and Saeid Eslamian

Abstract  The main focus in this chapter is on natural disasters. There are various types of natural disasters which occur globally every year and which cause loss of human lives, economic losses, infrastructure damage as well as displacement of populations. In order to mitigate the impacts of natural disasters, immediate and timely effective response actions are required. Long-term planning is also necessary to reduce future negative impacts of natural disasters. There are global standards and practices in place to undertake emergency response actions as well as long-term planning and implementation of resilience measures for risk management and mitigation. In this chapter, various types of natural disasters and strategies for disaster response are discussed. Factors which impact disaster response are analysed. The focus is on types of natural disasters which create material impacts globally and the strategies for disaster risk reduction. Keywords  Natural disasters · Disaster risks · Risk reduction and mitigation · Strategies · Global Standards

1  Introduction United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) defines a disaster as:

T. Khan (*) RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] S. Eslamian Department of Water Engineering, College of Agriculture, Center of Excellence in Risk Management and Natural Hazards, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_1

3

4

T. Khan and S. Eslamian A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic, or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources. (UNISDR, 2009).

A natural disaster needs to be considered from the above perspective of human, material, economic, or environmental losses as a result of the event. Adequate availability of resources is a critical element; without proper resources, emergency and crisis management as well as long-term resilience planning is hard to achieve. A critical element of strategic planning for emergency and crisis management in the short-term and long-term resilience building is disaster risk reduction. Disaster risk reduction involves transformation to achieve preservation of the state of a system (Alexander, 2013). Strength of a human society is defined as its ability to devise ways to resist disaster and maintain integrity while adapting to circumstances produced by the disaster to lessen the associated impacts (Alexander, 2012). In the context of disaster risk reduction, resilience is specifically considered as “the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions” (UNISDR, 2009). As implied in this definition, to achieve preservation and restoration, efficient and timely allocation of available resources is critical. At a global scale, the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) aims for reduction of disaster risk and losses (UNDRR, 2019), human, material, economic, and/or environmental losses. According to UNDRR, Disaster Risk Reduction aims to mitigate new and existing disaster risks and aims to increase resilience of societies, systems, and processes. The key areas to which disaster reduction relates to include climate change, urbanisation, displacement, pandemics, and protracted crises; situations in which a large portion of population faces heightened risks of death, disease, or breakdown of livelihoods; as well as financial systems collapses (UNDRR, 2019). UNDRR operates to implement the SENDAI Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030). The framework’s main aim is to achieve major reduction of disaster risk and associated loss of lives, livelihoods, negative health impacts, and negative impacts on economic, physical, social, cultural, and environmental assets at various societal levels ranging from individuals to businesses, communities, and countries (UNDRR, 2019). As far as global disasters are concerned, they have been categorised into human-­ caused and natural disasters which impact thousands of people every year. Human-­ caused disasters are subclassified as industrial accidents, shootings, acts of terrorism, and incidents of mass violence. Other incidents of mass trauma include infectious disease outbreaks and community unrest (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2019). Natural disasters include tornadoes and severe storms, hurricanes and tropical storms, floods, wildfires, earthquakes, and drought (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2019). Natural Disasters Association has provided

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

5

further categories of natural disasters which include tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes, cold and ice storms, avalanches, snow and hailstorms, landslides, pestilence and disease, and global warming. This classification is used as the underlying premise of covering various forms of natural disasters. Thus, this chapter focuses on the following global natural disasters, their impacts, and risk reduction strategies: tsunamis, earthquakes, thunderstorms, tornadoes, heat and drought, wildfires, ice storms, volcanic eruptions, flooding, infectious disease outbreaks, and global warming. The focus is on natural disasters as global climate change is resulting in increased frequency of natural disaster events, and the multiple impacts of natural disasters are far more than those of human caused disasters. The aim in this chapter is to present a global picture of the types of natural disaster risks faced recently. Risk reduction strategies implemented are also discussed by going through examples of the various types of actions undertaken to mitigate the impacts of natural disaster risks. Factors which can negatively impact efficient disaster risk management are also discussed. A key limitation of this study is a contextual focus as this chapter provides an overview rather than deep analyses of specific disaster contexts. Pagett and Eslamian (2021) will discuss in depth the principles behind disaster risks and resilience, in the urban context in an upcoming volume. Thus, principles are not covered in this chapter.

2  Global Natural Disasters According to Ritchie and Roser (2019), the number of natural disasters has shown an increasing trend since 1900, with the highest level of natural disasters occurring in 2005. The highest occurring natural disaster globally has been flooding, followed by extreme weather, extreme temperatures, earthquakes, drought, landslides, wildfires, and volcanic activity. At the same time, global annual deaths from all-natural disasters have been decreasing. Earthquakes have caused most deaths, followed by extreme temperatures in this decade. Wildfires have also remained a cause of fatalities consistently in the last two decades. Deaths from natural disasters worldwide have ranged from 30,000 plus to less than 10,000 since 2011 (EM-DAT, 2019). Although fatalities from natural disasters have decreased, other impacts of natural disasters remain. These impacts include injuries, homelessness, and international and internal displacement (where an individual is forced to leave the dwelling but remains within the country’s borders). Numbers of people who are currently internationally displaced from natural disasters are in the millions (The World Bank, 2019). Economic costs from natural disasters range in the billions and are currently around the 100 billion US$ per annum globally (EM-DAT, 2019).

6

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

2.1  Global Economic Impacts of Natural Disasters Economic impacts from natural disasters can extend beyond local and national impacts. The main reason for this is the potential for chain reactions to countries where the disaster has not occurred (AON, 2015). The main direct impacts on businesses and individuals in affected areas are uninsured losses. Uninsured losses can be multiple times more than insured losses. Global supply chains can be negatively impacted by a natural disaster as well. For example, the Thai floods in 2011 caused a major shortage of computer hard drives, which increased prices of hard drives substantially (AON, 2015).

2.2  Strategic Response to Natural Disasters The only strategic response to reducing risks from natural disasters relates to the recovery stage. Thus, the focus must be on resilience in the planning and recovery stages. Significant change usually occurs as a resilience strategy in the recovery phase of a major disaster in the following areas: socioeconomic, organisational, political, and environmental (Birkmann & Fernando, 2008; UNISDR, 2009). Typically, internationally, the approach is to gather data on loss inventories, and the focus is on emergency relief activities (Relief Web, 2019). Postrecovery evaluations (setting and comparing with benchmarks) relating to relief and recovery, leading towards positive changes in policy or practices, are not usually undertaken (Birkmann & Fernando, 2008). Although they are a critical resilience strategy, they are rarely an element of global environmental risk management (van Eijndhoven et al., 2001). Economically advanced countries, which have adequate resources to undertake such evaluations, are able to implement this critical step. These evaluations are important to create changes in future approaches to risk management and mitigation as well as to implement changes in recovery and reconstruction post disaster, to avoid repetition of mistakes that might have had multiple negative impacts previously. Factors which need to be considered include not only resource allocations but also quality of recovery which includes disaster risk reduction. Birkmann and Fernando (2008) have established a direct connection between quality of impacts and quality of change. Quality of impact refers to an event which would have direct impacts created by the nature (severity, exposure, and susceptibility) of the hazard and existing vulnerabilities. Effects would include damage to health and livelihoods with temporary or permanent loss. Quality of change, on the other hand, is a response occurrence because of the hazard event. It is mediated through reflexive and reflective actions (unintended and/ or intended/ planned actions). Quality of change is complex and is impacted by numerous factors; it creates medium- and long-term consequences. Change can be at various levels, including social, political, structural, and procedural levels. It is important for businesses, regardless of their size, to have a disaster recovery and business continuity plan in place in case it is hit by a disaster.

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

7

Different classifications of natural disasters and strategies for responding to each type are covered below.

2.3  Tsunamis A tsunami occurs when a large body of water is displaced, from seismic activity, landslides, or underwater explosions. Damage from tsunamis can range from little to great devastation. Although a tsunami can occur anywhere, countries around the Pacific Ocean are most susceptible to tsunamis. The key predisaster strategy is the establishment of warning systems including warning sirens and evacuation routes to minimise loss of lives from tsunamis. As far as tsunami-caused property damage is concerned, risk mitigation strategies are much harder to implement. The main reason for this is due to the potential for continued damage during surge and recession of the tsunami.

2.4  Earthquakes An earthquake causes the Earth’s surface to shake or vibrate. Fault lines or plate boundaries are common locations of earthquakes. Earth’s tectonic plates include the African Plate, Antarctic Plate, Australian Plate, Eurasian Plate, North American Plate, South American Plate, and Pacific Plate. Earthquakes happen without warning. Earthquake response can vary between countries. For example, in North America, seismically reinforced and state-of-the-­art emergency operations centres have been established. Web-based technologies are also in place for situational awareness. Legislation such as in California has required clear incident command system during emergencies. In California, there is a five-level emergency response system in place which facilitates flow of emergency information and resources within and between relevant organisations (Raths, 2013). Social media including twitter has been established to relay critical information as well as text-based services are set in place to communicate information (Raths, 2013). A group which brings together community agencies has been established for coherent emergency response. A utilities association has also been established which can work together to provide energy, telecommunications, water, and gas in case of an earthquake in San Francisco. Plans for infrastructure rebuilding have also been established based on detailed research to identify best practices in the postdisaster recovery stage (Raths, 2013). Countries that are not so advanced with the establishment of planned systems, for example, Nepal, experience international civil society involvement in the recovery phase. For example, World Vision, through its innovation lab, in collaboration with Field Ready (based in the United States), developed a pipe through 3D printing

8

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

which was used to repair water supply systems damaged in Nepal’s 2015 earthquake (World Vision, 2019).

2.5  Thunderstorms Thunderstorms are caused by moist, warm air. Cool air moving downwards and warm air moving upwards create energy and electricity which result in lightning and thunder. Severe thunderstorms cause global economic loss of more than 10 billion US$ per year as a result of damage to property and agriculture as well as loss of lives (Allen, 2018). Key phenomena associated with thunderstorms include large hail, strong winds, and tornadoes, and severe thunderstorms are classified as a global threat. Research on the impact of global climate change on the severity of thunderstorms is still in infancy, but the impact of climate change, especially global warming on active hail periods, has been linked with warming climates and increasing temperatures, while decreasing hail frequencies have been linked with increasing melting level and changes to rising freezing altitude (Allen, 2018; Dessens et al., 2015). Global responses to thunderstorms include communications from national weather services which provide warnings a few hours before the thunderstorm. The onus is mostly on households to develop and implement a disaster plan. This plan needs to include assessment of risk, identification of a safe place in the dwelling which does not have windows, and skylights or glass doors to take refuge during the thunderstorm. Lightning is a major hazard associated with a thunderstorm, and the key recommendation communicated is to assume a crouch position on the ground with minimal contact with the ground. First aid training is also recommended as important response strategy to minimise risk exposure (National Disaster Education Coalition, 1999). Typhoons (a tropical cyclone) which are more prevalent in Asian countries have major impacts on business operations, bringing them to a halt and cause fatalities (Needham, 2018). In most Asian regions, the predisaster focus is primarily on evacuation, and postdisaster focus is on disaster assessment and recovery. On the other hand, in countries such as Australia, there is a continuous process linked to the event (immediate recovery stage) and long-term strategic detailed data analyses, risk assessments, and planning. Technological tools such as wind field modelling and community vulnerability assessments which include impacts on housing, demographics, and infrastructure are undertaken to provide a comprehensive risk assessment which includes possible casualties and economic losses (Geoscience Australia, 2009). The goal of such assessments is to mitigate negative impacts including fatalities.

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

9

2.6  Tornadoes According to Natural Disasters Association, tornadoes are violently rotating columns of air which come in contact with ground. They are caused by warm humid air streams combining with cold dry air streams at high speed. The more susceptible areas globally to tornadoes include Tornado Alley, comprising of Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, and Nebraska in the United States, Great Britain as well as Bangladesh and Argentina. The degree of damage caused depends on the severity of the tornado and ranges from light to incredible. Impact of climate change on tornadoes is currently being researched, but there are complexities which need to be addressed before impacts of global climate change on tornadoes can be established. These complexities include the lack of understanding of the impact of global warming on atmospheric instability and wind shear (Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2020). Also, it is difficult to undertake simulations of tornadoes by climate modelling. Fatalities from tornadoes in the United States have decreased due to advance warnings of extreme weather conditions; economic losses from tornadoes still end up being billions of dollars, up to 30 billion US$ per annum (Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2020). Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions (2020) has identified the following disaster risk reduction strategies in the case of tornadoes: More stringent building codes in tornado susceptible areas. Continued research on tornadoes and the impact of global climate change. Timely issuing of warnings and following of protocols in case of emergency. Protocols have been identified as moving out of a vehicle or mobile house to a basement or safe room or laying on the ground in a ditch or hollow. In a building, staying away from doors and windows is recommended.

2.7  Heat and Drought A drought is a period of unexpected rainfall deficit which causes a shortfall of water. Drought effects can occur slowly, and impacts include lack of drinking water, loss of vegetation and farmland as well as loss of livestock and human lives due to famine. There are two types of droughts: meteorological droughts which relate to decrease in precipitation in a region, and hydrological drought which relates to the impact of decreased precipitation on streamflow, soil moisture, reservoir and lake levels, and groundwater recharge (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2019). Agricultural droughts occur when available water supplies are not able to meet the crop water demands (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2019). Climate change has a strong impact on creating worse drought conditions as increase in frequency and intensity of hot days causes decline in cool seasonal rainfall (Climate Council of Australia Ltd., 2018). Key impacts of droughts include

10

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

fatalities, impact on nutrition, infectious diseases, forest fires, negative impacts on mental health, negative impact on water supplies, decline in aquatic biodiversity, loss of vegetation and soil, as well as negative impacts on economies (Climate Council of Australia Ltd., 2018). As far as strategic responses to droughts are concerned, they focus on short-term measures including temporary water conservation, water use efficiency improvements, water transfers, and increased use of groundwater (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2019). As for global standards aimed at long-term drought risk reduction, the following strategies are proposed: Better monitoring and measuring of water supplies at national levels. Reduction in indoor water use through efficient appliances, technologies, and behaviours. Reduction in outdoor water use by implementing drought-tolerant landscaping and more water-efficient irrigation technologies. Increased recycling and reusing of water, capturing, and using of storm water, grey and waste water. More strategic use of ground water (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2019). People living in economically developing regions are most susceptible to drought impacts. Various strategies have been adopted to minimise the negative impacts of droughts (Strategies provided by Practical Action, 2019). These include rainwater catchment tanks where water is collected from roofs of various structures, drip irrigation which includes the use of a water harvesting tank, and the connection of hoses through buckets which allow water to be dripped on the roots of plants. Treadle pump irrigation uses pedal power to get water from wells. Sand dams require the construction of a deep trench in a valley or stream which reaches the bed rock. A wall is built across the river channels to trap and hold back the sand brought by a river during flooding. The sand stores water and filters the water to render it fit for drinking.

2.8  Wildfires Wildfires occur when vegetation causes uncontrolled fire. Droughts and high temperatures have a major role to play in causing wildfires. Increasing wildfires have been linked with climate change (Marlon et al., 2012). Risk of wildfires depends on a range of factors including temperature, soil moisture, and vegetation which can act as fuel (Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2020). Climatic changes which include warmer, drier conditions, drought, and longer fire seasons are potentially increasing risk of wildfires (Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2020). Key strategies which can be applied globally to reduce risks from wildfires include fire-resistant buildings and perimeter clearing around the building (Crawford, 2016). From a home protection perspective, Home Ignition Zone (HIZ) is an important strategic consideration. HIZ focuses on the use of fire-resistant materials, correct design and maintenance of the structure, and the creation of

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

11

resilient landscapes (Calkin et al., 2014). The use of big data analytical technology is becoming prevalent to understand and implement effective risk identification and management strategies.

2.9  Cold and Ice Storms These occur due to freezing rain, and when the rain comes in contact with a surface, it creates a smooth slippery surface. Increasing occurrences of ice storms in North America are being attributed to warm air masses, but detailed research on the impact of climate change on ice storms is required (Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, 2016). Advanced data analytics including modelling of winter storm risk encompasses numerical weather modelling and statistical analyses of historical events. It is being used to understand implications regarding risk sharing through insurance (RMS, 2019). Key societal impacts identified which need to be addressed through risk management include power outages, secondary effects including carbon monoxide poisoning and fire, lack of heat, transportation disruptions, closing of businesses and schools as well as economic losses (Call, 2010). Measures which can be taken to reduce electricity disruptions include trimming of trees away from power lines, burying electricity lines underground, and clearer communications when power outages occur regarding restoration estimates (Call, 2010).

2.10  Volcanic Eruptions Volcanic eruptions occur due to magma penetration through weaknesses in the Earth’s surface. At present, there are 500 active volcanoes globally. In one year, 10% of these erupt. As far as climate change is concerned, volcanic eruptions release toxic gases and solids which can stay in the stratosphere for a month (Wolfe, 2019). Large-scale volcanic activity can influence climate patterns for years, and sulphuric acid can stay in the stratosphere for years (Wolfe, 2019). Major eruptions also scatter solar radiation which can last for a few years. Anthropogenic emissions can make consequences of volcanic eruptions on the global climate system worse due to increase in chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) (Stenchikov et al., 1998). Natural Disasters Association has clarified that fatalities from volcanic eruptions occur mostly due to indirect impacts and hazards such as famine due to crop damage and mudflows. Most recent volcanic eruption in Democratic Republic of Congo in 2002 destroyed 15% of the City of Goma and killed 150 people; it left 75% of the population displaced. Key global standards for disaster response in this case include critical information communications through radio or TV, preparedness for evacuation, avoidance of downwind and downstream from the erupted volcano, and seeking shelter indoors. After the eruption comes the rebuilding phase as ash fall can cause major property damage (Habitat for Humanity International, 2019).

12

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

According to Pan American Health Organisation (PAHO) (2019), societal impacts of volcanic eruptions can include risk of food and water contamination, fatalities or harm to livestock, damage to crops and interruption to utilities, communications and transport as well as access to health services.

2.11  Flooding According to Union of Concerned Scientists (2019), average global sea levels have increased by 8 inches since 1880 and are rising by a higher rate in the Gulf of Mexico. Natural Disasters Association has described flooding as the most common environmental hazard. There are two types of floods: river (when a river over spills its banks) or coastal (low-lying land being flooded by seawater). Flash floods occur due to increasing water levels from high rainfall intensity, duration, due to a surface that supports flash flooding and features of the area which promote flash flooding. Storm floods occur in coastal areas due to low atmospheric pressure, high tides, and storm surges. Dams and levees can fail as a result if flood intensity is more than anticipated. Economic damage from floods until 2016 has ranged between 40 billion US$ and a lowest figure of 11.6 billion US$ (Statistica, 2019). Other damages caused by flooding include fatalities, displacement, property damage, and interruptions to critical processes including business operations. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (2019) body in the United States has developed a detailed management strategy which includes these factors as key steps for flood risk management: Insurance coverage. Building of levees and floodwalls which are human made structures used to contain, control, or divert water flow. Implementation of a continuous process to analyse, assess, and develop mitigation strategies to decrease flood risk. Estimations of frequency and magnitude. Fragility analysis of levee and other systems. Risk assessment of levee breach and inundation assessment. Consequences and impacts analyses development. Use of modern technology for data analysis and computational mapping (National Research Council, 2013). Although flood warning systems have been developed and used in economically developing and developed countries, losses from floods and flood impacts continue to be more pronounced in developing countries (Keoduangsine & Goodwin, 2012). The main reasons for greater impacts of flooding in economically developing countries include lack of use of advanced technologies in the development and implementation of flood management strategies including levees, flood warning systems, and evacuation procedures. Flood damage continues to remain as a serious issue for countries like India, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Laos which have been identified as most at risk of river floods (Luo et al., 2015).

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

13

2.12  Pestilence and Disease According to Natural Disasters Association, six diseases are responsible for 90% of infection-related deaths in people under 44 years of age. These diseases are AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis (TB), measles, diarrhoeal diseases, and respiratory illnesses. More than 40 million people are impacted by human immunodeficiency virus, and Sub-Saharan African region is the most impacted. HIV infections are also prevalent in Europe and Asia with four million people diagnosed in India. More than two million people succumb to Malaria every year with 90% of cases in Sub-Saharan Africa. TB fatalities are more than three million per year, while there are 30 million cases of measles per year, and one million children die from measles every year. Key steps which have been undertaken globally to address infectious diseases which impact at such massive scale include the development of a Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria (Nakatani, 2016). Also, the development of the International Health Regulations (IHR) Public Health Treaty in 2005. This Treaty requires countries to report unusual health related events. There has been an increase in the amount of funding and the number of funding bodies interested in providing budgets to address diseases. As a result of these efforts and resource allocations, AIDS-related deaths have decreased by 30%, TB-related mortalities have decreased by more than 40%, and there has been a dramatic positive reduction in child mortality from infectious diseases (Nakatani, 2016). World Health Assembly (WHO) has involved multiple stakeholders in the implementation of global health strategies which have included vaccination programs, resource mobilisation, and investment planning (Nakatani, 2016).

2.13  Global Climate Change Natural Disasters Association has identified global warming as a threat in its own right. As identified for each type of disaster, global climate change attributed to anthropogenic activities has the potential to create change in occurrence and or impact of natural disasters. The increase in Earth’s temperature by 0.6 degrees Celsius since the middle of the previous century has been established. Carbon dioxide and its equivalents are the key causes of increase in the Earth’s temperature, and they are attributable to fossil fuels consumption, deforestation as well as agricultural activities. The two serious impacts of global warming are increase in Earth’s temperatures and increase in sea levels (National Disasters Association, 2019). These two factors have a direct impact on increased risks of disasters such as storms, heat and drought, tsunamis, and flooding. United Nations is a key player in promoting international cooperation on climate change. Its Framework Convention on Climate Change has the key objective to

14

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

stabilise greenhouse gas emissions to prevent human interference with the climate system (Australian Government, 2019). Various international agreements such as the Paris Agreement have been ratified to give them the status of international law. Under the Paris Agreement, signatory countries have agreed to limit average increase in global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius. Countries have also agreed to undertake national strategies to reduce carbon emissions, promote transparency and accountability around action, and monitor progress as well as implement resilience strategies (Australian Government, 2019). International carbon market rules have been finalised at the end of 2019 (Australian Government, 2019). The Kyoto Protocol ratification requires developed countries signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Other international agreements to reduce emissions include the Cancun Agreements as well as International Civil Aviation and Maritime Organization agreements to reduce emissions through fuel efficiency and adoption of alternative fuels. Use of technologies to influence carbon emissions reduction is also being considered at national levels in the form of smart grids, off grid access to electricity, carbon capture and storage, sustainable biofuels, and use of solar power, clean energy, and alternative fuels (Australian Government, 2019). The key initiatives that are being used to promote global action to address climate change include the following: International Solar Alliance to promote wider adoption of solar technology especially in countries with high levels of solar energy. Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change which supports the development of assessment and impact reports which feed into the Paris Agreement’s global reporting requirements on initiatives and action to tackle global climate change. International Partnership for Blue Carbon raises awareness about coastal blue carbon systems and aims to strengthen cooperation between governments and research institutions to protect and restore the ecosystems. International Coral Reef Initiative has a focus on world’s coral reefs resilience. The Coral Triangle Initiative focuses on Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, and Solomon Islands and addresses issue relating to food security, climate change, and marine biodiversity (Australian Government, 2019).

3  Disaster Risk and Resilience Complexities In the above section, various types of natural disasters and the risks that they pose are covered, as well as strategies for disaster risk management. In this section, factors which can interfere with efficient risk management are discussed. Promotion of accountabilities for effective risk management especially from governments needs to be considered and implemented to mitigate the effects of natural disaster occurrences. Resilience as a strategy for disaster risk reduction would be impacted by multiple societal and political factors which can in some circumstances exacerbate rather

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

15

than reduce disaster risk event impacts. Drury et al. (2005) have found foreign policy and domestic factors as overriding determinants for disaster assistance allocations. Political considerations impact both the decision to grant disaster assistance as the well as the amount of aid for disaster recovery. Political considerations may also include the generating of favourable political contexts from the disaster, and the disaster might be used as a window of opportunity (van Eijndhoven et al. (2001). Political discourse which might emerge may end up being symbolic and superficial without backing the case for more meaningful involvement in disaster recovery as promoted by scientific organisations. In other instances, for example in the case of Sri Lanka, with resource allocations post disaster (Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004), there might be increased social tensions in the disaster response stage as well as risk of intensification of armed conflict (Birkmann & Fernando, 2008). In spite of droughts being a major threat from global climate change, international agencies are deferring risk management of droughts and droughts being declared to national governments (Pearce, 2015). An international UN body, to provide global drought early warning system, has not been established so far. Forecasting mechanisms which should consider the impacts of droughts on local water and food supplies are extremely unreliable, especially in countries most at risk (Pearce, 2015). There have been criticisms of drought response as being delayed. There have also been assertions of agricultural mismanagement which has failed to prevent crop and livestock loss (Pearce, 2015). Drought declaration itself is politicised; as in some countries, it is considered shameful to declare. International help is resisted. Nevertheless, droughts can have serious social implications such as the civil war in Syria and mass exodus from the country (Kelly, 2015). Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Disaster Risk Resilience Complexities COVID-19 is a current pandemic which is posing as a material risk to health systems around the globe (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, CRED, 2020). So far there have been more than 40 million cases and more than one million deaths from COVID-19 (Centre for Systems and Engineering, John Hopkins University, 2020). COVID-19 has caused multiple negative social and economic impacts for individuals, households, firms, and institutions (Rondeau et al., 2020). Trillions of dollars of emergency fiscal amounts have been deployed; global output of emerging economies is contracting, and there is potential risk of hundreds of millions more being pushed into poverty (Rondeau et al., 2020). CRED (2020) has identified potential complexities associated with COVID-19 restrictive measures including social distancing and wearing of face masks and management of a major natural disaster (which has not occurred so far since the progression of COVID-19) such as heat waves. There is a strong suggestion that intersecting risks’ management is going to be much more difficult in the case of dealing with the pandemic and a major natural disaster. Preventative measures against the spread of COVID-19 can act in direct contradiction to emergency and recovery measures which are required to deal with a natural disaster in the short term. Long-term resilience building is also potentially at risk due to financial constraints.

16

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

As Rondeau et al. (2020) have pointed out, there are too many uncertainties associated with COVID-19. Combined with a major natural disaster occurrence, it has the potential to pose as a major challenge to risk management. Even advanced risk management modelling assumptions no longer hold in the current COVID-19 environment. The complexities associated with multiple factors at micro and macro levels, including changed behaviours and lack of appropriate climate change-related policies, could mean lack of a clear course of action for crisis risk management and long-term resilience planning when facing intersecting risks associated with COVID-19 and a major natural disaster.

4  Risk Management Standards Risk management standards use tools, indicators, and language that can pool resources from diverse stakeholders and effectively ground both business strategies and policy-making objectives. All organisations deal with risk in the same way: by identifying it, analysing it, and then evaluating whether the risk should be modified by risk treatment. Risk management standards are a useful tool in representing and logically organising this process in a way that makes decision-making open to inputs from different stakeholders, and accountable to the public, as illustrated in Fig. 1.1 (UNECE, 2015). Throughout the process of managing risk, communication and consultation with stakeholders remain essential, as are the constant monitoring and reviewing of the risks and controls that are in place to ensure that no further risk treatment is required. These two activities inform each of the steps of the risk management process. After the context is set, and risks have been identified, the next step of the process is the analysis and evaluation of risks, so that the organisation can decide how to prioritise previously identified risks so that the most important are addressed first, which is accomplished by comparing them all with one another. Two elements of the concept of risk can be quantified as estimates: likelihood and consequences. Likelihood can be quantified in terms of probability, and consequences for business are often expressed as monetary or time losses, whereas for a regulator, the consequences could be economic loss, ecological damage, or deterioration of public health. Afterwards, the expected value of a risk can be calculated by multiplying probability and consequences, which permits to rank all the risk (UNECE, 2015). In case risks cannot be quantitatively assessed, building a consequence/probability matrix is the most simple and commonly used tool for prioritising risks. To apply this method, an organisation develops customised scales for potential consequences and probabilities of events and a matrix that combines the two. Probability may be graded as “very low”, “low”, “medium”, and “high or very high”. Similarly, the whole range of consequences can be graded as having “very low”, “low”, “medium”, “high”, and “very high” impact.

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

17

Fig. 1.1  IEC/ISO 31010 on “risk management” (UNECE, 2015)

Once the risks have been ranked by both probability and consequences, the organisation needs to rank every combination of probability and consequences (such as “high probability and high impact” – a critical risk), which will further help organisations and policy-makers decide if “risk treatment” is needed in order to satisfy the organisation’s own risk criteria (UNECE, 2015) (Table 1.1). In all organisations, no matter whether they are a business, a policy or regulatory body, or an NGO, risk treatment always involves four options: risk avoidance, risk reduction or mitigation, risk transfer or sharing, and risk retention. All regulatory systems are established to ensure safety for the population and the natural environment in different scenarios, ranging from “business as usual”, to the progressive deterioration of the contextual location conditions, to more extreme climatic conditions, such as drought, and to the sudden disruption such as those caused by earthquakes or tropical cyclones. Nonetheless, because safety has a cost, weighing costs against safety underlie all regulatory and management systems. A well-functioning regulatory system is based on an effective risk oversight and management process that allow regulatory and policy authorities to monitor the achievement of policy goals under their respective responsibility and to design lines of accountability accordingly. To be effective, the risk oversight system of a regulatory authority should include the same elements that have been described above: the determination of the regulatory objectives, the identification of risks in attaining these objectives, the ranking

18

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

Table 1.1  Ranking risks (UNECE, 2015)

of the risks, a structured mechanism for choice among risk treatment strategies, and a dedicated crisis management function. In the context of DRR, strategies to mitigate risk include both regulations and alternatives to regulatory action, such as for example opening public procurement to companies who implement desired safety standards. Strategies to avoid a risk typically involve banning a dangerous activity: for example, banning construction in a specific flood prone area. An example of a risk sharing strategy is making it compulsory for organisations or individuals to subscribe insurance for a specific risk (UNECE, 2015). Figure 1.2 illustrates the decisions that the management of a company or a regulatory authority can take in order to manage the risk of floods, presenting some of the strategies that can be developed under each of the four options.

5  Summary and Conclusions In this chapter, the main forms of natural disasters which occur globally have been discussed together with their impacts. Most of these disasters appear to be exacerbated by global climate change conditions, although more research is required in establishing these relationships between global climate change and the frequency and intensity of natural disasters. Fatalities from natural disasters have reduced at a global level due to the implementation of multiple risk mitigation strategies. Such strategies include the use of analytical technologies, sophisticated warning systems, and prompt disaster response. As discussed earlier, economically developed countries such as the United States have advanced and sophisticated processes and systems in place which are continuously updated and improved for evaluation and planning purposes. Economically developing countries which are more vulnerable to natural disasters do not undertake evaluation activities. When it comes to disaster response, other factors can influence the level of disaster response efficiency. The main factor is the political influence on resource allocation. Various reasons, including priority considerations, impact resource allocation during the crisis response and during postdisaster recovery and rebuilding stages.

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

19

Fig. 1.2  Alternative risk management strategies (UNECE, 2015)

Disaster risk reduction needs to be considered from three perspectives: international policies, response, and involvement of multiple country affiliations (such as international NGOs and rescue teams), from a macro perspective, for example, the consideration of impacts on businesses and communities, as well as at an individual level (e.g. resilience of families and individuals). Strategies can be implemented at all three (individual, community/business, and national) levels to mitigate risks such as loss of life, property damage, and economic losses. Community resilience is a key consideration that has taken numerous forms of multicollaborations to tackle global climate-related risks. Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction need to be implemented as collaborative efforts with the involvement of critical stakeholders including governments, business, civil society, communities, data scientists, and environmental scientists who can assess impacts based on critical risk factors. Governments need to be held accountable for undertaking efficient measures for disaster planning and recovery to minimise disaster risks, in all regions of the world, regardless of their economic status. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction continues to serve and should be used as a vehicle to promote efficient disaster recovery, globally. Governments also need to undertake measures to mitigate risks associated with disasters, through effective resource allocation, greater transparency, and use of technology for measurement, recording, monitoring, data analytics, and communications purposes.

References Alexander, D. E. (2012). Resilience against earthquakes: Some practical suggestions for planners and managers. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 13, 109–115. Alexander, D.  E. (2013). Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An etymological journey. Available at https://www.nat-­hazards-­earth-­syst-­sci.net/13/2707/2013/nhess-­13-­2707-­2013. pdf. Accessed 15th April 2019.

20

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

Allen, J. (2018). Future climate change scenarios, climate impact: Extreme events. Available at https://oxfordre.com/climatescience/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.001.0001/ acrefore-­9780190228620-­e-­62. Accessed 10th March 2019. AON. (2015). The impact on natural disasters on the global economy. Available at https://theonebrief.com/the-­impact-­of-­natural-­disasters-­on-­the-­global-­economy/. Accessed 12th April 2019. Australian Government. (2019). International cooperation on climate change. Available at https:// dfat.gov.au/international-­relations/themes/climate-­change/Pages/international-­cooperation-­ on-­climate-­change.aspx. Accessed 16th April 2019. Birkmann, J., & Fernando, N. (2008). Measuring revealed and emergent vulnerabilities of coastal communities to tsunami in Sri Lanka. Disasters, 32(1), 82–104. Calkin, D., Cohen, J., Finney, M., & Thompson, M. (2014). How risk management can prevent future wildfire disasters in the wildland-urban interface. PNAS, 111(2), 746–751. Call, D. (2010). Changes in ice storm impacts over time: 1886–2000 Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, AMS 1000. Available at https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/2009W CAS1013.1. Accessed 16th June 2019. Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions. (2020). Wildfires and climate change. Available at https://www.c2es.org/content/wildfires-­and-­climate-­change/#:~:text=Climate%20change%20 has%20been%20a,in%20the%20Western%20United%20States.&text=Research%20 shows%20that%20changes%20in,these%20increases%20in%20wildfire%20risk. Accessed 10th October 2020. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). (2020). COVID-19 and other disasters. Available at https://disasterphilanthropy.org/press-release/new-report-11-9b-incovid-19-philanthropy-tops-giving-for-other-past-disasters/covid-19-and-other-disasters/. Accessed 10th October 2020. Centre for Systems and Engineering, John Hopkins University. (2020). COVID-19 data repository by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University. Available at https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-­19. Accessed 10th October 2020. Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination. (2016). Climate change and ice storms. Available at http://www.caccmi.org/climate-­change-­and-­ice-­storms/. Accessed 15th May 2019. Climate Council of Australia Ltd. (2018). Climate change and drought June 2018 Factsheet. Available at https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-­content/uploads/2018/06/CC_MVSA0146-­ Fact-­Sheet-­Drought_V2-­FA_High-­Res_Single-­Pages.pdf. Accessed 20th April 2019. Crawford, M. (2016). Under fire: Planning for wildfire risk. Available at http://www.rmmagazine. com/2016/04/01/under-­fire-­planning-­for-­wildfire-­risk/. Accessed 11th April 2019. Dessens, J., Berthet, C., & Sanchez, J. L. (2015). Change in hailstone size distributions with an increase in the melting level height. Atmospheric Research, 158–159, 245–253. Drury, A. C., Olson, R. S., & Van Belle, D. A. (2005). The politics of humanitarian aid: US foreign disaster assistance, 1964–1995. The Journal of Politics, 67(2), 454–473. EM-DAT. (2019). The international disaster database. Centre for Research on the Nakataniogy of Disasters-CRED. Available at https://www.emdat.be/. Accessed 10th March 2019. Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration. (2019). National Flood Insurance Program. Available at https://www.floodsmart.gov/. Accessed 15th March 2019. Geoscience Australia. (2009). Tropical cyclones: Hazard modelling and risk assessment. Available at https://ecat.ga.gov.au/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/68013. Accessed 10th March 2019. Habitat for Humanity International. (2019). Volcanic eruptions. Available at https://www.habitat.org/impact/our-­work/disaster-­r esponse/disaster-­p reparedness-­h omeowners/volcanic-­ eruptions. Accessed 20th March 2019. Kelly, J.  E. (2015). Not our fight alone: An analysis of the US Strategy combating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Unpublished Thesis. Available at https://scholarship.claremont.edu/ cmc_theses/1036/. Accessed 10th March 2019.

1  Global Standards for Disaster Risk Reduction

21

Keoduangsine, S., & Goodwin, R. (2012). An appropriate flood warning system in the context of developing countries. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 3(3), 213–216. Luo, T. Maddocks, A., & Iceland, C. (2015). World’s 15 countries with the most people exposed to river floods. Available at https://www.wri.org/blog/2015/03/world-­s-­15-­countries-­most-­ people-­exposed-­river-­floods. Accessed 15th March 2019. Marlon, J., Bartlein, P., Gavin, D., Long, C., Anderson, R., Briles, C., Brown, K., Colombaroli, D., Hallett, D., Power, M., Scharf, E., & Walsh, M. (2012). Long-term perspective on wildfires in the western. PNAS, 109(9), E535–e543. Nakatani, H. (2016). Global strategies for the prevention and control of infectious diseases and non-communicable diseases. Journal of Epidemiology, 26(4), 171–178. National Disaster Education Coalition. (1999). Talking about disaster: guide for standard messages. Available at http://www.disastercenter.com/guide/guide.htm. Accessed 12th March 2019. National Research Council. (2013). Levees and the National Flood Insurance Program: Improving policies and practices. The National Academies Press. Available at https://doi. org/10.17226/18309. Accessed12th March 2019 Needham, K. (2018). King of storms’ slams into China as Philippines death toll climbs. Available at https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/king-­of-­storms-­super-­typhoon-­slams-­into-­guangdong-­ china-­20180916-­p5045b.html. Accessed 20th March 2019. Pagett, R., & Eslamian, S. (2021). Principles regarding urbanization, disaster risks and resilience. Chapter 3. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience, Vol. 1, New frameworks for building resilience to disasters. Springer Nature Switzerland. PAHO. (2019). Volcanic eruptions. Available at https://www.paho.org/disasters/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=704:volcanic-­eruptions&Itemid=1171&lang=en. Accessed 16th March 2019. Pearce, F. (2015). Drought is a global problem  – We need a global solution. The Guardian. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/global-­development-­professionals-­network/2015/ oct/09/why-­isnt-­there-­a-­global-­body-­to-­monitor-­drought. Accessed 20th April 2019. Practical Action. (2019). Coping with drought. Available at https://practicalaction.org/coping-­ with-­drought. Accessed 30th March 2019. Raths, D. 2013. 7 ways the response to a devastating earthquake has changed. Emergency Management. Available at https://www.govtech.com/em/disaster/7-­Ways-­Response-­Loma-­ Prieta-­Earthquake.html. Accessed 20th April 2019. Relief Web. (2019). Disaster displacement: A global Review, 2008–2019. Available at https:// reliefweb.int/report/world/disaster-­displacement-­global-­review-­2008-­2018. Accessed 30th of April 2019. Ritchie, H., & Roser, M. (2019). Natural Disasters. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Available at https://ourworldindata.org/natural-­disasters. Accessed 20th March 2019. RMS. (2019). Winter Storm. Available at https://www.rms.com/models/winter-­storm. Accessed 30th March 2019. Rondeau, D., Perry, B., & Grimard, F. (2020). The consequences of COVID-19 and other disasters for wildlife and biodiversity. Environmental and Resource Economics, 76, 945–961. Statistica. (2019). Economic damage caused by significant floods worldwide from 1900 to 2016* (in billion U.S. dollars). Available at https://www.statista.com/statistics/267750/economic-­ damage-­caused-­by-­floods-­worldwide/. Accessed 20th March 2019. Stenchikov, G. L., Kirchner, I., Robock, A., Graf, H.-F., Antuna, J. C., Grainger, R. G., Lambert, A., & Thomason, L. (1998). Radiative forcing from the 1991 mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption. Journal of Geophysics Resources., 103(D12), 13837–13857. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2019). Types of disasters. Available at https://www.samhsa.gov/find-­help/disaster-­distress-­helpline/disaster-­types. Accessed 10th April 2019.

22

T. Khan and S. Eslamian

The World Bank. (2019). Internally displaced persons, new displacement associated with disasters (number of cases). Available at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IDP. NWDS?view=chart. Accessed 10th June 2019. UNDRR. (2019) Resilience dividend-toward safe and inclusive societies. Available at https:// www.unisdr.org/. Accessed 13th April 2019. UNECE. (2015). Standards for disaster risk reduction. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Union of Concerned Scientists (2019). Causes of drought: What’s the climate connection? https:// www.ucsusa.org/global-­warming/science-­and-­impacts/impacts/causes-­of-­drought-­climate-­ change-­connection.html UNISDR. (2009). Terminology on disaster risk reduction. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction. van Eijndhoven, J., Clark, W. C., & Jäger, J. (2001). The long-term development of global environmental risk management. In The social learning group, learning to manage global environmental risks, vol 2. The MIT Press. Wolfe, J. (2019). Volcanoes and climate change. Earthdata. Available at https://earthdata.nasa.gov/ learn/sensing-­our-­planet/volcanoes-­and-­climate-­change. Accessed 15th April 2019. World Vision. (2019). World-first collaboration inspires smarter disaster response. Available at https://www.worldvision.com.au/global-­issues/world-­emergencies/nepal-­earthquake-­2015/ world-­class-­collaboration-­inspires-­smarter-­disaster-­response

Chapter 2

Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective Katarzyna Cichos

Abstract  During the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) in Sendai (Japan) in 2015, the world community adopted the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 2015–2030. Since 2015, more and more attention has been paid to integrated action to DRR, sustainable development, and climate change agreements implementation. Disaster risk reduction seems to be essential to achieve sustainable development, but at the same time, climate change is becoming more and more challenging for DRR resilience. This chapter presents the correlation between DRR, sustainable development, and climate change within such areas as coherence of legal framework and priorities and methods of the implementations’ action based on preparation of guidelines which are supposed to be the leading tool for integrated action. Keywords  DRR Guidelines · Resilience · Sustainable development · Disaster risk

1  Introduction During the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) in Sendai (Japan) in 2015, the world community adopted the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 2015–2030 (UNDRR, 2015). The secretary general of the UN Ban Ki-moon expressed that “an ambitious outcome at the WCDRR will put the world on a path to a new sustainable development agenda in 2015, together with the forthcoming Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and a meaningful climate change agreement” (Uitto & Shaw, 2016). Since 2015, more and more attention has been paid to integrated action to DRR, sustainable development, and climate change

K. Cichos (*) Cardinal Stefan Wyszyńki University in Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_2

23

24

K. Cichos

agreements implementation. Disaster risk reduction seems to be essential to achieve sustainable development, but at the same time, climate change is becoming more and more challenging for DRR resilience. This chapter presents the correlation between DRR, sustainable development, and climate change, and its aim is to present the DRR’s guidelines against the background of the existing acquis in this area and try to assess their potential effectiveness. The first part explains the basic terms and relations between these three areas. The second one investigates whether the current legal framework is sufficient and identifies the global needs, priorities, and directions of future activities properly. The third part presents the implementations’ action based on preparation of guidelines which are supposed to be the leading tool for integrated action. The research methodology is based mostly on texts and documents analysis and dogmatic and legal method appropriate for legal sciences. The study limitation is numbers of documents and guidelines, which diversity and variety prevent cross-sectional analysis of the consistency of regulations and recommendations.

2  C  limate Change, Disaster Risk, Resilience, and DRR (Background and Key Terminology) Over the last decades, the Earth’s climate changes due to its natural evolution as well as abrupt causes, which included the increasing of global average of air temperature in the twentieth century (by 0.6 °C). The 1990s was the hottest decade; from 1956 to 2005, the temperature has increased by 0.64 ± 0.13 °C, twice faster than it did in the twentieth century (IPCC, 2001). Due to rainfalls or the rising of the sea level, the average global sea level has increased by 1.8 mm per year since 1961 and by 3.1 mm per year since 1993 (Shaw et al., 2013). The change in rainfall pattern and the increase in temperature caused climate change and its related hazards. In the last 25 years (from 1991 to 2016), both hydro-met (hydro-meteorological) and climatic events are responsible for nearly 80% of disasters caused by natural hazards, and geophysical events took around 1.6 million lives and left more than billion people affected (SDC, 2018). In addition, over 700,000 people lost their lives, and around 23 million were made homeless as a result of disasters. The total economic loss was more than $1.3 trillion (UNDRR, 2015). Disaster risk is the “potential loss of life, injury and destroyed or damaged assets which could occur to a system, the society or the community in a specific period of time, determined probabilistically as a function of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and capacity” (UNISDR, 2017, 28). Chan et al. (2009) provide psychosocial definition of the disaster risk as HV – C = R, where H = hazard (physical, environmental, health, or other threat, which are natural or manmade, short- or long-term), V = vulnerability (sensitivity to the hazard in question), C = capacity (ability to nullify or resist the impact of the hazard), and R = risk (social breakdown, i.e., loss of hope and meaningfulness in life). According to Grundy (2013), disaster is the fulfilment

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

25

of the risk where loss (of life, health, livelihoods, safety, governance, communications, or assets) is an essential element. Disaster risk assessment is a “qualitative or quantitative approach to determine the nature and extent of disaster risk by analysing potential hazards and evaluating existing conditions of exposure and vulnerability that together could harm people, property, services, livelihoods and the environment on which they depend” (UNISDR 2017, 29). Disaster risk assessments seem to be necessary for disaster resilience which is the ability of individuals, communities, organisations, and states to adapt to and recover from hazards, shocks, or stresses without compromising long-term prospects for development. According to UK aid (DFID, 2011, 6), disaster resilience is “the ability of countries, communities and households to manage change, by maintaining or transforming living standards in the face of shocks or stresses – such as earthquakes, drought or violent conflict – without compromising their long-term prospects”. Hyogo Framework of Action (UNISDR, 2005, 4) defines it as “the capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure”. Manyena (2006) presented the theoretical base of disaster resilience. She presents theories which see vulnerability (defined as a reflection of the fundamental physical, economic, social, and political predisposition or predisposition of a community to be affected by a dangerous physical phenomena of natural or anthropogenic origin) as the opposite of disaster resilience, as well as a risk factor and disaster resilience as the capacity to respond. She also described disaster resilience as both an outcome and a process, showing that the practices focused on the outcome have tended to adopt top-down reactive approaches which can favour the status quo and take attention away from inequalities resulting from insecurity and disaster. Disaster resilience as a process involves supporting the capacity of individuals, communities, and states to adapt through assets and resources relevant to their context. Manyena (2006) explained that the concept of resilience helps to obtain a complete understanding of risk and vulnerability. She underlined that the process should focus on resilience directly rather than vulnerability or poverty reduction because disaster resilience activities can “lead to actions, such as enhancing community coping capacity and livelihoods, allowing communities to make appropriate choices within the context of their environments” (Manyena, 2006). Shaw et  al. (2013), present the sectors where the impact of disaster risk as a result of climate change can be seen across all nations, including impact on ecosystems (increase in average temperature and in concomitant atmospheric CO2 concentrations produces negative consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem); food security (globally, the potential for food production is projected to increase; however, in seasonally dry and tropical regions, crop productivity is projected to decrease); coastal areas (coasts are projected to be exposed to increasing risks, including coastal erosion which can cause that annually, much more people than at present will experience floods every year due to the sea level rise); human health (the health status of human population can affect the humanity through, for example, the increase in food insecurity that may cause malnutrition or starvation; diseases, injury, disability due to disasters; increased frequency of cardiorespiratory

26

K. Cichos

diseases due to higher concentrations of ground level ozone in urban areas, etc.); and water resources (it is expected that the climate change will intensify current stresses on water resources and can lead to changes in runoff and water availability, including the increase in runoff by 10–40% in the middle of the century at higher latitudes and in some wet tropical areas, and decrease by 10%–30% over some arid regions at mid-latitudes) (Shaw et al., 2013). Flood, earthquake, hurricane, etc. can destroy or severely damage infrastructure, as well as limit the capacity of service providers that can cause disruption to the system education and learning, water, sanitation and hygiene problems, or distress to the shelter sector, the loss or damage of which results in the increased exposure and vulnerability of people, families, and entire communities (DG ECHO, 2013). Disaster risk reduction is the policy and practice objective aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which contribute to strengthening resilience. It requires systematic efforts to analyse and reduce the causal factors of disasters in all sectors and areas, like reducing exposure to hazards, lessening vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improving preparedness and early warning for adverse events (Naheed & Eslamian, 2021). Bricen (2015) identified the problem in understanding that managing risk is mostly about reducing vulnerability and not just understanding hazards and emergencies. This is the reason why several efforts still remain not effective and with insufficient impact. Bricen (2015) explained that the major initiative should focus on relevant stakeholders behind a common strategy that addresses the obstacles to understanding risk and implementing risk management programmes. He also underlined that the challenge in implementation of development tasks (health, nutrition, agriculture, etc.) is not insisting on the importance of DRR as a separate task but rather on the need to address DRR before undertaking the other tasks. Development efforts usually can be easily affected by insufficient risk management. It means that they need to be integrated with risk management approaches. This would require a common approach in the international system as a joint action taken by all relevant stakeholders – governmental and nongovernmental, public and private (including involvement of scientific and academic experts and local community leaders and authorities). It provokes the question if the international binding and soft law regulation provide framework for coherent and integrated action within the DRR, sustainable development, and climate change policy and provide recommendation for farther implementation.

3  Coherence of Global Legal Framework for DRR The legal base to DRR can be found in the climate change law, which is based mostly on the mitigation concept. More practical approach of DRR legal framework seems to be more concentrated on adaptation approach and will have its base in DRR regulations as well and in sustainable developmental laws and

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

27

concepts. Considering that there are direct relation between global average temperatures and the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the main goal is in decreasing the amount of emissions released into the atmosphere and in reducing the current concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2). All efforts to reduce emissions are referred to as “mitigation”. Climate change was identified as an urgent global problem at the First World Climate Conference in 1979. It led to the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on the Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. The IPCC published its First Assessment Report in 1990, which became a basis for adoption on 9 May 1992 by United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and which entered into force on 21 March 1994 (Shaw et  al., 2013). The UNFCCC requires all parties, keeping in mind their responsibilities and capabilities, to formulate and implement programmes containing measures to mitigate the climate change. Under the UNFCCC, and especially under the Kyoto Protocol adopted at COP 3 (1997) in Kyoto, Japan, states adopted individual, legally binding commitment for GHG emissions reduction. In general, developed counties have set economy-wide caps for their national emissions, while developing countries declared to focus on specific programmes and projects. In addition, the United Nations General Assembly decided that the 1990s would be the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) and established permanent secretariat in the United Nations to promote disaster risk reduction worldwide. The outcome of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction held in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan, in 2005, was the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 focused on building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. The Hyogo Framework identifies activities related to environmental and natural resource management, including integrated flood management, land-use planning as well as development and management of fragile ecosystems as elements for disaster risk reduction. It also recognised the integration of risk reduction linked with present climate variability and future climate change and the identification of climate-related risks (Uitto & Shaw, 2016). Such elements are closely related to the terms of adaptation measures, which aims to consider several actions that help reducing vulnerability of social and biological systems to the consequences of climate change, including more secure facility locations and infrastructures, natural landscape renovation and reforestation, diversification of agriculture, research and knowledge development on possible catastrophes, and preparation of prevention and protection measures (evacuation plans, health issues, etc.). In March 2015, the disaster risk reduction community met in the Japanese city of Sendai for the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction where the Sendai Framework was accepted on 18 March 2015. Adoption of the Sendai Framework by the UN Member States includes seven global targets to assess global progress in disaster risk reduction, which “will be measured at the global level and will be complemented by work to develop appropriate indicators” (Section 18 UNDRR, 2015). Those seven global DRR targets were included in the adopted Agenda 2030 in 2015, in line with Sendai Framework, Section 18, especially with regard to the targets and indicators of SDG 11. Goal 11.5 was revised as follows:

28

K. Cichos

“By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations”, with two indicators: “number of deaths, missing persons and persons affected by disaster per 100,000 people” and “direct disaster economic loss in relation to global GDP, including disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services” (which corresponds with Sendai Framework targets from a to d). Similarly, 11.b was revised as follows: “By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levels”. The international community provided such indicators as: “proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030” and “number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies (which correspond with the Sendai Framework targets e and f)”. Besides, the direct references to the outcomes of the Third UN WCDRR and the Sendai Framework Agenda 2030 recognise and reaffirm the urgent need to reduce the risk of disasters by several goals and targets that can contribute to reducing the disaster risk and to building resilience, including in particular related to poverty, ending hunger, ensuring healthy lives, education, sustainable management of water, building resilient infrastructure, resilient cities, climate change, and marine and terrestrial ecosystems (UNDRR, 2015b; UNISDR, 2016). Finally, Goal 13 takes urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts and urges strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. Goal 13 is related to the Paris Agreement, adopted in November 2015 at the UN Climate Change Conference COP21. Even though the Paris Agreement does not mention directly DRR, its aim is to “strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty” and “increase the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience” (Article 2). In addition, in Article 7, the parties established “the global goal on adaptation of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability to climate change, with a view to contributing to sustainable development and ensuring an adequate adaptation response in the context of the temperature goal referred to in Article 2”. It shows that all international processes on the political and legal grounds recognise the importance of mitigation and adaptation actions to ensure sustainable development and disaster risk reduction. However, the question that needs to be considered is if the increasing references to links between the policies had positive influence on the practical cooperation and implementation?

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

29

4  G  uidelines as the Sendai Framework and DRR Implementation Tool (Recommendation) The SDG 17, “Revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development”, states that a platform of partnerships should be provided between governments, the private sector, and civil society to implement the SDG commitments. Goal 17 corresponds with the concept of governance, which is defined as the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. To achieve the SDG Agenda 2030, it is underlined that global community should enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multistakeholder partnerships, and share knowledge, expertise, technology, and financial resources (Agenda 2030), at all levels – international, regional, and national. Article 7 of Paris Agreement says that each party shall involve in adaptation planning processes and the implementation of actions, including the development of relevant plans, policies, etc. which might embrace, for instance, the implementation of adaptation actions, the process to formulate and implement national adaptation plans, and the assessment of climate change impacts, monitoring, and evaluation. The Sendai Declaration also has strong paragraphs on implementation mechanisms at different governance levels. It offers to support the placement of DRR measures into other sectors, which help to ensure that disaster risk reduction is not overlooked, but need to cooperate with other interests, including as it is mentioned in Section 47d, “multilateral and bilateral development assistance programmes within and across all sectors, as appropriate, related to poverty reduction, sustainable development, natural resource management, environment, urban development and adaptation to climate change” (UNDRR 2015). As underlined by Kelman (2015), the Sendai Declaration is forming opportunities to work with others on their terms rather than trying to dictate what might work best overall. The Sendai Framework urges to focus on four priority areas for action, including the following: • Understanding disaster risk (DRR management based on the understanding of disaster risk in all its dimensions of vulnerability supported by adequate training for local authorities). • Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk (guide, encourage the public and private sectors to take appropriate action). • Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience (focus public and private investment in DRR on structural and nonstructural measures). • Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction (strengthen disaster preparedness for more effective response) (UNDRR, 2015, Section 20; Wahlstrom, 2015).

30

K. Cichos

All off the above-mentioned priorities include the most basic task which is supposed to facilitate promotion and dissemination of existing knowledge and regulations into real action, especially in those nations and communities with low level of understanding of appropriate risk management strategies, policies, and programmes. Under the first priority of Sendai Framework (UNDRR 2015), Section 24c underlined the need to develop, periodically update, location-based disaster risk information, including risk maps, to decision makers. The Sendai Framework in paragraph 26 (which the clarification of the second priority) underlines that the DRR at the national, regional, and global levels is of great importance for an effective management of disaster risk. It underlines that the clear vision, plans, competence, guidance, and coordination within and across sectors, as well as participation of relevant stakeholders are crucial for strengthening disaster risk governance. Section 30f (related to the third priority) underlines the need to “promote the mainstreaming of disaster risk assessments into land-use policy development and implementation, including urban planning, land degradation assessments and informal and non-permanent housing, and the use of guidelines and follow-up tools informed by anticipated demographic and environmental changes,” and Section 31 presents the need of promotion of coherence across systems, sectors and organisations, stakeholders, including local authorities, academia, etc., related to sustainable development and to disaster risk reduction in their policies, plans, programmes, and processes. Section 33a (related with the fourth priority) underlines that the important action is to prepare or review and periodically update disaster preparedness and contingency policies, plans, and programmes with the involvement of the relevant institutions, considering climate change scenarios and their impact on disaster risk, and facilitating, as appropriate, the participation of all sectors and relevant stakeholders. Section 33 (k) recommends to develop guidance for preparedness for disaster reconstruction, such as land-use planning and structural standards improvement, including by learning from the recovery and reconstruction programmes over the decade since the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action, and exchanging experiences, knowledge, and lessons learned. Finally, Section 48 (c) of the Sendai Framework calls upon “the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, in particular, to support the implementation, follow-up and review of this framework through […] generating evidence-based and practical guidance for implementation in close collaboration with States, and through mobilisation of experts; reinforcing a culture of prevention in relevant stakeholders […]” (UNDRR 2015). In order to support the process, a number of targeted Sendai Framework implementation guides shall be developed. It shows that at the official policy level, Sendai Framework provides proper base for further action and implementation process. In addition, it clearly proves that one of the most important implementation and promotion tools of Sendai Framework should be the guidelines for DRR.

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

31

5  Examples of Guidelines Since the guidelines are becoming the most important implementation tool for DRR, it is important to add that a guideline is a statement or a plan by which the course of action is determined. Its aim is to rationalise particular processes according to a set propositions of routine or practice. By definition, a guideline is never mandatory, not binding, and not enforceable by law. As a soft law instrument, guidelines might be issued only with the cooperation with states, local government, or some other authorities. This article does not discuss the problems of implementation of nonbinding instruments also in the area of DRR, which was the subject of several research and articles (Eburn et al., 2019; Hopkins, 2019). UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) (formerly known as UNISDR) works on the substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses to ensure a sustainable future. Its role is to be focused on the disaster risk reduction in the UN system, responsible for coordinating and integrating disaster risk reduction into the UN country-level programmes and activities. UNDRR supports countries in its implementation, monitoring, and review of progress. To implement the Sendai Framework, UNDRR has prepared several guidelines under the series of Words into Action, some technical and monitoring tools, and tools to support regional engagement and ownership.

5.1  “Words into Action” Guidelines The UNDRR commissioned the development of the series of thematic guidelines under its “Words into Action” initiative to support national implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Under this series, they published several guidelines, including the following: • National disaster risk assessment guideline is related to the first Priority for Action: Understanding Disaster Risk is a basis for all measures on DRR (UNISDR (2017) and intents to motivate and guide countries in establishing a national system for understanding disaster risk and encourages the NDRA leaders and implementing entities to aim for holistic assessments that would provide the understanding of the many different dimensions of disaster risk (hazards, exposures, vulnerabilities, capacities). The guidelines provide policy guidance on how to conduct a successful disaster risk assessment, which is focused on the three stages: preparing and scoping, conducting risk analysis, and using the results for disaster risk management and development decisions. The document also presents special topics which should be considered during the designing and carrying out a national disaster risk assessment and hazard-specific risk assessment and consists of modules covering more in-depth information on conducting risk assessment for specific hazards (like earthquake, tsunami, flood, wild fire, etc.) UNISDR (2017).

32

K. Cichos

• “Implementation guide for addressing water-related disasters and transboundary cooperation” guideline aims to raise awareness on the importance of river basin management and transboundary cooperation within DRR on the climate change adaptation. The general objective of this guide is to support the implementation of the Sendai Framework in (transboundary) basins through bringing together disaster risk management, integrated water management and climate adaptation approaches. This includes ensuring that IWRM issues are considered at all levels, including the international level, and that the role of water and basins is taken into account. However this guide does not offer a detailed methodology but rather set of principles and guidance with references to additional materials (UNDRR, 2018). • “Developing national disaster risk reduction strategies” guideline aims to support countries in developing a national disaster risk reduction strategy that will align with the Sendai Framework and helps to achieve the Target E, i.e., the increase in the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies. National and local disaster risk reduction strategies are considered as essential for implementing and monitoring a country’s risk reduction priorities. The guide proposed a 10-step approach to developing a national DRR strategy, within three phases: building understanding and providing evidence, as well as designing the strategy and action plan and preparing for implementation (UNDRR, 2019). • “National Focal Points for DRR, National Platforms for DRR, Local Platforms for DRR” guideline underlines the fact that the Sendai Framework requests “to establish and strengthen government coordination fora composed of relevant stakeholders at the national and local levels, such as national and local platforms for DRR”. States are also recommended to prepare local and national coordination systems. The number of National Platforms for DRR officially established and reported back to UNISDR has increased from 34 in 2006 to 93 in June 2016. This document provides guidance on National Focal Points for the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 and on the establishment or strengthening the National and Local Platforms for DRR. It also defines the relation between Global, National, Regional, and Local Platforms for DRR (UNISDR, 2017b). • “Implementation guide for local disaster risk reduction and resilience strategies” guideline aims to advise local governments on developing and implementing integrated local DRR strategy and presents what a local DRR and resilience strategy should look like and what is needed to create and implement one (UNDRR, 2019c). • “Disaster displacement: How to reduce risk, address impacts and strengthen resilience” guideline provides solutions to help governmental authorities integrate disaster displacement and other related forms of human mobility into regional, national, subnational, and local DRR strategies (UNDRR, 2019d). • “Man-made and technological hazards” guideline presents practical approach in addressing manmade and technological hazards (including industrial ­pollution,

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

33

ionising radiation, toxic wastes, dam failures, transport accidents, factory explosions, fires, and chemical spills) in the context of DRR (UNDRR, 2018b).

5.2  Other UNDRR Guidelines Examples UNDRR has also prepared several plans of action or technical guidelines, including the following: • Strategic approach to capacity development for implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction: a vision of risk-informed sustainable development by 2030 presents key principles, elements, and actions that help guide planning discussions, provide targets, and normalise practice across sectors and implementation practical standards (UNDRR, 2019b). • Technical guidance for monitoring and reporting on progress in achieving the global targets of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction provides technical suggestions in respect of applicable definitions and terminology, possible computation methodologies, data standards to support the modification, and completion of the technical guidance for countries reporting on achievement of the Sendai Framework (UNISDR, 2018).

5.3  Regional and Sectoral Examples of Guidelines UNDRR with the cooperation with other specialised UN or regional organisations also prepared several plans and guidelines for sectoral or regional action, including the following: • “Guidance notes on recovery: health”, which focuses on the management of postdisaster recovery requirements in the public health and health sector (IRP, 2017). • “Guidelines and recommendations for the Implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction in the agriculture and food security and nutrition sector – Latin America and the Caribbean”, which focus on the identification of key elements for DRR standards implementation in the agriculture sector (crops, livestock, forests, fisheries, and aquiculture) (FAO, 2017). • “European Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction Roadmap 2015–2020” is the Europe Union’s guide implementation of the Sendai Framework, presenting the activities for the period 2015–2020 and provides an overview for the 15-year span of the whole framework (EFDRR, 2016). • “Operational Guidance Note on Disability Inclusion in EU-funded operations”, which was published by European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (DG ECHO) and acknowledges the Sendai Framework for its increased consideration of disability and inclusion by effective access and par-

34

K. Cichos

ticipation of persons with disabilities in humanitarian aid and to ensure mainstreaming of disability in all EU-funded humanitarian operations (DG ECHO, 2019). • “Disaster Response in Asia and the Pacific, A Guide to International Tools and Services” aims to help disaster managers in national governments advance basic knowledge of how to mobilise and use international and regional tools and services for DRR (OCHA, 2018). • “Water and risk in Africa: a community leader’s guide” aims to help community leaders to have a better understanding of the complex nature of water to reduce the risk from water-related disasters (UNDRR, 2004). • National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs) should make plans which provide a process for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) to identify priority activities that respond to their urgent and immediate needs to adapt to climate change. The UNFCCC created a database of NAPAs, and country priorities were identified within NAPAs (Islam et al., 2013). To support countries in developing joint strategies, UNISDR works with the LDCs Expert Group (LEG) of the UNFCCC on the process of formulating and implementing NAPAs (UNISDR, 2019).

6  Guidelines (Examples of Implementations) Even though the Sendai Framework is not a binding instrument, since its adoption, several actions at the global level in the area of promotion and implementation through creation of guidelines for international organisations, states, or local communities, have been already implemented, including the following: • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change developed guidance on integrating climate change with the Sustainable Development Goals and the Sendai Framework to ensure coherence between national climate change adaptation plans and national disaster risk reduction strategies (UN, 2018). • To provide countries with more effective solutions and integrate UN operational preparedness and response capacities, the entities of the UN system are required to follow the commitments of the United Nations Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Towards a Risk-informed and Integrated Approach to Sustainable Development (UN, 2018, Section 28). This revised plan was prepared in light of the new international agreements and changing operational context; in particular, to ensure coherence with respect to climate change risk and the principles of Agenda 2030 (UN, 2017). • UNDP became responsible to develop system-wide guidance on resilience to bring better coherence across the work of the UN on resilience building, including such areas as disasters, climate, humanitarian action, health, food security, gender inequality, violent conflict, and human rights to reform of the UN development system (UN, 2018, Section 38).

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

35

• The UN provides technical guidance to countries to develop national and local disaster risk reduction strategies. Since July 2018, 71 countries and territories have developed or are in the process of developing disaster risk reduction strategies aligned with the Sendai Framework. In addition, in 2017 the UNDRR trained 975 national and local government officials and stakeholders from 66 countries on the development of disaster risk reduction strategies (UN, 2018, Section 41–42). • In the Americas, six countries completed national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework, and the strategies of 11 countries and territories are currently under development. There are also 1800 local governments’ commitments to enhancing resilience through the Making Cities Resilient campaign (UN, 2018 Section 48). • Arab Coordination Mechanism for Disaster Risk Reduction adopted the Arab Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction 2030 which emphasises the need to better understand disaster risk to tackle risk drivers in the region. It also gives guidance on integrating disaster risk reduction throughout development programming. In addition, seven Arab countries aligned disaster risk reduction strategies with the Sendai Framework, and the other seven are in the process of doing so (UN, 2018, Section 53–54). • Since the adoption of the Sendai Framework, 32 European countries conducted national risk assessment to provide data and information to guide the development of national disaster risk reduction strategies. Fourteen countries developed disaster risk reduction strategies, and four countries are in the process (UN, 2018, Section 69). • Also 13 African countries already have national disaster risk reduction strategies, and 3 countries are in the process of alignment (UN, 2018, Section 47).

7  Summary and Conclusions There is deep understanding of the need to coordinate the action taken in the area of DRR, sustainable development, and climate change. The need for coherence has been expressed broadly in literature but also in several documents, and both binding and not binding legal instruments sufficiently identified the global needs, priorities, and directions of future activities. It seems that the planned tools for implementations’ action based on preparation of guidelines can be good and effective solution. There might be some critical voices that guidelines are not binding instruments and states will not be obligated to follow its instruction. However, in such area as DRR, it seems to be impossible to force states to protect its own citizens. It is states’ interest to implement the guidelines and provide proper policy, especially today, when the climate change is becoming more and more distressing. Therefore, states, committed by changing climate conditions (rather than legal binding instruments), should increase its capacity building and continue to develop its national and local disaster risk reduction strategies. In addition, there is a need to involve all

36

K. Cichos

stakeholders, including the private sector, academia, civil society organisations, and the media, with their knowledge, experience, and resources. However, at international (especially within UNDRR) level, there is still a need to investigate and analyse if the presented guidelines are useful and applicable or not. During last few years, several guidelines (general, technical, sectoral, and regional) have been presented. There are some with very specific instructions and suggestions on how to prepare some tools or mechanisms. But there are also some that are very theoretical. There is not one main concept which would be repeated and specified according to the new circumstances or the specificity of the region or sector. It might be the reason of the difficulties in applying the proposals by the states. The problem can be also with the numbers of guidelines. There are already plenty of them, and probably, several more will be prepared in the nearest future. There is not any one official website (not mentioned the bigger promotion) where the guidelines would be available with some introduction on how to use them, which are the most important, etc. It also might make it difficult to use them properly and effectively. Another aspect is the question if the correlation between DRR, sustainable development, and climate change has been presented in the guidelines. Even if, as it was proved in the research, there are some kind of natural correlation between DRR, sustainable development, and climate change, and the DRR resilience has positive effects on development and poverty eradication, today available (in all of these areas) tools, methods, or instruments, including financial instruments, are not “naturally” compatible and coordinate. It seems that even if there is understanding of the need of coordination, there are not guidelines or suggestions on how to coordinate such actions at international, regional, states, and local levels. There are already several development assistance or humanitarian aid instruments and tools which can be applicable for DRR strategies and regional and states plan of actions. Therefore, the available guidelines, especially those concentrated on regional or sectoral support, but also those more general, should also provide the analyses if there are or not available instruments that can be modified and improved, to not duplicate the systems. In conclusion, prepared guidelines are the step in the good direction; however, there is a need for deep understanding of the relation of different policy (DRR, sustainable development, and climate change policy) not only from theoretical perspective but also at very practical, technical level. Guidelines should very clearly present the available methodology, financial instruments, and examples of good, coordinated, and integrated actions. Considering the number of already adopted guidelines, it’s time to pay more attention to their quality and consistency, which should become the next step for building the coherence of all available instruments.

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

37

References Bricen, S. (2015). What to expect after Sendai: Looking forward to more effective disaster risk reduction. Int J Disaster Risk Sci, 6, 202–204. Chan, C. L. W., Sun, A. H. Y., Ho, A., Wang, X. L., Wang, X., Zhang, B. Q., & Zhang, X. (2009). Community capacity building and post disaster psychosocial reconstruction. IDRC Cheng Du Conference, 15 July, Chengdu, China. DFID. (2011). Defining disaster resilience: A DFID approach paper, DFID, UK Aid. Available: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/186874/defining-­disaster-­resilience-­approach-­paper.pdf DG ECHO. (2013). Disaster risk reduction, increasing resilience by reducing disaster risk in humanitarian action, Thematic Policy Document n° 5, European Commission. Available: http:// ec.europa.eu/echo/files/policies/prevention_preparedness/DRR_thematic_policy_doc.pdf DG ECHO. (2019). The inclusion of persons with disabilities in EU-funded humanitarian aid operations, DG ECHO Operational Guidance, European Union. Available: https://ec.europa. eu/echo/sites/echo-­site/files/2019-­01_disability_inclusion_guidance_note.pdf Eburn, M., Collins, E., & da Costa, K. (2019). Recognising limits of international law in disaster risk reduction as problem and solution. In K.  L. H.  Samuel, M.  Aronsson-Storrier, & K. N. Bookmiller (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of disaster risk reduction and international law. Cambridge. EFDRR. (2016). European forum for disaster risk reduction roadmap 2015–2020. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/55096 FAO. (2017). Guidelines and recommendations for the Implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction in the agriculture and food security and nutrition sector – Latin America and the Caribbean, Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/54350 Grundy, P. (2013). Structural design for disaster risk reduction. Australian Journal of Structural Engineering, 14(2), 135–143. Hopkins, W.  J. (2019). Soft obligations and hard realities: Regional disaster risk reduction in Europe and Asia. In K. L. H. Samuel, M. Aronsson-Storrier, & K. N. Bookmiller (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of disaster risk reduction and international law. Cambridge IRP. (2017). Guidance notes on recovery: Health – Supplementary edition, International Recovery Platform. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/56610 Islam, A., Shaw, R., & Mallick, F. (2013). National adaptation programme of action. In R. Shaw, F. Mallick, & A. Islam (Eds.), Methods, approaches and practices, climate change adaptation actions in Bangladesh, Tokyo, Japan (pp. 93–106). Springer. Kelman, I. (2015). Climate change and the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction. Int J Disaster Risk Sci, 6, 117–127. Manyena, S. B. (2006). The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters, 30(4), 433–450. Naheed, S., & Eslamian, S. (2021). Understanding disaster risk reduction and resilience: A conceptual framework. Chapter 1. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience, Vol. 1, new frameworks for building resilience to disasters. Springer Nature Switzerland. OCHA. (2018). Disaster response in Asia and the Pacific, A Guide to International Tools and Services, OCHA Asia-Pacific. Available https://www.unocha.org/sites/unocha/files/ROAP_ DisasterGuide.pdf SDC. (2018). SDC guidelines on disaster risk reduction, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC. Available: https://www.shareweb.ch/site/DRR/Documents/Types%20 of%20activity/SDC_Guidelines_on_DRR_April_2018.pdf Shaw, R., Mallick, F., & Islam, A. (2013). Climate change: Global perspectives. In R.  Shaw, F. Mallick, & A. Islam (Eds.), Methods, approaches and practices, climate change adaptation actions in Bangladesh, Tokyo, Japan (pp. 3–15). Springer.

38

K. Cichos

Uitto, J. I., & Shaw, R. (2016). Sustainable development and disaster risk reduction: Introduction. In J. I. Uitto & R. Shaw (Eds.), Methods, approaches and practices, sustainable development and disaster risk reduction, Tokyo, Japan (pp. 1–12). Springer. UN. (2017). United Nations plan of action on disaster risk reduction for resilience towards a risk-informed and integrated approach to sustainable development, United Nation. Available: https://www.preventionweb.net/files/49076_unplanofaction.pdf UN. (2018). Implementation of the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030, Report of the Secretary-General, 27 July 2018, A/73/268. UNDRR. (2004). Water and risk in Africa: A community leader’s guide, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction  – Regional Office for Africa. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/we/ inform/publications/8541 UNDRR. (2015a). Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. http://www.wcdrr. org/uploads/Sendai_Framework_for_Disaster_Risk_Reduction_2015-­2030.pdf UNDRR. (2015b). A reflection paper prepared by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/files/46052_disasterriskreductioninthe2030agend.pdf UNDRR. (2018a). Words into action guidelines: Implementation guide for addressing water-­ related disasters and transboundary cooperation, integrating disaster risk management with water management and climate change adaptation, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available https://www.unisdr.org/files/61173_ecemp.wat56.pdf UNDRR. (2018b). Words into action guideline: Man-made/technological hazards, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/ publications/54012 UNDRR. (2019a). Words into Action guideline: Developing national disaster risk reduction strategies, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/ files/65095_wianationaldrrstrategies10052019.pdf#page=28 UNDRR. (2019b). Strategic approach to capacity development for implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction: a vision of risk-informed sustainable development by 2030, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.preventionweb.net/files/58211_fullconciseguide.pdf UNDRR. (2019c). Words into Action guideline: Implementation guide for local disaster risk reduction and resilience strategies, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/57399 UNDRR. (2019d). Words into action guidelines  – Disaster displacement: How to reduce risk, address impacts and strengthen resilience, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/58821 UNISDR. (2005). Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. World Conference on Disaster Reduction. 18–22 January 2005, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. A/CONF.206/6. UNISDR. UNISDR. (2016). Implementing the Sendai framework to achieve the sustainable development goals, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available; https://www.unisdr.org/ files/50438_implementingthesendaiframeworktoach.pdf UNISDR. (2017a). Words into action guidelines, national disaster risk assessment, governance system, methodologies, and use of results, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/files/52828_nationaldisasterriskassessmentwiagu.pdf UNISDR. (2017b). Words into action guidelines, national focal points for disaster risk reduction national platforms for disaster risk reduction local platforms for disaster risk r­ eduction, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/files/53055_ npslpswiapublicconsultation2017.pdf UNISDR. (2018). Technical guidance for monitoring and reporting on progress in achieving the global targets of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/54970

2  Guidelines for Resilient Disaster Risk Reduction: International Law Perspective

39

UNISDR. (2019). United Nations Office for disaster risk reduction 2018, annual report, United Nation. Available: https://www.unisdr.org/files/64454_unisdrannualreport2018eversionlight.pdf Wahlstrom, M. (2015). New Sendai framework strengthens focus on reducing disaster risk. Int J Disaster Risk Sci, 6, 200–201.

Chapter 3

Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster Leandro Torres Di Gregorio, Silvia Midori Saito, Josep Pont Vidal, Vânia Rocha, and Delton Winter de Carvalho

Abstract  Strengthening institutional resilience is essential for disaster risk governance. This chapter analyzes the principal institutional vulnerabilities exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic crisis in Brazil and the United States. We identify nonconformities that reflected institutional vulnerabilities in these countries’ pandemic crisis, based on a survey of professional media coverage. The identification of these failures also led to a discussion of the potential causes of institutional vulnerabilities. The findings were classified according to three levels of analysis, i.e., national governance, international governance, and public–private–third sector governance. Failure modes of institutional vulnerabilities were identified in several sectors (public, private, and third sector), federative entities (Federal Government, States, and Municipalities), and contexts (national and international). The interconnection of these nonconformities contributed to the deepening of the crisis. This chapter could contribute to the development of a political–administrative–operational framework to improve institutional resilience. L. T. Di Gregorio (*) Urban Engineering Graduate Program and Environmental Engineering Graduate Program, Polytechnic School, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] S. M. Saito National Center for Monitoring and Early Warning of Natural Disasters (CEMADEN) and Graduate Program in Natural Disaster/ Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil J. P. Vidal Center for High Amazon Studies (NAEA), Federal University of Pará, Belém, Brazil V. Rocha Urban Engineering Graduate Program and Geography Graduate Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil D. W. de Carvalho Unisinos Law Graduate Program, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_3

41

42

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Keywords  Institutional resilience · National governance · International governance · Public–private governance · COVID-19

1  Introduction The impacts of COVID-19 have been directly influenced by the management and sanitary governance of the countries. The COVID-19 as a disaster results in a severe impact on global public health systems, causing significant loss of human life and widespread economic crisis (Carvalho, 2020; Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020). The pandemic is uniquely suited for analyzing underlying institutional broad-scope vulnerabilities, i.e., transboundary, intersectoral, and intergovernmental. Such vulnerabilities are permeated by social, physical, or institutional factors, which exposed entities and communities to the negative consequences. Thus, disaster resilience is directly influenced by institutional practices and decision-making processes. The current scenario evidenced the hypercomplexity and the existence of many countries action spheres (WHO, countries, and governments), actors (public, private, semipublic, and collective), and diverse interests (economic, financial, and scientific). Resilience can be described the capacity of a system to absorb disturbances or the magnitude of a disturbance, which can be made before a system changes its structure, thereby changing the variables and processes that control its behavior (Holling et al., 1995). Considering the technical, ecological system aspect applied to communities, the studies on the resilience idea with the communities’ vulnerability stand out from the perspective of risk management and the communities resilience (Di Gregorio et al., 2013; Soler et al., 2013; Gregorio & Soares, 2017). Institutions involved in disaster risk context must be committed to performing their missions in the best way possible and contributing in synergy to other institutions’ work. To accomplish this, they must seek the continuous improvement of their operations and relations, considering their peculiarities and striving to build up individual and collective capacities, even under adverse circumstances. Therefore, the reduction of institutional vulnerability is a central point that organizations must relentlessly pursue to achieve systemic resilience. However, studies about institutional vulnerability are still scarce, and probably this is the least dimension explored in the literature (Papathoma-Köhle & Thaler, 2018). Institutional resilience describes the degree of a network of organizations to plan, learn, and cope against threats, build capacity, and act through a coordinative model (Smith et al., 2018). The institutions best display resilience in response to external pressures or crises (Hills, 2000). The pandemic has revealed different institutional resilience levels, resulting from the lack of previous organization, articulation, and communication. Considering the unprecedented situation triggered by the COVID-19, many actions demanded a fast response by the institutions from different sectors. In South Korea, the collaboration from public and private sectors exponentially increases real-time PCR tests (Park & Chung, 2020). The longtime rivals

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

43

Google and Apple build together a smartphone app to track the spread of the coronavirus (Michael & Abbas, 2020). On the other hand, a lack of arrangements was also revealed during the pandemic. It was noticed in the absence of governmental coordination to implement policies to respond to the crisis (Abrucio et al., 2020), disagreement between federal and state level about social distancing (Adolph et al., 2020; Pereira et  al., 2020), and economy and health policies divergences at the national level (Chaudhry et al., 2020; Ortega & Orsini, 2020). The first step for building institutional resilience is the understanding of vulnerabilities and their roots (Nazif et al., 2021). In this regard, this paper seeks to present the main institutional vulnerabilities exposed by COVID-19 and to reflect on their potential causes. Three levels considered to be representative of the institutional dynamics were applied for this analysis: national governance, international governance, and public–private–third sector relations. The data collection was focused on events that occurred on the American continent, particularly in the two countries that, at the time this text was written, had registered the highest absolute numbers of cases: the United States and Brazil. Based on the analysis levels and limits, we applied a factual approach drawn mostly from news published in professional media outlets, aiming to identify nonconformities that exposed institutional vulnerabilities. A reflection of the possible causes of such vulnerabilities was also developed. This simplified process is analogous to the management systems standards, such as ISO 9001:2015 (International Organization for Standardization, 2015). Since it addresses disaster risk from a multidimensional and multisectoral perspective, this chapter could support institutions to build a more resilient political– administrative–operational framework regarding the key aspects of national and international governance and the relations between the public, private, and third sectors. Building resilience is vital in overcoming this and future pandemics (Trump & Linkov, 2020).

2  Analysis Levels This chapter considers that institutions define the existing game rules in society to organize it, according to its political configuration, at a given moment. The primary function is, then, to organize society. There is no consensus in the academic community on the “institutionality” concept, like most concepts and notions. We consider institutionality as a type of structured communication, assumed and agreed upon by the areas or systems that make up society (political, legal, administrative, cultural, etc.) that arises from (public) organizations and are accepted by the society areas or systems. It can be expressed by accepting each system’s autonomy and each power on which the State of Law is based (Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary). The political system (composed of the set of political forces and the parliament) maintains a position of hierarchical order different from the other subsystems, that is, having the ability to guide (or lead) functional regulations of the other systems. The State is included as an autonomous system, among others, although subjected to the political system

44

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

A robust institutionality is needed to achieve consensus, coexistence, and balance among the institutions and each component area of society, and so its political system. Thus, institutionality must be above private interests, or partisans of a group, party, or ideology, in other words, in a situation with the potential to guide the society as a whole. In the institutional and political–administrative sphere, resilience refers to the capacity of public institutions to anticipate the possible impacts produced by a factor (whether human or natural) and to offer possible solutions or proposals agreed with the community for searching alternatives that enhance governance for the common good (Vidal, 2018). Hence, it is linked to the governance—or phenomenon management—and the notions of multilevel governance, good governance, governance of the nation, and institutionality of the decision-making. The context or political–administrative system acquires particular relevance. Starting from the assertive that governance designates the quality and the good orientation given by the state intervention, the pandemic emergence caused by COVID-19 has been the phenomenon that best illustrates the governance and Government in a country. Thus, this crisis test empirically the assumption of governance, understood as “a new governing way” (Vidal, 2019) or as “good governance” at the regulatory plan. Based on the above exposed, three primary levels of institutional resilience analysis emerge: (a) at the national level; (b) at the international level; and (c) at the public–private governance and the third sector.

2.1  National Governance In the case of COVID-19 pandemic, the State and its representation in the Government must ensure the common good overcoming personal or partisan interests. Governance grants legitimacy to both Government decisions and State action. Thus, institutionality must establish the mechanisms for a problem or issue to acquire an institutional dimension. Multilevel governance and institutions’ changes must aim to enable better functioning of institutions and decision-making processes at different political–administrative levels (in Brazilian case, among Municipalities, regions, States of the Union, and the Federal Government). A renewed institutionality in the COVID-19 pandemic period means technical decision-making and clear political definitions that link technical, sanitary, economic, logistical, social, and cultural criteria to the political–administrative levels that make up the Union, including all social groups (e.g., indigenous groups of the North Brazilian region). In Brazil, national governance has also been bumping into the limits of the decisions taken by various government bodies (flexibility suspension, confinement time) and judicial decisions and sentences. In four weeks, the exchange of two Ministers of Health and the Minister of Justice and Public Security has had a negative impact on the pandemic political–sanitary management. Cases of corruption by

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

45

over-invoicing in the medical supplies purchase or in the field hospitals construction that have never been completed began to go public in May 2020. The state bureaucracy also expressed national governance limitations. In China, the death of Li Wenliang highlighted the opacity of the Chinese Government’s internal bureaucracy and the slowness in publishing the fact. After alerting coworkers about discovering a new virus, in December 2019, the Wuhan authorities forced the doctors to stop spreading alarming news, under penalty of being punished. Two days before this recommendation, under popular pressure from citizens in the country, the Politburo (the main government group in a Communist country) had to admit “imperfections and deficiencies” related to that corrective procedure. The minimization of the pandemic or its denialism and the counterproductive messages by some governments have affected effective national governance. This fact has been evidenced in the United States, whose Government has denied the pandemic’s severity since the beginning, which has also occurred in Brazil and Italy. Consequently, there was a delayed response of the health system in the United States. There was some disagreement among the Federal Government and the state governors in Brazil, who have not accepted the Federal Government guidelines. This situation has caused a deep political–institutional crisis in Brazil, to which unprecedented health and economic emergency has been added. The federative order in Brazil—or Brazilian cooperative federalism—limits the president’s interference possibility in decisions from local governments in the health, education, and trade areas, since it is not a type of unitary State (Donkor et al., 2021). The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 (Art. 18) clearly defines it: “The political and administrative organization of the Federative Republic of Brazil comprises the Union, the States, the Federal District, and the Municipalities, all autonomous [...]” (Brazil, 1988). Thus, the federative pact can be described as the union of federal entities, each with autonomy, although subject to central power. Based on this understanding, federal entities join forces by a joint agreement for creating a central government that assumes some attributions of the federative units (Abrucio & Franzese, 2007; Arretche, 2002; Arretche & Rodden, 2004). The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 establishes the culmination of the political opening process by which democracy and organization were restored as federal State in the country (Costa Xavier & Costa Xavier, 2014; Pinto Filho, 2002; Serafin, 2014).

2.2  International Governance Experts in international governance analysis have already dealt with the problems arising from applying international governance standards’ central mechanisms. Other experts analyze the decision-making processes in specific policies or thematic areas such as climate changes and diseases, also looking for standards, rules, and procedures needed in other key areas.

46

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

2.3  Public, Private, and Third Sector The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global economy is evident. In the public sector, governments worldwide had their revenues negatively impacted at some point. According to a report published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the health and economic crisis required a rise in expenses. They caused a drop in tax collection, which can increase indebtedness in countries, including Brazil (United Nations, 2020). The private sector was seriously affected in general. Segments of industry and commerce linked to aviation, tourism, bars and restaurants, shopping malls, clothing, construction, and vehicles were the most impacted (Estadão, 2020). Small and medium businesses in Brazil are at risk, as 59% declared the need for loans to continue their activities without the dismissal of employees (SEBRAE, 2020). Larger companies make adjustments to reduce production costs, including lower wages and discharges, which can generate or aggravate the economic crisis in several countries (International Labour Organization, 2020). The third sector, composed of nonprofit organizations, has been conducting studies on the impacts of COVID-19. Among the main concerns is the reduction in the sources of funding coming from the public or private sector for the development of projects and the provision of services (Observatory of the Third Sector, 2020). The analysis of facts and their possible causes from these sectors can contribute to revealing institutional vulnerabilities and identifying practices that have contributed to the improvement of the related services. Considering that the pandemic response might last for a long time, these sectors need to resist to maintain national and global governance related to the pandemic. When adopting a systemic approach of analysis, there is an effort to account for the interdependent relationships between these sectors. Thus, the impact in one of the sectors will generate reflexes in the others, causing a cascade effect of local, national, and global levels. In addition to the economic viewpoint, when analyzed as a whole, these sectors needed to (and will still need to) adapt their work and production flow and train their professionals in a brief period to deal with the new reality. With this, new perspectives of services and products have emerged in different areas, especially in the informatics and health fields. The expectations for solutions to the different problems generated are deposited precisely in public, private, and third sectors, each in its role or integrating functions. An example of this is the possibility of producing an efficient vaccine to prevent the new coronavirus, coordinated by the Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ). This initiative relies on Brazilian public institutions such as the Universiade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp) and FIOCRUZ; University of Oxford; the private sector, represented by the pharmaceutical industry AstraZeneca; and the third sector, by Instituto In’Dor (Fiocruz, 2020).

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

47

3  Methodology After the records of the first infected people, a series of actions were initiated to face the new coronavirus in several countries: the structuring of field hospitals, research for vaccines and medicines, control of new infections, social isolation, among others. Throughout this process, however, it was possible to notice a series of events with the potential to worsen the pandemic, most of them related to issues of institutional order, in various sectors (public, private, and third sector), federative levels (Federal Government, States, and Municipalities), nationally and internationally. On the other hand, it is well-known by researchers in organizational management that the correct understanding and treatment of errors are valuable opportunities for continuous improvement of work processes. In order to be able to incorporate this knowledge into organizational learning, however, it is necessary to define requirements to be obeyed, both in the work processes and in the outputs of these processes, aiming to satisfy the final customer. Failure to identify any of these predefined requirements constitutes the emergence of a “non-conformity,” which needs to be adequately addressed. The nonconformities treatment consists in the correction of problems (reactive approach); the analysis and correction of the real causes of problems (corrective approach); and the analysis and correction of potential causes of problems (preventive approach), seeking greater capacity for forecasting the emergence of problems (predictive approach). It is also necessary a regular reflection about how the processes could improve their performance, that is, the critical analysis for continuous improvement (International Organization for Standardization, 2015). All management standards point that the involvement of every organizational levels in the construction of integrated management is determinant for any enterprise’s success. The commitment and leadership of high-level administration are essential. It should also be stressed that the latest version of the ISO 9001 standard (requirements of a Quality Management System) establishes the need for a risk-­ based approach and the understanding of the organization’s context, recognizing the importance of managing relationships with the interested parties (International Organization for Standardization, 2015). Besides, the concept of “organization” is flexible, applicable to private, public, and third sector entities. Since the institutions are primarily composed of organizations but not necessarily restricted to them, it is reasonable to assume that continuous institutional improvement can be achieved by constructing analogies to the organizational structuring process. Based on this hypothesis, we sought to adapt the process of handling organizational nonconformities to the context of adverse institutional interactions revealed by the COVID-19 disaster (Fig. 3.1). Due to the need to restrict the scope of the analysis, the collection of information was concentrated on events in the American continent, especially in the two countries that have registered the largest number of absolute cases to date: Brazil and the United States. Aiming at understanding the problems, in this first phase, we sought to portray the main adverse facts that eventually contributed to the aggravation of the COVID-19 crisis from December 2019 to July 2020, here interpreted as

48

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Phase 1: Facts selection • Brainstorming and web searches for the relevant adverse facts • Classification in Analysis Levels • Outputs: 96 adverse facts selected and classified

Phase 2: Facts ranking • Adverse facts ranking • Institutional failure modes identification

• Outputs: 25 relevant facts ranked from Brazil and 12 from the USA; failure modes identified

Phase 3: Causes identification • Brainstorming for potential failure modes causes • Redundancy elimination and adjustments • Outputs: potential failure modes causes identified

Fig. 3.1  An adapted process of nonconformities analysis concerning institutional vulnerabilities observed in the COVID-19 crisis

nonconformities in the light of institutional resilience requirement. This identification was made through brainstorming and web searches, especially in the professional national and international media and institutional websites, to avoid fake news. The facts were classified according to their framing in the three analysis levels previously discussed (national governance, international governance, and public–private governance–third sector). In some cases, they were classified in more than one scope. The intention was not to carry out a thorough approach to the problem but to proceed with an analysis driven to the most relevant facts, acknowledging that the vulnerabilities eventually associated with them have a more significant potential for aggravating damages and losses and, therefore, deserve greater attention. In the second phase, the 96 adverse facts previously obtained were hierarchically ranked according to their order of importance, considering their influence on the COVID-19 disaster’s aggravation. From this hierarchy, 25 facts related to Brazil (a country whose reality the authors experience most directly) and 12 related to the United States were selected (Tables 3.1 and 3.2, respectively), on which six groups of failure modes were identified, representatives of the leading institutional vulnerabilities (Fig. 3.2). In the third phase, the potential causes for these groups’ failure modes (i.e., the causes of institutional vulnerabilities) were discussed through the following question: “which causes could eventually be associated with these modes of institutional vulnerability?” It is noteworthy that this analysis’s objective was not to discuss the real causes of the problems encountered because this would require a level of detail and information from each case that is not feasible to be gathered within this work. However, it aimed to reflect on the leading causes that could be associated with vulnerabilities. From a practical point of view, this exercise probably encompasses real causes and goes beyond, allowing a broader understanding of the problems’ origins. Phase 3 outputs are presented and discussed in the following section.

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster 49

Table 3.1  Ranked relevant adverse facts from Brazil concerning the COVID-19 crisis and their impact on the analysis levels Content reported in the professional press Analysis Sources ID (adverse facts from Brazil) levels 1 Coronavírus: prefeitura recorre de decisão que suspende flexibilização (Veja, Jun 2020, available at https:// 1 Disagreement among vejario.abril.com.br/cidade/prefeitura-recorre-decisao-suspende-flexibilizacao/) public managers—Federal, State, and Municipal levels 1 Sob Teich, perfil de infectados, antes diário, demora até 10 dias para sair (UOL, May 2020, available at https:// 3 Change in methodology noticias.uol.com.br/saude/ultimas-noticias/redacao/2020/05/07/sob-teich-saude-demora-uma-semana-parafor the informing of data divulgar-perfil-de-infectados.htm) on infected and victims by Ministério da Saúde muda formato de divulgação de dados de covid-19 (Agência Brasil, Jun 2020, available at the coronavirus https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/saude/noticia/2020-06/ ministerio-da-saude-muda-formato-de-divulgacao-de-dados-de-covid-19) 2 Declaração de Eduardo Bolsonaro sobre coronavírus provoca crise diplomática com a China (O Globo, Mar 4 Declaration of Brazilian 2020, available at https://oglobo.globo.com/mundo/ politician assigning China declaracao-de-eduardo-bolsonaro-sobre-coronavirus-provoca-crise-diplomatica-com-china-24313933) as responsible for the proliferation of coronavirus in the world 6 Departure of 1st Health 1 Ministério da Saúde: Mandetta é demitido por Bolsonaro (El País Brasil, Apr 2020, available at https://brasil. Minister elpais.com/sociedade/2020-04-16/mandetta-e-demitido-por-bolsonaro.html) 1,3 Além da covid-19, persiste o vírus da corrupção no país (Jornal de Brasília, Jun 2020, available at https:// 9 Reports of overbilling— jornaldebrasilia.com.br/politica-e-poder/alem-da-covid-19-persiste-o-virus-da-corrupcao-no-pais/) corruption in public procurement during the pandemic 10 Scarcity of health items to 1,2,3 Coronavírus: pesquisa mostra que 50% dos médicos acusam falta de EPI (Agência Brasil, Apr 2020, available at fight the pandemic https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/geral/noticia/2020-04/ coronavirus-pesquisa-mostra-que-50-dos-medicos-acusam-falta-de-epi) 'Guerra' entre países por respiradores mecânicos e produção nacional insuficiente são entrave para o combate ao coronavírus no Brasil (G1, Apr 2020, available at https://g1.globo.com/bemestar/coronavirus/ noticia/2020/04/05/guerra-entre-paises-por-respiradores-mecanicos-e-producao-nacional-insuficiente-saoentrave-para-o-combate-ao-coronavirus-no-brasil.ghtml) (continued)

Content reported in the professional press Analysis Sources ID (adverse facts from Brazil) levels 12 COVID -19 threats 1 Paulinho Paiakan: Amazon indigenous chief dies with coronavírus (BBC News, Jun 2020, available at https:// indigenous villages www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-53087933) Brasil tem 10,3 mil casos confirmados de coronavírus entre indígenas, dizem entidades (G1, Jul 2020, available at https://g1.globo.com/bemestar/coronavirus/noticia/2020/07/02/brasil-tem-mais-de-103-mil-casosconfirmados-de-coronavirus-entre-indigenas-dizem-entidades.ghtml) Covid-19 se espalha entre indígenas brasileiros e já ameaça povos isolados (El País, Jun 2020, available at https://brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2020-06-17/covid-19-se-espalha-entre-indigenas-brasileiros-e-ja-ameaca-povosisolados.html) COVID-19 e os Povos Indígenas (Jun 2020, available at https://covid19.socioambiental.org/) 1,2 Bolsonaro participa de manifestação e cumprimenta apoiadores, que fazem críticas a STF (Uol, May 2020, 15 Negationist statements available at https://jc.ne10.uol.com.br/politica/2020/05/5610990-bolsonaro-participa-de-manifestacao-eabout the seriousness of cumprimenta-apoiadores%2D%2Dque-fazem-criticas-a-stf.html) the pandemic “O negacionismo comprometeu a resposta do Brasil à pandemia” (Revista Pesquisa Fapesp, Jun 2020, available at https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/o-negacionismo-comprometeu-a-resposta-do-brasil-a-pandemia/?%0Autm_ source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=EdOnline&fbclid=IwAR3GccZjhf1AfjAsKuFonhRxS o7iVVfvkwRQupzXL-YmuY4oXB_szpUpkA4) Combinação de pandemia e governos autoritários no mundo é preocupante, diz Lilia Schwarcz (BBC, May 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/brasil-52682049) 1 Governo do Amazonas anuncia saída de Rodrigo Tobias, e Simone Papaiz assume secretaria de saúde (G1, Apr 18 Exchange of health 2020, available at https://g1.globo.com/am/amazonas/noticia/2020/04/08/simone-papaiz-e-a-nova-secretaria-desecretaries of the States/ saude-do-am-em-meio-a-risco-de-colapso-no-setor.ghtml) Municipalities https://g1.globo.com/rj/rio-de-janeiro/noticia/2020/05/17/secretario-de-saude-do-rj-deixa-o-cargo.ghtml Secretário de Saúde do RJ deixa o cargo durante a pandemia de Covid-19 (G1, May 2020, available at https:// plantaoenfoco.com.br/politica/troca-de-comando-na-saude-de-niteroi/)

Table 3.1 (continued)

50 L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

(continued)

Content reported in the professional press Analysis Sources ID (adverse facts from Brazil) levels 3 Pandemia revela dificuldade no acesso ao crédito, diz presidente do BNDES (Agência Senado, Jun 2020, 20 The difficulty of available at https://www12.senado.leg.br/noticias/materias/2020/06/16/ companies in access to pandemia-revela-dificuldade-no-acesso-ao-credito-diz-presidente-do-bndes) credit Em crise, pequenas empresas têm dificuldade de acessar linhas de crédito (G1, May 2020, available at https:// g1.globo.com/economia/noticia/2020/05/16/em-crise-pequenas-empresas-tem-dificuldade-de-acessar-linhas-decredito.ghtml) Menos de 20% do crédito para socorrer empresas foi desembolsado (Folha de S. Paulo, Jul 2020, available at https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/mercado/2020/07/menos-de-20-do-credito-para-socorrer-empresas-foidesembolsado.shtml) 21 Delay in releasing 3 Caixa demora para pagar R$ 600 e diz que prazo de 5 dias úteis é estimativa (Uol, Apr 2020, available at https:// emergency aid payments economia.uol.com.br/noticias/redacao/2020/04/17/auxilio-emergencial-coronavoucher-cadastro-em-analiseprazo-caixa.htm) Beneficiários reclamam de demora para liberação dos saques do auxílio emergencial (Extra, Jun 2020, available at https://extra.globo.com/noticias/economia/beneficiarios-reclamam-de-demora-para-liberacao-dos-saques-doauxilio-emergencial-24501888.html) Na epidemia, governo ignora sistema que protege mais pobres (DW, May 2020, available at https://www.dw. 22 Public authorities' lack of 3 com/pt-br/ knowledge about people in na-epidemia-governo-ignora-sistema-de-assist%C3%AAncia-social-que-protege-mais-pobres/a-53537488) need 1,3 MPF: governo precisa esclarecer dificuldades no acesso a auxílio de R$ 600 (Uol, May 2020, available at 23 Difficulties of those https://economia.uol.com.br/noticias/redacao/2020/05/05/mpf-governo-precisa-esclarecer-dificuldade-deaffected in solving acesso-a-auxilio-de-r-600.htm) problems to access the emergency resource

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster 51

Content reported in the professional press Analysis Sources ID (adverse facts from Brazil) levels 24 Delay in delivery of 1,3 Atraso na entrega dos hospitais de campanha do RJ completa 2 meses; apenas duas unidades foram abertas (G1, campaign hospitals Jun 2020, available at https://g1.globo.com/rj/rio-de-janeiro/noticia/2020/06/30/atraso-na-entrega-dos-hospitaisde-campanha-do-rj-completa-2-meses-apenas-duas-unidades-foram-abertas.ghtml) Justiça do Trabalho determina melhorias urgentes no Hospital de campanha do Maracanã (G1, May 2020, available at https://g1.globo.com/rj/rio-de-janeiro/noticia/2020/05/27/justica-do-trabalho-determina-melhoriasurgentes-no-hospital-de-campanha-do-maracana.ghtml) Demora do Governo para inaugurar hospital de campanha preocupa Wilker (Informe Amazonas, Apr 2020, available at https://informeamazonas.com.br/ demora-do-governo-para-inaugurar-hospital-de-campanha-preocupa-wilker/) 27 Pressures for liberation 1,3 Maia: Fim do isolamento é pressão de quem está 'perdendo dinheiro na Bolsa' (Uol, Mar 2020, available at from social isolation https://economia.uol.com.br/noticias/redacao/2020/03/25/maia-fim-do-isolamento-e-pressao-de-quem-estaperdendo-dinheiro-na-bolsa.htm) “É inoportuno falar em flexibilizar isolamento quando vemos subir o número de mortos” (El País, May 2020, available at https://brasil.elpais.com/ brasil/2020-05-12/e-inoportuno-falar-em-flexibilizar-isolamento-quando-vemos-subir-o-numero-de-mortos. html) 3 Mais de 600 mil pequenas empresas fecharam as portas com coronavírus (CNN Brasil, Apr 2020, available at 30 Company / business breakdown https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/business/2020/04/09/ mais-de-600-mil-pequenas-empresas-fecharam-as-portas-com-coronavirus) 34 Lack / shortage of PPE in 1,2,3 See item 10. hospitals 1 Governo não garante socorro a estados e municípios ainda em maio (Correio Braziliense, May 2020, available 35 Slow distribution of at https://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/app/noticia/politica/2020/05/21/interna_politica,857201/governo-naoresources to States and garante-socorro-a-estados-e-municipios-ainda-em-maio.shtml) Municipalities to fight the pandemic 38 WHO communication 2 Pessoas sem sintomas podem transmitir coronavírus — entenda a confusão envolvendo fala da OMS (BBC failure (not from Brazil) News Brasil, Jun 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/geral-52988154)

Table 3.1 (continued)

52 L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

1

1,2,3

50 The economic crisis before 1,2,3 the pandemic 56 Market reactions 1,2,3

49 Increased unemployment

Moradores de favelas relatam a dura realidade durante a crise do coronavírus (CNN Brasil, May 2020, available at https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/nacional/2020/05/03/ moradores-de-favelas-relatam-suas-realidades-durante-a-crise-do-coronavirus) Entre o vírus e a bala: nas favelas, insegurança dentro e fora de casa (Veja, Jun 2020, available at https://veja. abril.com.br/brasil/entre-o-virus-e-a-bala-nas-favelas-inseguranca-dentro-e-fora-de-casa/) Trabalhadores informais no Brasil estarão entre os mais afetados no mundo (Uol, Apr 2020, available at https:// noticias.uol.com.br/colunas/jamil-chade/2020/04/07/trabalhadores-informais-no-brasil-estarao-entre-os-maisafetados-no-mundo.htm) Os números que mostram o impacto da pandemia no emprego (Nexo, May 2020, available at https://www. nexojornal.com.br/expresso/2020/05/28/ Os-n%C3%BAmeros-que-mostram-o-impacto-da-pandemia-no-emprego) Brasil caminha para maior crise econômica de sua história (DW, Jun 2020, available at https://www.dw.com/ pt-br/brasil-caminha-para-maior-crise-econ%C3%B4mica-de-sua-hist%C3%B3ria/a-53488177) Bolsa cai 30%, e dólar sobe 16% em março com pandemia de coronavírus (Agência Brasil, Mar 2020, available at https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/economia/noticia/2020-03/ bolsa-cai-30-e-dolar-sobe-16-em-marco-com-pandemia-de-coronavirus)

Analysis levels Sources 1 Qual o efeito da medida que isenta agentes públicos na pandemia (Nexo, May 2020, available at https://www. nexojornal.com.br/expresso/2020/05/14/ Qual-o-efeito-da-medida-que-isenta-agentes-p%C3%BAblicos-na-pandemia)

47 A high number of informal 1,3 in the economy

Content reported in the professional press ID (adverse facts from Brazil) 39 Attempted provisional measure on exemption from accountability to public managers during the pandemic 44 The difficulty of social isolation in needy communities

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster 53

Table 3.2  Ranked relevant adverse facts from the USA concerning the COVID-19 crisis and their impact on the analysis levels Content reported in the professional press Analysis levels Sources ID (adverse facts from USA) 1 (Threat of) US exit from WHO 2 Trump ameaça retirar EUA da OMS (DW, May 2020, available at https://www.dw.com/pt-br/ trump-amea%C3%A7a-retirar-eua-da-oms/a-53492650) 5 Accusations about delays in Chinese 2 Quais as suspeitas de que a China esconde casos de contaminação (Expresso, Apr 2020, information about the pandemic available at https://www.nexojornal.com.br/expresso/2020/04/23/ Quais-as-suspeitas-de-que-a-China-esconde-casos-de-contamina%C3%A7%C3%A3o) 7 Negationist statements about the 1,2,3 'Gripezinha ou resfriadinho' e outras 7 frases controversas de líderes mundiais sobre o seriousness of the pandemic coronavírus (BBC News Mundo, Apr 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/ internacional-52205918) 9 Low coverage of a public health 1 A ameaça do coronavírus nos EUA, onde milhões não têm licença médica nem saúde pública system (BBC News Brasil, Mar 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/ internacional-51746841) 12 The high spread of the pandemic in the 1 'Sentença de morte': o número oculto do coronavírus nas prisões dos Estados Unidos (O prison system Globo, May 2020, available at https://oglobo.globo.com/mundo/ sentenca-de-morte-numero-oculto-do-coronavirus-nas-prisoes-dos-estados-unidos-24433081) Pandemia coloca em xeque sistema prisional pelo mundo (Folha de S. Paulo, May 2020, available at https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/mundo/2020/05/pandemia-coloca-em-xequesistema-prisional-pelo-mundo.shtml) Detentos denunciam falta de produtos de limpeza em presídios nos EUA (Uol, Apr 2020, available at https://noticias.uol.com.br/internacional/ultimas-noticias/2020/04/01/detentoseua-processos-coronavirus.htm)

54 L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

30

24

16 17 19 21

ID 15

Content reported in the professional press (adverse facts from USA) Inefficiency in the realization of economic aid Deficiencies in coronavirus testing Scarce production / supply of PPE Non-scientific statements by leaders Late measures were taken against COVID-19 proliferation The diplomatic crisis between China and the USA increases during the pandemic Coronavirus exposes the fragility of labor law in the USA 1

2

1,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1

Analysis levels 1,3

Coronavírus nos EUA: 3 mudanças drásticas causadas pela pandemia no país que chegou a 100 mil mortos (BBC News Brasil, May 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/ internacional-52828789) See item 9.

Sources Coronavirus response: Things the US has got right - and got wrong (BBC News, May 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52579200) See item 15. See item 15. See item 7. See item 9.

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster 55

56

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

International governance VI. Difficulty of integrated international action

National governance I. Legal-political-administrative issues II. Divergences between Union, States and Municipalities III. Vulnerability of social systems IV. Public information and communication issues

Public, private and third sector V. Productive and economic impact

Fig. 3.2  Groups of failure modes and their relationship to the institutional vulnerability analysis levels

4  Results and Discussions In this section, we sought to explore the potential causes for each group of failure modes representative of institutional vulnerabilities: (1) State’s Legal–political– administrative issues; (2) Federal, State, and Municipal divergences; (3) Vulnerabilities of social systems; (4) Public information and risk communication issues; (5) Productive and economic impacts, and; (6) Difficulty on an integrated international action.

4.1  State’s Legal–Political–Administrative issues The State’s legal–political–administrative issues probably compose the group of institutional vulnerabilities that most affects disasters since they include nonconformities that involve all organizational levels (operational, tactical, and strategic). They cross various organizations and institutions in all sectors (public, private, and third sectors) and federative entities (Municipalities, States, and Federal Government). Therefore, this is the group the most articulates to the other groups of vulnerabilities, with the potential for geometric propagation of the damages and losses of the disaster through a chain of interrelated events. On the other hand, it is also the group with the most significant potential for disaster reduction when treated to reduce its vulnerabilities. Considering the potential causes’ particularities and similarities, the group of “State’s legal-political-administrative issues” was subdivided into the structure represented in Table 3.3.

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

57

Table 3.3 State’s legal–political–administrative: aspects of political nature and legal– administrative nature State’s legal–political– administrative issues

Aspects of political nature

Aspects of legal– administrative nature

Political interference in institutions Political disputes Public governance unguided by ethics and social commitment Strategic level issues Tactical level issues Operational level issues Issues related to vulnerabilities in internal and interinstitutional relations Issues related to the institutional mission, transversal to all levels

The aspects of political nature are related to the performance and influence of political agents on the affected system, who may use the institutions that compose the system to achieve their political–party–ideological interests. The subgroups that make up the political aspects and potential causes of institutional vulnerabilities are shown in Table 3.4. The legal–administrative aspects are related to issues involving the management of the institutions and organizations that compose the affected system based on the legal–administrative framework that regulates them. Since these aspects involve different levels of management (strategic, tactical, and operational), it is necessary to define the limits of the system/subsystem to be analyzed. These limits are flexible and should be chosen according to the convenience for a better understanding of the problem. For example, to understand the institutional vulnerabilities involving the Federal Government, the strategic level could be the presidency of the republic/ civilian house. In contrast, the tactical level can be understood as the ministries’ level, and the operational level would be the level of the secretariats that compose the ministries. However, to understand the vulnerabilities in a greater degree of detail, a relevant subsystem can be chosen, i.e., the Ministry of Health, in the COVID-19 disaster. In this way, the Ministry of Health can be positioned at a strategic level; at the tactical level, there would be the secretariats subordinated to the ministry; and at an operational level, there would be the organizations that work directly with the citizen. The two approaches provide complementary and relevant information for the composition of a broader picture of institutional vulnerabilities under the legal–administrative aspect. The subgroups that make up the legal–administrative aspects are described below, highlighting that political interference in institutions is a subgroup of political causes with the potential to affect all subgroups of administrative-legal nature. The legal–administrative elements and potential causes are shown in Table 3.5.

58

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Table 3.4  Aspects of political nature and potential causes of institutional vulnerabilities. Aspects of political nature Political interference in institutions consists of the interference of political nature with the risk of submitting the institutions to the political–party–ideological interests of a group and affecting the capacity to accomplish institutional missions

Political disputes: consist of using the disaster as a stage for political clashes, at a loss of the articulations and integrations necessary to overcome the problem

Public governance not guided by ethics and social commitment: can be understood as the root cause of all other vulnerabilities of political nature

Potential causes The predominance of political requirements over technical ones. Institutional hierarchical structure based on political indications The replacement of managers who had obtained political projection during the disaster Lack of alignment between technical and political discourses Decision-making is based on subjective aspects (mainly political–ideological opinions) and not on facts or scientific studies Political disputes Public governance is not guided by ethics and social commitment Vanities/Political interests for maintaining power status Intense politicization of the disaster Intense political–ideological polarization, turning joint actions to be difficult Political interference in institutions Public governance is not guided by ethics and social commitment The politicization of the most vulnerable groups to indulge the political–ideological apparatus of the group in power Lack of political will Deficiency in the construction of interfederative articulations Deficiency in the construction of interfederative articulations Political interference in institutions Political disputes

4.2  Federal, State, and Municipal Divergences Intergovernmental coordination is a specific requirement that deals with complex relations between the Federal Government, the States, and Municipalities (Abrucio & Franzese, 2007), in the federative model. If differences already existed between the federated entities, these became even more pronounced during the pandemic. This group of failure modes reflects the facts associated with such divergences among federated entities, both regarding the methodology for disclosing data about

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

59

Table 3.5  The legal–administrative aspects and potential causes. The legal–administrative aspects Potential causes Overly verticalized/centralized management, with little Issues at the strategic level: willingness to engage in a dialogue between different which are related to the management levels management of the highest organizational/institutional Administrative–legal–technical irregularities at the strategic level level, within the limits of the Omission by administrators when faced with irregularities of chosen system (high-level administrative–legal–technical nature administration) and include Low political–administrative skills/experience of strategic-level mainly issues such as managers institutional policies, Low systemic view, both at national and international levels strategic planning, Public administration distant from the population (as opposed to organizational structure, the policy of proximity) institutional performance, decision-making, High dependence on international industries/companies, interinstitutional relationship, especially Chinese ones possible interface with Nonexistence/ineffectiveness of a national self-sufficiency aspects of a political nature, program for the production of critical/strategic items among others Nonexistence/ineffectiveness of an administration focused on reducing vulnerabilities Public procurement systems not geared toward emergency procurement Ambiguous or conflicting public guidelines Decisions based on subjective aspects (feelings and personal opinions) and not on facts or scientific studies Poor leadership skills of strategic level administrators Limited knowledge of the organizational/institutional system under the responsibility of strategic level administrators Political interference in institutions Administrative–legal–technical irregularities at the managerial Issues at the tactical level: level which are related to the organizational/institutional The omission of administrators when faced with irregularities of mid-level management, administrative, legal, and technical nature within the limits of the The powerlessness of administrators when faced with chosen system, and which irregularities of administrative, legal, and technical nature include the breakdown of Low autonomy of administrators in the chain of command strategic objectives through Low technical-administrative skills/experience of tactical level to operational and tactical administrators goals, as well as the Poor leadership skills of tactical level administrators coordination required to achieve these objectives, the Disbelief in the occurrence of specific risk scenarios, deemed to measurement of performance, be unlikely the anticipation of problems Limited knowledge of the organizational/institutional subsystem and the provision of under the responsibility of tactical level administrators resources ( mainly personnel, Overly verticalized/centralized management, with little materials, equipment, willingness to engage in dialogue with the operational level training, infrastructure, work Political interference in the institutions procedures)

(continued)

60 Table 3.5  (continued) The legal–administrative aspects Issues at the operational level: related to the functional level of the organizations/institutions, i.e., the core activities they perform, which are intended to carry out products or services for the end-user

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Potential causes Administrative–legal–technical irregularities at the operational level Lack of/deficiency in the disaster information collection system Deficiencies in the organizational information systems Highly bureaucratic procedures Lack of/deficiency in gathering and keeping records of vulnerable groups Confusing working procedures Low-skilled/inexperienced operational team Political interference in the institutions Intrainstitutional divisions and internal competitions Issues related to intrainstitutional and Low institutional capacity to resist to political pressure interinstitutional behaviors: Nonexistence/unawareness of institutional resources and These concern vulnerabilities mechanisms for technical resistance related to the organizational/ Low rate of institutional self-surveillance institutional culture and cross-institutional articulation Low rate of institutional self-organization Nonexistence/ineffectiveness of institutional codes of conduct/ institutional policies for alignment with social ethics Low rate of interinstitutional coordination and cooperation, especially with controlling agencies Low institutional transparency Political interference in the institutions Deficiencies in organizational information systems Issues related to the institutional mission: involve Inefficiency/inertia in public administration cross-sectoral vulnerabilities Limited knowledge of the target audience, i.e., the end-user at all organizational/ Lack/deficiency of an integrated management system and an institutional levels and are integrated systemic management therefore associated with Lacking/deficient transparency in disaster data systemic deficiencies that Low integration between multi-institutional and multilevel directly affect the effectiveness with which the information systems institutional mission is Deficiency in the preventive approach of systems for public performed procurement control Low effectiveness of control systems Nonexistence/inefficiency of an integrated contingency plan for different threats and risk scenarios Low integration between public, private and third sectors in providing systemic solutions Nonexisting/inefficient communication channels between the Government and citizens Unawareness of studies about better ways to conciliate health and economy (paths to minimize the disaster) Political interference in institutions

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

61

infected persons and deaths and pressures to finish social isolation. Yet another fact refers to the delay in allocating federal resources to States and Municipalities to combat the impacts of the new coronavirus. Adopting different attitudes toward the disease (denial or minimization versus combative action) also highlighted the differences between these entities. This group reflects the dimensions related to the divergences between the federative entities. In a first plan, the potential causes for such differences may be associated with the lack of articulation, which resulted in concurrent action instead of cooperative effort between the entities. In Brazil, the Federal Government’s delay in defining measures to combat the pandemic transferred to the States the responsibility of the first response to the crisis. The political scenario, evidenced by ideological polarization, was difficult to establish partnerships between the federative entities, also resulting in competitive actions between the Federal Government and States to acquire equipment. Political vainness/interests in maintaining power status and public governance not guided by ethics and social commitment were also identified as potential causes of institutional vulnerabilities. In another analysis level, some potential causes linked to external influences on public management were also identified, i.e., the intense pressure from the private sector over public managers for an early end to social isolation to quickly re-­ establish its activities. On the other hand, health care managers were opposed, fearful of the exponential increase in contagion and the pressing need for hospital beds, confirming the lack of consensus between the health and economic areas. The predominance of political requirements over technical ones represents a potential cause of divergence between federative entities, i.e., hiring people with low capacity or little experience, just based on political criteria. Finally, the low transparency and traceability of public accounts also caused differences among Brazil’s public administration. Although progress has been made in recent years, most of the transparency portals, in the States and especially in the Municipalities, do not contain reliable, updated, and open information (Zuccolotto & Teixeira, 2019).

4.3  Vulnerabilities of Social Systems Vulnerability and coping are two crucial aspects of facing the pandemic (Wong et al., 2020). Pre-existing vulnerabilities were particularly pronounced as the pandemic advanced across countries. Social isolation and hygiene measures were also not followed by the different population segments, due to the poorest’s precarious housing conditions and infrastructure. These aspects were faced both by residents in urban areas and by traditional peoples. Socioenvironmental vulnerabilities are produced from social and environmental processes that make the living conditions and social protection of populations precarious. In synthesis, socioenvironmental vulnerability results from socioeconomic structures that produce both poor living conditions and deteriorated environments,

62

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

expressing itself as lower risk reduction capacity and low resilience (Freire et al., 2014; Freitas et al., 2012; Narváez et al., 2009). Exposure is an essential concept within this context as it enables to identify groups more or less vulnerable to the threat. In a pandemic, nations and populations are somewhat vulnerable to getting and spreading the disease; however, according to the level of exposure, some groups are more likely than others. Exposure is a crucial concept of environmental health that allows establishing possible relationships between the population and the socioenvironmental conditions in which certain groups live and work, making them more exposed to the threat (Freitas et al., 2014). The groups most exposed to the COVID-19 are the impoverished populations (without the conditions to carry out the recommended social isolation), homeless people, refugee settlements, workers in essential services such as health, security, cleaning, transportation, informal and self-employed service providers who have no other form of income and continue to carry out their work activities. Clinical studies consider the elderly and people with pre-existing illnesses (diabetics, hypertensive, cardiac, asthmatics, patients in cancer treatment) as belonging to risk groups, which may develop the most severe form of the disease. The chances of death increase substantially when risk groups are in conditions of socioenvironmental vulnerability and high exposure levels. Therefore, only health measures are not enough to deal with this disaster. They need to be accompanied by socioeconomic protection measures, requiring the institutions to have a high level of organization and response capacity. From the economic perspective, the high number of workers involved in the informal economy has constituted a directly impacted contingent due to the reduction in people’s circulation and demand for services. Small and microenterprises also had their revenues affected, leading many to declare bankruptcy, which resulted in increased unemployment. A previous economic crisis and high social inequality are also determinants for the accentuation of vulnerabilities. Social systems’ vulnerability is a social construction, resulting from past choices that reflect on the present and may become more pronounced in the future. In a pandemic context, the causes of socioeconomic systems’ vulnerabilities were accentuated in the face of the ongoing economic crisis, deepening inequalities. The lack of multisectoral policies to attend the most vulnerable social groups, such as universal access to basic sanitation and health, and the eradication of precarious settlements, highlighted the absence of policies oriented to the reduction of vulnerabilities and social commitment. During the spread of the new coronavirus infections, a constant concern was the public health system’s attendance capacity, especially for the poorest. The greater exposure of these groups to infection could overload the system, reinforcing the need to expand this infrastructure. Examples of the lack of public management close to the population are the deficiency of a registration system to identify these vulnerable groups and the inexistence/inefficiency of communication channels between Government and citizens. The absence of such data makes it more challenging to formulate actions aimed at the priority groups. One of the causes may also be the lack of definition of the

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

63

vulnerable in different risk scenarios and the inefficiency of national and international metrics and management protocols focused on reducing vulnerabilities. The absence of a political will, political–ideological polarization with repercussions on the deepening of inequalities, and public governance not guided by ethics and social commitment have also been pointed out as potential causes of this group’s vulnerabilities.

4.4  Public Information and Risk Communication Issues In disaster scenarios, risk communication plays a significant role in the reduction of human losses. In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, it has proven to be even more relevant, as it can increase adherence to protective behaviors, develop a policy of transparency and information, and discourage the spread of disinformation (Gonçalves, 2020). The adverse events attributed to this group are related to the public statements of managers softening or denying the seriousness of the pandemic and blaming a particular country for the spread of the new coronavirus. In the same way, public information transparency is also relevant, since it corroborates for the better planning of response actions and the recovery of social and economic activities. The lack of real knowledge about the pandemic data can influence public opinion and cause, for example, the pressure to end social isolation. Among the adverse facts recorded in this regard, the accusations of misappropriation of public procurement funds, both at the State and Municipal levels, were highlighted. Also, the dismissal of Brazil’s health minister during the pandemic (two health ministers have been replaced to date) directly impacted the change in the methodology for counting the infected people and deaths, leading to a delay in data dissemination and consolidation. There were also exchanges of health secretaries at the State and Municipal levels, making it difficult to continue lines of action. The caution of WHO’s official communication of pandemic status may have caused conflict of preventive actions in countries at the international level. Statements by politicians in some countries have questioned the organization’s exemption in the face of economic groups’ pressure. A potential cause may be a lack of well-defined criteria used for declaring the pandemic state. The use of communication channels, especially social media, has demonstrated the power of spreading misinformation by fake news, minimizing and denying the effects of the pandemic. The intense political and ideological polarization may have influenced risk communication and the absence of public information throughout the worsening of COVID-19 pandemic in affected countries. Discourses and behaviors of managers, which conflicted with the health guidelines, still collaborated to influence the population’s perception of the seriousness of the pandemic. This conflict also occurred between hi-level managers, demonstrating the absence of internal articulation. One point of significant disagreement was the resumption of economic activities by the end of social isolation, directly contradicting the technical health sector’s recommendations and the WHO. There are still

64

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Table 3.6  Public information and risk communication issues and potential causes Public information and risk communication issues

Potential causes Low technical-administrative capacity/experience of the replaced managers Institutional communication behavior is driven to misinformation or change of focus of responsibility Disregard for WHO’s recommendations in detriment to economic issues Lack of understandings between hi-level managers Lack of transparency about disclosure of data on infected persons and casualties The predominance of political requirements over technical requirements The pressure of the private sector over the health sector

few studies on the best way to reconcile health and economic aspects to minimize this kind of disaster. However, pressure from the private sector was evident in this scenario, and the conflict of interest in privileging operations to the largest contributors. This sequence of disagreements resulted in difficulties in joint actions between the federative entities. The predominance of political–economic requirements in detriment to the technical ones caused the exchange of health secretaries in the middle of the crisis in Brazil. This transition process of managers ended up influencing questions about ongoing procedures, such as reporting data on infected persons and deaths. This change had a rather negative impact, conveying the idea of hiding the data. This subgroup may have, among others, the following potential causes, shown in Table 3.6. Regarding the misuse of public resources, a potential cause may be the low transparency and traceability of public accounts, especially for emergency procurement.

4.5  Productive and Economic Impacts The productive and economic impacts group brings together potential causes of economic damage to people and businesses in the context of disasters. These two types of losses are mutually reinforcing to each other. Adverse economic impacts on people affect their family budgets, generally reducing demand for products and services, which results in new economic implications for companies and people. On the other side, adverse economic impacts on companies’ harm business finances. When followed by a demand decrease for products and services, it will probably lead to layoffs and reduced consumption of inputs for production throughout the production chain, resulting in further economic impacts on companies and people. Because of this high level of interdependence, this group’s causes will be treated simply as causes of economic impact.

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

65

It is important to note that, when dealing with economic losses, it is necessary to understand how threats (processes capable of causing disasters) affect people and companies in different sectors. For example, the new coronavirus threat seems to most strongly affect macro sectors directly related to the urban environment (industry, commerce, and services). The macro-financial and public sectors’ economic impacts will not be discussed in this group because of their particular dynamics. However, disaster situations can also bring business opportunities for some companies and sectors of the economy, as long as they are prepared to operate in these peculiar circumstances. Pre-existing vulnerabilities are also determinant for the worsening of the economic impact. The low effectiveness of policies focused on enhancing micro and small enterprises has reinforced the vulnerability of this group. The low digitalization level of such businesses has blocked their participation in an increasingly digital market, consequently reducing their ability to adapt in the short term. Another difficulty has been the access to credit: the public resources were made available in partnership to the private banking system in Brazil, which imposed rather restrictive criteria for the concession of bank loans to most companies, such as high rates and unenforceable terms of payment. The aggravation of economic losses can also be attributed to the lack or inefficiency of an intersectoral and multithreat contingency plan, looking at possible risk scenarios. The unclear procedures by the institutions involved in prevention and response resulted in uncoordinated actions. In a way, the disbelief in the occurrence of specific risk scenarios, considered unlikely, highlighted the lack of technical and management preparation, leading to reactive postures. The potential causes related to economic impacts were broken down into the following subgroups: instability in the business environment, resource constraints, and demand constraints for products and services. This subgroup and causes of institutional vulnerabilities are shown in Table 3.7.

4.6  Difficulty on an Integrated International Action The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the need for strong integration between countries for effective action to combat and reduce socioeconomic impacts. However, a deepening of the crisis was revealed, especially in those countries with low response capacity. This group’s adverse facts are directed related to: (i) a sharped diplomatic crisis between countries; (ii) the equipment seizure, and (iii) questioning the data disclosure. Another relevant aspect was the negationist or minimization declarations of leaders from different countries. The great demand for hospital equipment led to its rapid shortage. Most of these products are from China, which was gradually restarting its activities. From an economic point of view, the global market reacted proportionately as the pandemic advanced around the world, with high variation in the stock exchanges, i.e., a decline in the values at the airline and tourism stock Market, and an appreciation tendency in the pharmaceutical sector.

66

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

The difficulty of an integrated international action revealed the political–ideological interference on the countries. The misalignment of priorities (i.e., economic versus humanitarian) between nations was another cause that may have interfered with diplomatic issues. The politicization of the disaster led to the questioning of preventive measures, such as social isolation, or the use of inefficient drugs to combat the new coronavirus and financial assistance to social groups most impacted. Decision-making based on subjective criteria, e.g., on personal opinion, showed a Table 3.7  Productive and economic impacts and potential causes Productive and economic impacts Potential causes Turbulent political environment and with shades of Instability in the business environment: public governance radicalism is probably the most influential The predominance of political requirements rather than factor in the stability of the technical ones business environment since it has Lack of alignment between technical and political discourses the prerogative to act in the whole Political–ideological discourses not aligned with science affected system, being able to articulate intersectoral, national, Decision-making based on subjective aspects (personal feelings and opinions) and not on facts and scientific studies and international measures, Ambiguity or conflict between public guidelines including changing the game rules (legislation) in favor of Public management distant from the population (as opposed disaster reduction. Markets are to proximity policy) the second-largest influencing Low national and international systemic vision factor in the business Low integration between the public, private and third sectors environment, which act to in the provision of systemic solutions anticipate and amplify investor expectations, but are also strongly Low exploitation of existent national solutions from the influenced by public governance. public, private and third sectors Low effectiveness of policies aimed at strengthening micro Therefore, weak, turbulent, and inefficient public governance not and small enterprises only contributes to the Absence or inefficiency of an integrated contingency plan nonreduction of disaster damage for different threats and risk scenarios and losses but to their Absence or inefficiency of an integrated international considerable amplification, protocol for disaster reduction and response requiring timely and integrated Insufficient disaster preparation, including emergency action of public, private, and third infrastructure and provision sector institutions to eliminate Disbelief in the occurrence of specific risk scenarios, obstacles to disaster reduction considered unlikely Unawareness of the evolution of the threat (in this case, the virus) and its consequences Unawareness of studies on better ways to reconcile health and economy (ways to minimize the disaster) High Stock Exchange variation High variation in the price of commodities High exchange rate variation High level of bureaucracy State’s political–administrative–legal issues

(continued)

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster Table 3.7  (continued) Productive and economic impacts Resource restrictions for the production of goods and services: this subgroup fits causes related to the scarcity of resources to maintain independent, formal and informal companies and professionals’ core activities. If the demand for products and services during a disaster is guaranteed, restrictions tend to be concentrated on scarce labor resources, materials, and production equipment. It is essential to keep the necessary conditions for production, as long as it does not aggravate the disaster. For example, in the case of the COVID-19 disaster, many countries restricted industrial operations, commerce, and services to avoid a burden on the health system; the essential services were maintained with security protocols. On the other hand, it is necessary to guarantee assistance to companies and workers who cannot work during the disaster, minimizing the risk of losing the country’s economic capacity. In summary, it is crucial to guarantee the production conditions for those who can and must produce, with necessary adaptations. It is also essential to ensure the livelihood conditions for those that cannot work through financial assistance measures

67

Potential causes Lack/low coverage of a specific program aimed at digitalizing business and economy Absence/deficiency of financial protection mechanisms for companies in a disaster context (funds, insurance, etc.) High dependence on international industries/companies, especially on the Chinese ones High interdependence on the global economy Protectionist measures (national selfishness) to the detriment of the worsening of the disaster in other countries Absence of an international agreement to standardize access to resources and minimize disasters on a global scale Lack or inefficiency of a national self-sufficiency program in the production of critical/strategic items Logistics problems, mainly in the acquisition of inputs for production The slowness of the Federal Government to assist companies with credit lines Difficulties in releasing loans due to the use of the private banking system as an intermediary to public financing The ecosystem of vulnerable micro and small businesses The difficulty for small and micro enterprises to access credit (high-interest rates and bureaucracy) Lack of credit products adapted to the reality of the disaster (interest rates, credit analysis, adequate terms, and guarantees) Low representativeness of the information and small business sectors Lack of tributary flexibilization during the pandemic situation Businesses financial vulnerability, before the pandemic Shortage of qualified labor in the production of strategic items for disaster reduction The imbalance between the availability of health professionals, hospitals, and equipment (in case of COVID-19 disaster)

(continued)

68 Table 3.7  (continued) Productive and economic impacts Demand restrictions for products and services: are a complex threat to the maintenance of certain businesses, since the customer decision of buying involves several aspects, such as financial availability, need or interest in the good or service purchased, price of the product, supplier’s reputation, future prospects, etc. It is possible in some situations that the low demand for products and services is a market option when the public governance must assume the role of guiding and facilitating the migration of certain business models to activities better aligned with demand. An example is the case of self-service restaurants in Brazil (where the customer serves himself at a buffet common to all customers and pays for the weighted food, differently from the “a la carte” system, with a menu meal). The new hygiene habits stimulated by the new coronavirus prevention routine may lead users to avoid this type of restaurant due to the greater exposure of food to eventual contamination vehicles. This may impose adaptation or reformulation measures by enterprises of the sector

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Potential causes The economic crisis before the pandemic Lack/deficiency in the registration of vulnerable groups, with a view to the timely implementation of assistance measures Absence/inefficiency of communication channels between government citizens Insufficient emergency financial assistance for affected populations Delays in providing economical solutions to the affected population Difficulties in the logistics of delivering products and services Ambiguity or conflict between public guidelines Difficulty in adapting the operations of companies and people in disaster situations The difficulty of companies in communicating with their target audience in the new reality of the disaster Loss of sales channels (for example, street commerce with face-to-face service Lack/inefficiency of a national program to improve local businesses in emergencies

low resistance from institutions to political pressure. Although the consequences caused by the new coronavirus were unknown, it did not exclude countries from taking preventive measures. Considering the weak/slow legal implications of their actions, some politicians and managers acted negligently. Thus, the lack of coordinated and synergistic efforts guided by scientific experts led to the worsening effects of the pandemic. The diplomatic attack between the United States and China could be a potential cause of international coordination difficulty. The exchange of accusations about the origin of the virus between the two global economic powers could impact the global market’s uncertainty. This instability may generate an economic retraction on the other countries, depending on the degree of import/export operations.

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

69

The lack of international integrated protocols for disasters may also influence the low coordinated actions. For example, it was noticed minimal dialogue among border countries and the trade blocs, such as Mercosur. On the other hand, some countries’ selfishness was noted to protect trade policy or sovereignty. The uncoordinated closing of borders and accusations between countries have shown a lack of global alliance.

5  Summary and Conclusions The simultaneous existence in current modern societies of various kinds of phenomena (economic, political, environmental, migratory), such as the COVID-19 pandemic, has characteristics of indeterminism, entropy, unpredictability, and insecurity of possibilities. Management based on risk is necessary and urgent to handle these uncertainties, demanding an integrated multi-institutional approach to achieve effective results. The present chapter analyzes the institutional vulnerabilities exposed during the development of COVID-19 pandemic under three analysis levels: national governance, international governance, and public–private governance–third sector. The major adverse events reported, mainly by the professional media, were considered potentially harmful to aggravate the damage and losses caused by the COVID-19 disaster in the two countries currently with the highest absolute number of cases (the United States and Brazil). After an analysis of these facts, failure modes representative of institutional vulnerabilities were identified in several sectors (public, private, and third sectors); federative entities (Federal Government, States, and Municipalities); and contexts (national and international), which were then organized in six groups: • • • • • •

State’s political–administrative–legal issues Divergences between the Federal Government, States, and Municipalities Vulnerabilities of social systems Public information and risk communication issues Productive and economic impacts The difficulty of integrated international action

Finally, the leading potential causes of institutional vulnerabilities in the groups mentioned above were explored, in analogy to the nonconformity treatment process recommended in management system standards. The content presented could be used as a starting point for institutions to improve their resilience profiles, not only in the context of disasters but also in routine operations and interactions. Although this work’s results were obtained based on events revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic in two countries on the American continent, the conclusions may be valid for other contexts of disasters and countries with similar federative dynamics. This is because the analysis was not restricted to the real causes of the problems, which are specific to the particular contexts. Considering

70

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

the possible causes related to a broader, generic, and timeless spectrum, the analysis performed would apply to a greater variety of situations and then it is expected that the results presented have high adherence to the contexts visited. A critical reflection by institutions that aim to use this text’s results in the construction of their respective vulnerability reduction mechanisms is essential. National governance’s importance for promoting systemic institutional resilience is crucial, mainly concerning the political, administrative, and legal state issues. This group’s causes are highly related to all other groups of institutional vulnerabilities, especially aspects of political nature (political influence of institutions, political disputes, and unaligned governance with ethical and social commitment), which can significantly affect institutional capacities and contribute to the aggravation of disasters. Institutions must be very clear about the role to be played individually and collectively in the context of disasters. It is necessary to work with multihazard risk scenarios and build broad institutional capacities to operate in adverse circumstances. Therefore, it is essential to reflect on how institutions are affected by disasters, just as institutions influence them. Depending on institutional behavior, vicious or virtuous circles may arise during disasters. Vicious circles occur when disasters increase institutional vulnerabilities, which, in turn, aggravate the effects and magnitude of disasters. On the other hand, virtuous circles appear when disasters are used as learning opportunities to reduce institutional vulnerabilities, which can reduce the risks of future disasters. All institutions and their decision-making processes must contain the flow of vicious bonds and encourage practices that provide virtuous circles of institutional resilience.

References Abrucio, F. L., Franzese, C. (2007). Federalismo e políticas públicas: o impacto das relações intergovernamentais no Brasil. Tópicos Econ. Paul. para Gestores Públicos. Abrucio, F. L., Grin, E. J., Franzese, C., et al. (2020). Combating COVID-19 under Bolsonaro's federalism: A case of intergovernmental incoordination. Revista de Administração Pública, 54, 663–677. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-­761220200354x Adolph, C., Amano, K., Bang-Jensen, B., et al. (2020). Pandemic politics: Timing state-level social distancing responses to COVID-19. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. https://doi. org/10.1215/03616878-­8802162 Arretche, M. (2002). Relações federativas nas políticas sociais. Education and Society, 23, 25–48. Arretche, M., Rodden, J. (2004). Política distributiva na federação: Estratégias eleitorais, barganhas legislativas e coalizões de governo. Dados. Brasil. (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Texto Const. Orig. Publ. no Diário Of. da União 5 outubro 1988. Carvalho, D. W. (2020). A natureza jurídica da Pandemia COVID-19 como um desastre biológico: um ponto de partida necessário para o Direito. Rev. dos Trib. 1017. Chaudhry, R., Dranitsaris, G., Mubashir, T., et  al. (2020). A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions, country preparedness and socio-economic factors on COVID-19 mortality and related health outcomes. EClinicalMedicine, 25, 100464. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100464

3  Strengthening Institutional Resilience: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Disaster

71

Costa Xavier, G., Costa Xavier, C. (2014). O federalismo: conceito e características. URL https:// ambitojuridico.com.br/cadernos/direito-­tributario/o-­federalismo-­conceito-­e-­caracteristicas/. Accessed 7.10.20. Di Gregorio, L. T., & Soares, C. A. P. (2017). Post-disaster housing recovery guidelines for development countries based on experiences in the American continent. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 24, 340–347. Di Gregorio, L.  T., Soares, C.  A. P., Saito, S.  M., Soriano, E., Londe, L., & de Coutinho, R. M. P. (2013). Proposta para a construção um sistema informatizado para gestão integral de riscos de desastres naturais (sigrid) no cenário brasileiro. Geogr. Dep. Univ. Donkor, F. K., Mearns, K., Ojong-Baa, E., Tantoh, H. B., Ebhuoma, E., Abubakar, H., Mavuso, S., Mbewe, P., Mabeza, C., Leclerc, A., & Eslamian, S. (2021). Mainstreaming education into disaster management to facilitate disaster resilience, Chapter 10. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of disaster resilience reduction, Vol. 1: New frameworks for building resilience to disasters. Springer Nature Switzerland. Donthu, N., & Gustafsson, A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on business and research. Journal of Business Research, 117, 284–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.008 Estadão. (2020). Os impactos do coronavírus em 11 setores. URL https://einvestidor.estadao.com. br/mercado/impactos-­coronavirus-­nos-­setores/ (accessed 7.10.20). Fiocruz. (2020). Covid-19: Fiocruz firmará acordo para produzir vacina da Universidade de Oxford. URL https://portal.fiocruz.br/noticia/covid-­19-­fiocruz-­firmara-­acordo-­para-­produzir-­ vacina-­da-­universidade-­de-­oxford. Accessed 7.10.20. Freire, N.  C. F., Bonfim, C.  V., do Natenzon, C.  E. (2014). Vulnerabilidade socioambiental, inundações e repercussões na Saúde em regiões periféricas: o caso de Alagoas, Brasil. Cien. Saude Colet. Freitas, C.  M., de Carvalho, M.  L., Ximenes, E.  F., Arraes, E.  F., & Gomes, J.  O. (2012). Vulnerabilidade socioambiental, redução de riscos de desastres e construção da resiliência lições do terremoto no Haiti e das chuvas fortes na região serrana, Brasil. Cienc. e Saude Coletiva. Freitas, C.  M., Silva, D.  R. X., de Sena, A.  R. M., Silva, E.  L., Sales, L.  B. F., de Carvalho, M. L., Mazoto, M. L., Barcellos, C., Costa, A. M., Oliveira, M. L. C., & Corvalán, C. (2014). Desastres naturais e saúde: Uma análise da situação do Brasil. Cienc. e Saude Coletiva. Gonçalves, J. C. (2020). Confiança na comunicação de risco sobre o COVID-19 no Brasil: desafios e perspectivas. In N. Valencio & C. M. Oliveira (Eds.), COVID-19: Crises Entremeadas No Contexto de Pandemia (Antecedentes, Cenários e Recomendações). UFSCar/CPOI. Hills, A. (2000). Revisiting institutional resilience as a tool in crisis management. Journal of Contingencies & Crisis Management, 8, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-­5973.00130 Holling, C. S., Schindler, D. W., Walker, B. W., & Roughgarden, J. (1995). Biodiversity in the functioning of ecosystems: an ecological synthesis. In C. Perrings, C. Folke, C. S. Holling, & B. Jansson (Eds.), Biodiversity loss: Economic and ecological issues (pp. 44–83). Cambridge University Press. International Labour Organization. (2020). Forte aumento do desemprego na América Latina e no Caribe deixa milhões sem renda [WWW Document]. Organ. Int. do Trab. International Organization for Standardization. (2015). ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems — Requirements. 03.100.70 Manag. Syst. Michael, K., & Abbas, R. (2020). Behind COVID-19 contact trace apps: The Google–Apple partnership. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 9, 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1109/ MCE.2020.3002492 Narváez, L., Lavell, A., & Pérez, O.  G. (2009). La construcción del riesgo de desastre. In La Gestión Del Riesgo. Un Enfoque Basado En Procesos. Nazif, S., Mohammadpour Khoie, M. M., Eslamian, S. (2021). Urban Disaster Management and Resilience, Ch. 7, Handbook of Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, New Frameworks for Building Resilience to Disasters, Ed. By Eslamian, S., Eslamian, F., Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 157–186.

72

L. T. Di Gregorio et al.

Observatory of the Third Sector. (2020). Pesquisa analisa os impactos da pandemia no terceiro setor [WWW Document]. URL https://observatorio3setor.org.br/noticias/pesquisa-­analisa-­os-­ impactos-­da-­pandemia-­no-­terceiro-­setor/. Accessed 7.10.20. Ortega, F., & Orsini, M. (2020). Governing COVID-19 without Government in Brazil: Ignorance, neoliberal authoritarianism, and the collapse of public health leadership. Global Public Health, 15, 1257–1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2020.1795223 Papathoma-Köhle, M., & Thaler, T. (2018). Vulnerability and resilience to natural hazards. In S.  Fuchs & T.  Thaler (Eds.), (pp.  98–124). Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781316651148 Park, J., & Chung, E. (2020). Learning from past pandemic governance: Early response and Public-Private Partnerships in testing of COVID-19 in South Korea. World Development, 137, 105198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105198 Pereira, A. K., Oliveira, M. S., & da Sampaio, T. S. (2020). Asymmetries of state government social distancing policies in the face of COVID-19: political and technical-administrative aspects. Revista de Administração Pública, 54, 678–696. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-­761220200323x Pinto Filho, F. B. M. (2002). A Intervenção Federal e o Federalismo Brasileiro. Editora Forense. SEBRAE. (2020). Impactos da Covid-19 nos pequenos negócios URL https://bibliotecas.sebrae. com.br/chronus/ARQUIVOS_CHRONUS/bds/bds.nsf/f12aae66ff38f298fa179202d6bca5dd/$ File/19511.pdf. Accessed 7.10.20. Serafin, G. P. (2014). O princípio federativo e a autonomia dos entes federados. Rev. Doutrina da 4a Região 58. Smith, G., Martin, A., & Wenger, D.  E. (2018). Disaster recovery in an era of climate change: The unrealized promise of institutional resilience, 595–619. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­63254-­4_28 Soler, L. S., Gregorio, L. T., Leal, P., Gonçalves, D., Londe, L., Soriano, É., Cardoso, J., Coutinho, M., Santos, L.  B. L., & Saito, S. (2013). Challenges and perspectives of innovative digital ecosystems designed to monitor and warn natural disasters in Brazil. In Proceedings of the 5th. Trump, B.  D., & Linkov, I. (2020). Risk and resilience in the time of the COVID-19 crisis. Environment Systems & Decisions, 40, 171–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-­020-­09781-­0 United Nations. (2020). COVID-19: recuperação será mais lenta após “crise como nenhuma outra”, prevê FMI. URL https://nacoesunidas.org/agencias/fmi/ (accessed 7.10.20). Vidal, J. P. (2018). Movimentos sociais e resiliência: noções complementarias ou assimétricas? Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Desenvolvimento Regional, 14, 124–146. Vidal, J. P. (2019). Governança democrática. Para uma nova coordenação da sociedade. Tirant, Florianópolis. Wong, M. C., Teoh, J. Y., Huang, J., & Wong, S. H. (2020). The potential impact of vulnerability and coping capacity on the pandemic control of COVID-19. The Journal of Infection, 81, 816. Zuccolotto, R., & Teixeira, M.  A. C. (2019). Transparência: aspectos conceituais e avanços no contexto brasileiro. Brasília.

Chapter 4

Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience Mihaela Sima and Gabriela Adina Morosanu

Abstract  Mining hazard risk reduction and resilience is a complex concept involving two major actions: framing the risks posed by the hazard in an adequate typology and taking the necessary steps toward achieving resilience. Proper risk management requires a good degree of knowledge of the types of risk related to mining activities. Thus, this chapter distinguishes between several types of risks raised by mining activities, based on the surface or underground operations involved, either single or multihazard types that could have an impact on the environment and people’s health. This chapter reviews conservation and rehabilitation initiatives, in the context of the circular economy, as an important step toward mine hazard prevention and reduction. It also puts forward several guidelines to enhance the community resilience facing mining-related hazards that are derived from a number of examples of good practices. This chapter represents a review of existing literature and case studies to show the different types of mining hazards. Therefore, due to the need to undertake a selection of the most relevant publications, and also for reasons of brevity, it does not and cannot pretend to represent an exhaustive presentation of all works published on this topic. Keywords  Mining hazards · Community resilience · Sustainability · Risk assessment · Mine slope instability · Risk Reduction · Environmental impacts

M. Sima (*) · G. A. Morosanu Romanian Academy, Institute of Geography, Bucharest, Romania © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_4

73

74

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

1  Introduction All states have a history, be it long or short, in the field of resource exploitation, whether it involves ferrous or nonferrous metals, coal, oil and natural gas, sand and gravel aggregates, or other types of ores. Some countries have even consolidated their economy and maintained their prosperity through the extractive industry. Such examples of leading countries are well-known in the field of the production of mineral resources (Statista, 2020): China (coal industry, iron ore, gold and rare minerals, and copper), India (coal industry, iron, and rare earth minerals), Australia (gold, coal industry, iron ore, copper, lithium, and diamonds), Brazil (iron ore industry, lithium, and rare earth minerals), South Africa and its neighboring countries (platinum, diamonds, coal, and rare minerals), Russia (coal, iron, platinum, diamonds, and copper), and Chile (copper and lithium). In addition to these countries, significant ore mining takes place in Canada (with the highest percentage of mineral exploration sites occupied in 2017), in the United States, and in a number of South American, African, Central, and South-East Asian countries. As for the states belonging to the European Union and its economic area (EEA), the mining industry has drastically declined in the output and number of operational mines over the last decades, with few European mining regions playing a significant role in the exploitation of certain resources, such as is still the case for Poland, Germany, and Romania (coal), Ukraine and Sweden (iron), Greece and Finland (nickel), Poland (56% of EU’s copper production), Sweden and Ireland (lead and zinc), or Portugal (lithium) (Farooki et al., 2018; Statista, 2020). By 2018, European mineral production importance dropped below 5% worldwide, after a gradual decline throughout the twentieth century, when in the second half of the nineteenth century, Europe had held more than 50% of the world’s mineral production. The orientation in our times toward other industries and the dwindling production of raw materials from surface and underground mining are further confirmed by the very small investments made in mining, as we are warned by the European Association of Mining Industries, Metal Ores and Industrial Minerals. Furthermore, although Europe could own sufficient resources to be globally competitive in some areas (especially with regard to nonferrous minerals), it is not looking for exploration expenditures. Instead, against the backdrop of increasing demand for resources worldwide, European countries are responding with policies aimed to encourage the development of procedures for improving the recycling and reusing of resources, in order to meet the requirements of environmental protection and conservation of old exploitation sites. Always concerned by the issue of mining sustainability, many European countries are shutting down their last traditional mines, preferring to import the needed raw materials from the southern (developing) countries, at lower financial and environmental costs (Hamor, 2004). However, would we be able to talk about persisting mining risks in certain European countries that exploited various resources during the communist years, prior to 1990? And what about countries outside Europe, which carry on with their mining activities? What risks are involved in all these

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

75

upheavals in the depths of the earth, caused by our search for mineral resources, followed by the storage and processing of ores? Mining activities lead to mining hazards, which, in turn, are known to have a detrimental impact on society, people and the environment (Bell & Donnelly, 2006; Culshaw et al., 2000; HSE, 2014). It is hence vital to know first and foremost the situation of past and present exploitations, in order to be able to manage the possible risks associated with mining (Hamor, 2002). The new approach of modern mining industry toward sustainability, driven in many cases by pressures from society or governments, requires that close attention be paid to managing mining hazards in all stages of operation, in order to minimize the environmental impacts (Dold, 2008), an increasing concern toward a proper management and recycling of the waste (Aznar-Sánchez et al., 2018) or to rethink mining waste in the light of circular economy (Tayebi-Khorami et  al., 2019). A recent comprehensive review of frameworks of sustainability as applied to mineral industry, done by Segura-Salazar and Tavares (2018), has revealed the need for a more proactive management and continuous engagement with the different stakeholders throughout the life cycle of mining projects, the need for sustainability-­ driven technological innovation, identifying possible ways to communicate effectively with society, so as to make the good practices in mining more visible worldwide. The concept of disaster risk reduction and resilience is interlinked with the sustainable development concept (Uitto & Shaw, 2016; Naheed, 2021). To frame this with regards to the mining industry, the reduction of the impacts caused by miningrelated hazards promotes building the resilience of the sector and of affected communities, putting mining on a sustainable path that takes into account the environmental, social and economic dimensions. Thus, an adequate sustainability framework for the mining industry needs to closely consider disaster risk reduction and enhancing community resilience toward a better response. Climate change comes as an additional threat to intensify mining related hazards, but also manifests as a business risk. Although still in the early stages of consideration within the mining community, especially in developing countries (Odell et al., 2018), this issue is recognized in the scientific community, with certain guidelines being elaborated for the mining companies to promote adaptation (Nelson & Schuchard, 2011). However, site-specific guidelines and strategies are necessary to better understand the risks and communicate them adequately to the communities. Along these lines, this chapter will analyze the types of mining hazards, classifying them by their relation to the environmental or human component, and the direct or indirect factors that can trigger or speed up their occurrence. This chapter also reviews case studies around the world with active or postactive mining in terms of particular practices for disaster risk reduction at the community level, conservation and rehabilitation initiatives, analyzing the consequences to the environment and society in different countries of the world. A specific resilience framework for disaster risk reduction in the mining sites is proposed to promote local partnerships for mutual benefits of the mining companies and communities.

76

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

2  Conceptualizing Mining Hazards Mining hazards are defined by the Dictionary of Mining (1965) as “any of the dangers peculiar to the winning and working of coal and minerals: […] i.e. collapse of ground, explosion of released gas, inundation by water, spontaneous combustion, inhalation of dust and poisonous gases, etc.” (Nelson, 1965). This approach highlights that mining hazards are linked to accidents that occur in mining areas, which directly affect workers. Also, as stated by the Mining Hazards Database for the Australian State of Queensland, in 2019, mining hazards are seen as a wide range of accidents resulting from underground or surface operations, presenting considerable safety risk to miners (Fig. 4.1). Following the model found in the above-mentioned database, in a first attempt to categorize the mining hazards into general, surface and underground hazards, the Australian Mines Inspectorate identifies a number of coal mining hazards, such as foreseeable risks arising from these hazards and appropriate methods for controlling them (NSWDPI, 1997). Under this framework, while general hazards refer more to the fault of the workers and to real time working conditions (fitness for work, lightning, vibration, fatigue, noise, heat, dust, air quality, hazardous chemicals, working near water, etc.), surface and underground hazards are more closely related to the mining operations themselves, i.e., to the mechanisms of exploitation, production and storage of minerals. Hazards may also be specific to the postmining phases, even in the maintenance and conservation of old closed mining sites (tailing dam failure, explosions, acid mine drainage, roof collapse, risks related to stockpiles, dredging, trenching, drifting and sealing operations, shaft sinking, firefighting, galleries inundations, gas drainage, etc.). This loss of human lives and injuries sustained, production interruptions and damages suffered by mining installations are usually caused by unsafe conditions and practices in mines, rather than by the presence of natural or anthropogenic elements exposed to risk, as one might believe by given the mere inclusion of mining

Fig. 4.1  Coal mining hazards according to Australian Mining and Quarrying Safety and Health Act (1999)

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

77

hazards in the lexical field of natural and anthropogenic hazards. Donnelly (2018) regarded mining hazards as a source of danger with perpetual potential, because they can occur at any time through the extraction and primary processing of minerals, which can lead to the loss of human lives, collapse or damage to mines, infrastructure, utilities, storage buildings, or to changes in the functionality of the lands and an impact on the environmental components. Mining hazard is also seen as “a potentially destructive phenomenon or hazardous situation” (AS/NZS 4360 Risk Management as cited by IGA, 2009), which occurs in a mineral extraction environment, generally in an anthropically transformed sites by uncovering the surface, followed by digging, excavating, or building structures for the extraction, transport and storage of ores and tailings. When organizing a mining operation, regardless of the type of resource exploited, a first step is to identify the potential risks associated with mining personnel and neighboring communities, in order to be able to come up with a security plan (Paithankar, 2011). The complete assessment of possible mining risks includes a detailed and systematic examination of the mining activity in question, the type of mining materials and equipment required, the level of safety of the buildings and structures involved in mining and the precise location of the site based on the physical-­geographic, economic, and human factors that may be affected. According to Iannacchione et al. (2008), risk assessment is a prime step in identifying hazards caused by mining activities, always closely related to the type of operation, the infrastructure used (including the level of risk assumed for the workers) and elements at risk (Fig. 4.2). The assessment must, therefore, take into consideration the relationship between the probability of production of the harmful phenomenon with the current and expected working situations at the mining site.

Fig. 4.2 Mining hazards assessment steps under different perspectives. (Adapted after Paithankar, 2011)

78

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Nevertheless, it is necessary to acknowledge that in the recent past, mining activities have resulted in many risks and even fatalities, both in the exploitation of ferrous and nonferrous ores (Eiter et  al., 2016). One possible explanation for the increasing number of reported mining hazards was accounted for by the heightened awareness of the dangers of working experience in the mining industry, as revealed by the results of a number of questionnaires addressed to workers and local communities, regarding their perception of the safety of worksites in mining areas (Eiter et al., 2016; Mining Hazards Database, 2019). Otherwise, why do there seem to be more mining hazards, given the much better prevention measures than the ones that had been taken in the past and the decrease in the number of industrial sites globally? According to Bell and Glade (2003), hazards need to be analyzed in terms of risk to life. Considering that mining is a hazardous operation with significant safety risks to miners, the concept of mining risks explores the relationship between the likelihood and the potential consequences of hazard risks occurring in mining areas. Starting from the example of slide risks (e.g., landslides, mudslides on tailing dumps), the authors calculated the occurrence of potentially damaging events, proposing the following risk assessment conceptual equation:

Mining

RISK =

Mining

HAZARD·CONSEQUENCE·ELEMENT OF RISK



There is a noticeable distinction between risk and hazard, although the latter term is most often used in considering accidents and instability problems of mining constructions and operations (Nelson, 1965; Thrush, 1968). Further on, this chapter will make a review of the diversity of hazards associated with mining activities, and their division into different categories is particularly related to hazard recognition abilities and factors of production, rather than to the elements exposed to risk, as it happens for other types of hazards. With regard to the current review of mining hazards, the authors decided to employ a more complex framework, in order to outline the hazardous phenomena derived from mining operations in terms of consequences for society and the environment. This includes not just the occupational hazards (health and safety hazards for mining workers), but also the hazards impacting communities living nearby a mining project and for the environment.

2.1  C  oping with Hazards. Legislative Framework for Mining Hazard Prevention Globally, the mining hazard is more or less recognized and treated from a legislative point of view, through various measures and regulations aimed at classifying, evaluating, controlling and reducing mining risks. The appearance of different legislative documents related to the evolution of the potential risk of mining activities should be related to the state wise industrial/mining history, the mining branches developed

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

79

over time, the capacity and management (of a private, administrative, political nature) of mining, as well as according to the records of negative events in the field of mining hazards. In order to form an overview of the organization of mining activities, it can be mentioned the International Comparative Legal Guides 2020 study conducted on Mining Laws in a cross-border perspective (International Comparative Legal Guides (ICLG), 2020). Mining risks are approached, however, briefly and rather tangentially, in connection to the stages of exploration, development and extraction of mineral resources, or in the phases of construction, management, reclamation and closure of mines. Closest to the complex notion of mining risk is the management of mining land and sites in Australia, a country with a long tradition of mining. References in the matter are the Mine Health and Safety Regulation (2007), as well as the Risk assessment workbook for Metalliferous mines, extractive and opal mines, and quarries (2009), designed to help mineworkers, local authorities and communities better understand the mining hazards and how they can assess and control the associated risks1 (NSWDPI, 1997). The key in terms of mining risk assessment, reduction and resilience within Australian territory is the Mining Act of 1978, which describes the legal conditions for performing mining activities, including listing the incidents that may occur in mining environments (the current versions of the Mining Act 1978, as well as the Mining Regulations 1981 and the Offshore Minerals Act 2003 can be consulted on the State Law Publisher portal). In the United States there is no unitary legislation on the recognition and management of mining risks, but mining activities and control of adjacent elements (land with different uses, environment, and local communities) are carefully regulated by a series of federal acts.2 Canada benefits from a mining risk reduction and remediation system better anchored in all aspects of control and safety measures during mining activities and in the postmining period. On the one hand, it is an advantage, but on the other hand, a disadvantage that the Canadian mining industry is governed by dozens of federal, provincial, and territorial regulations that cover a fairly wide range of subject matters. In general, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA, 2012) is the legislative act that establishes a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impact of mining activities at the federal level. This act, along with a number of other environmental laws, regulates the discharge of mine effluents (acid mining drainage being recognized as a mining hazard therein), atmospheric emissions, and the effects of the extractive industry on water resources, solid waste management, and stability of mining constructions. Also, a series of laws provide a legal framework for permits and interdictions on the discharge of mining contaminants into the environment, as well as postmining remedial measures. Differences in approach

1  For more information, see Risk assessment workbook for mines. Metalliferous, extractive and opal mines, and quarries (IGA, 2009). 2  Generally referred to as Mining Laws and Regulation in the United States.

80

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

occur from state to state, some of which (such as the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia3) are much better insured in terms of mining risk assessment. In South Africa, environmental risk assessment is primarily regulated by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (2002). This document makes provisions in terms of storage, tailings, and the closure of mines safety measures. Also, vague references to some aspects that may be related to the safety measures of those who perform mining activities can be found in the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation (2014). This act comprises the licenses for waste management and water use, components that are often related to or derived from mining activity. Therefore, South Africa, although it is a country with an economy mainly supported by branches of the extractive industry, does not have concrete regulations oriented toward resilience measures in case of mining risks. The mining sector of India’s economy is constantly evolving, but due to a string of unfavorable factors such as bad policies, corruption, ineffective measures to protect the mining heritage and their surrounding natural elements, the Indian legislative system can still be considered undersized. In general, mining activities are governed by the National Mineral Policy (2008), renewing that of 1993, but this law does not provide the best insurance for the recovery from the state of crisis generated by the eventuality or imminence of quite frequent mining risks in this country (Ministry of Mines in India, 2011). Among the most acute effects of poorly managed mining, one may mention the water sources contamination from acid spills, or the fatalities due to instability of waste mining heaps. China’s mining industry is on an upward trend due to international demand for raw materials. It is expected, therefore, that this country has a legislative framework adapted to the fast pace of exploration and extraction of minerals. Among the legislative documents that aim at regulating the process, among aspects related to the possible mining risks one could mention: the Mineral Resources Law 2009, Mine Safety Law 2009, or Regulations for the Implementation of the Mine Safety Law 1996 (Wu et al., 2018). Coming to Europe, the legislation regarding the organization of mining activities and the prevention and management measures following mining activities varies widely among the states. The most common bodies of law are environmental directives and regulations, which generally apply to EU member states, sometimes even in the form of guidelines to be respected by partner countries that are not part of the European Union (Crawford, 1998). The act most closely related to the implications of mining activities and their possible impacts on the environment and society would be the Mining Waste Directive (Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the management of waste from the extractive industries), which constitutes “the handlebar” of all regulations on Mining and Mining Waste in the European Union. The Mining Waste Directive is a legislative act that sets out a goal to be achieved by all EU member states in terms of liability for environmental damage caused by

 Mining-Risk-and-Responsibility Guideline (2019).

3

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

81

mining activities, legal remedies for the impact of mining on the environment and local communities, mine closure obligations, and financial guarantees to ensure good performance for meeting environmental obligations (Scanell, 2012). Among the central aims pursued by the Mining Waste Directive in direct or indirect relation with mining activities and mining hazards assessment and prevention, it can be mentioned the following: strategic control within the mining activities, the system of permits for the development of mining activities and the management of mining waste, the identification and application of integrated solutions for the prevention of mining pollution, the prevention of mining accidents, problems raised by the closure of mines and the control of mining waste, postmining management (Mining Waste Directive 2006/21/EC). Although there are no binding specifications directly pointing to the issue of mining hazard prevention, the last three statements mentioned above are the most related to this concern. The mining and postmining activity is seen as closely linked to the identification of areas that are suitable or no longer suitable for mining, in the context of the environmental and economic objectives agreed by the competent authorities of the Member States. In order to meet the environmental and safety requirements, taking into account the present and potential hazards induced by the mining activities, the classification and organization of mining waste facilities and the carrying out of mining activities in compliance with the principles of risk reduction and resilience also refer to legislation adjacent to the Mining Waste Directive (Directive 2006/21/EC). In order to draw up waste management plans (especially the construction and maintenance of waste dumps), this directive addresses important environmental issues, which also fall under the provisions of the Water Framework Directive (WFD  – 2000/60/EC), the Air Quality Directive (Directive 2008/50/EC), or the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), which prescribe the “do not exceed” limits in order to prevent harmful effects on water bodies, as well as to ensure the protection of the air and of various plant or animal species. Furthermore, mining activities are regulated within the EU in accordance with the Seveso Directive for Technological Disaster Risk Reduction (Directive 96/82/EC) and with the Waste Directive (2008/98/EC), which are relevant for drafting plans regarding waste organization, including the management of waste generated by ores preparation and washing. Both directives agree with the control over mining-related activities and mining waste, in order to achieve a good ecological status of the water bodies and river basins and comply with the WFD directive regarding the sustainable management of water resources and the maintenance or restoration of a high quality in rivers, lakes, and groundwater near the mining shafts. These obligations are particularly relevant in the context of authorizing the opening of new mining activities or the extension of mines already in operation, in order for Member States to achieve required the water, soil and air quality standards and to avoid the risks induced by the instability of mining constructions and the pollution with extracted elements or side-substances released.

82

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Fig. 4.3  An overview of two of the largest mining hazards in Europe: (a) Heavy metals tailing dam failure from Aznalcóllar from Spain in 1998, and (b) Gold mine cyanide spill from Baia Mare, Romania (2000)

Despite the usefulness of the mining sector for the development of different economic branches, mining activities also contribute to the emergence or intensification of social and environmental problems, the most serious events being represented by mining disasters, such as the well-known “Doñana Disaster”—heavy metals tailing dam failure from Aznalcóllar from Spain in 1998 (Fig. 4.3a), or the 2000 gold mine cyanide spill from Baia Mare in Romania (Fig. 4.3b). This type of large-scale spills releases impressive volumes of mining waste into the soils and waters. As a result of such accidents, the EU has raised the alarm and called for major legislative reforms to protect communities and the environment from poor practices in the field of mining waste disposal and the consequent pollution that it triggers. In recent years, the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) has recognized the need for more secure governance in the mining sector and militated for implementing strategies to prepare the population, local governments and economic agents to cope with all types of mining hazards. The issued norms and strategies are meant to implement adequate preparation and restoration measures within the affected areas to strengthen their resilience to mining hazards. In terms of strategic control of mining, the EU is equally concerned with the strategic perspective in the protection of the environment. Thus, Directive 2001/42/ EC on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been adopted in order to stimulate an integrated approach in the field of territorial planning, ensuring that environmental perspectives and interests are duly considered from the earliest stages of the planning process. Yet again, mining and its associated mining waste issues are included among activities requiring a strategic environment assessment (under articles 3 or 2.2 of the

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

83

SEA Directive). One of the major reasons for including mining activities in the scope of SEA is the fact that such activities frequently cause negative effects with regards to the environment, particularly in relation to the protection standards set by other directives with environmental objectives. It is also worth mentioning the constant concern of European institutions and business partners (including mining companies) to streamline mining operations and reduce their impact on the environment. Europe is increasingly geared toward lower consumption, the closure of mining companies and the acquisition of resilience in terms of resource efficiency management (including the implementation of the concept of “greener jobs”) and the reduction of mining risks, which can be done by them being closed (according to Euromines4).

2.2  Classification of Mining Hazards Hazards associated with metalliferous ore coal mining activities can occur at any stage of a mine’s lifespan, and may affect both surface and underground mines, impacting people, their goods and the environment (UNDP, 2018). The people most exposed to the mining hazards are the miners, but the neighboring communities can also be affected (Stewart, 2019). Apart from the environmental impact of mining operations on a certain buffer zone around a mining site, some hazards can have a more regional, national, and even transboundary impact, because of the high level of contamination affecting air and water quality (e.g., mining smelters, tailings dam failures). Each country with a higher concentration of mining sites owns specific hot-spots in terms of pollution and environmental degradation, with countless examples around the world in this respect. Referring to the occupational types of hazards, Abbasi (2018) identified several categories of mining hazards that can impair the health and safety of mining workers: –– –– –– ––

Physical hazards: dust, noise, heat, and ionizing radiation Mechanical hazards: vibration and fires Chemical hazards: exposure to toxic chemicals used in the mining operations Psychosocial hazards: any risks occurring in the context of the organization, management, and economic or social factors of work –– Biological hazards: any substance affecting the health of human beings and living organisms, which can be conveyed in the form of a microorganism, a virus, or a toxin Referring to the occupational health hazards in the metalliferous mining, Donoghue (2004) identified physical, chemical, biological, ergonomic, and

 European Association of Mining Industries, Metal Ores & Industrial Minerals.

4

84

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

psychosocial hazards that should be clearly addressed by the risk management plans of the companies to reduce exposure and increase resilience to said risks. Paithankar (2011) proposed a comprehensive classification of the major hazards due to different mining operations and their prevention and control as outlined in the following: (a) Surface mining: surveying, clearing out, laying out, drilling, using explosives, face stability (rock fall or slide), loading, transporting, processing of mineral (crushing, grinding, screening). (b) Underground mining: fall of roof and sides, collapse of pillar in coal mines, air blast, electrical hazards, fire hazards, flooding, ventilation, poor lighting. There are various terms associated with mining hazard identification and risk analysis: harm, hazard, hazardous event, accident, risk, tolerable risk, protective measure, severity, risk analysis, risk assessment, and risk treatment. At the same time, it is worth recalling the Australian exhaustive database of mining hazards related to coal exploitation, processing and depositing (Mining Hazards Database, 2019). In this chapter, the focus was on the mining hazards that can affect the environment not only within a mining perimeter, but also outside, having an impact on nearby communities. In this respect, based on the main trigger, the hazards can be of a physical or chemical nature: –– Physical hazards: dust or noise, instability of the mining waste deposits, causing failures—tailings dam accidents, landslides affecting the waste dumps, underground collapses of pillars causing negative effects on land stability, flooding of the underground mines (Mishra & Rinne, 2014). –– Chemical hazards: acid mine drainage, release of toxic chemicals in the air, water, or soils (e.g., heavy metals, cyanide, etc.) that can be transported over long distances away from the source (Metesh et al., 1998). There is one more category of combined hazards, multihazards or NATECH (natural triggering technological events) hazards, when one or more natural hazards occur, producing mining-related failures: e.g., earthquakes (which can produce tailings dam failures that further cause landslides and floods), lightning, avalanches, landslides, etc. This is a category of hazards with a high impact on the communities and the environment that should also be taken into account when developing disaster management plans. The most destructive disasters in terms of environmental impacts and fatalities are tailings dam failures, having after the year 2000 a frequency of five to six major failures annually (Vogel, 2013). Owen et  al. (2020) emphasized the importance of learning examining and sharing diverse knowledge about tailings dam disaster risk as an essential way to learn from disasters and reduce their risks, but also the importance of publicly registering all tailings facilities, providing details describing their design and operating specifications for the proper assessment of potential risks for communities. Therefore, in addition to mining hazards most frequently generated by anthropogenic factors, it is also necessary to learn how to prevent and control NATECH risks

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

85

in mining sites. This is done by ensuring that the equipment and facilities of the ore extraction sites, as well as the environments of tailings deposits (dams, dumps) respect regulatory requirements. Let’s not forget that a significant part of mining accidents, such as those in China—e.g., Benxihu Colliery Disaster (1942), or the one from the Andalusian Aznalcóllar Metal Mine (1998), or the disasters associated with the Summitville Mine in Colorado, are due to natural and environmental factors first (difficult topography, areas naturally exposed to hydrological or geomorphic hazards, geological substrates that do not hold the thickness of deposited materials, high flood risk above the mining site, etc), or to a combination of unsuitable natural conditions and a mining project which did not properly take into account certain risk factors.

3  D  isaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in the Mining Areas 3.1  C  onceptual Frameworks Through Case Studies Around the Globe As previously stated, when thinking about hazard mining prevention, a first step is to evaluate the potential of a mining site or activity to suffer accidents, caused by natural events, anthropically driven or caused by a combination of the two. There are two main tried and tested frameworks for thoroughly acknowledging mining hazards: the Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA) and Hazard Identification and the Risk (HIRA) in mining industries. The first concept, that of Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA) (Iannacchione et al., 2008) is used for the prevention of mining hazards of a physical nature (accidents in mines and open spaces surrounding mining objectives, as well as quasi-­ natural processes on the slopes of waste rock tailings), having as their primary aim helping mining personnel protect themselves against these risks. The development of this concept was based on ten case studies related to the different mining activities in the United States (extraction of coal, metals, nonmetals, and river aggregates), both large and small-scale operations (The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 2008). At the end of this analysis, the ten mining basins have proven their ability to successfully carry out methodologies for the evaluation and management of mining hazards, by implementing or strengthening their means of control and recovery (resilience), in order to reduce risks for local communities. In all cases, both the mining personnel and the population affected by a possible risk were driven by a common desire to learn how to manage crisis situations and the impact of mining activities by means of a proactive attitude toward the event. According to MHRA, the mining risks are arbitrated in terms of the likelihood of an event to occur and the consequences it may have (Table 4.1).

86

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Table 4.1  Paths to be followed for Major Hazard Risk Assessment Approaches Vulnerability Reactive Compliance driven Proactive Resilient

Actions to take Identifying exposure to risk and welcome changes Investigating and understand causes of mining hazards Organizing trainings to increase risk resilience Integrating risk management in the decision-making processes Already achieved competencies. No longer need for action

Responses Preventing possible reoccurrences Implementing standard procedures in order to minimize reliance on administrative controls Enhancing the coping capacity by internally monitoring new emerging risks Encouraging communication so as to manage hazards and focusing on eliminating hazards Pursuing practical ways of offering support in similar situations in different mining environments

Adapted after Iannacchione et al. (2008)

The second concept of Hazard Identification and Risk (HIRA) in mining industries (as described by Paithankar, 2011) requires the establishing of a clear and thorough mechanism allowing for the classification and comprehension of various hazards, by taking into account, first and foremost, their impact, followed by the issue of the vulnerability of a mine’s infrastructure when faced with such hazards. Most of the hazard identification and risk applications rely on the quantitative analysis of the level of risk each hazard poses, all the way from hazard mechanism knowledge to magnitude, extent and likelihood of harmful effects, on an event-­ based approach: optimal risk analysis by hazard identification and analysis (Khan & Abbasi, 1998), identification of risk source for prioritization of risk management using the Hierarchical Holographic Modeling (Lambert et al., 2001), the already discussed risk evaluation method by considering the relationship between hazard, consequences and elements of risk (Bell & Glade, 2003), or the frequency-based quantitative risk analysis used to assess accidents in mining environments (Carpignano et al., 1998). What one may infer from these two plans of recognition and evaluation of mining hazards and risks is that we must learn how to live with possible fatalities and devise way of better avoiding them by taking preventive measures. This can only be achieved if there is cooperation between mining operators, the authorities and the population as a whole, so that everyone may be informed about the next step that need to be taken in the mining activity. It is indubitable that the way mining activities are organized can affect the environment, the local economy and society. For example, to prevent polluting groundwater and rivers near a heavy metal or gold mine, the mining company must always and honestly keep rural and urban communities in the region informed about the chemicals used to extract and wash minerals. This is not always the case in many countries (e.g., the ever-lasting social pressure and civil activism in the case of Roșia Montană gold mine in the Apuseni Mountains, Romania—Fig. 4.4, where local communities are the last to know the real truth behind the mining activities and the techniques used). Getting blindsided by the mirage of an employment offer in the local mining industry, without knowing

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

87

Fig. 4.4  The evolution of public pressure as a force of resistance against the Roșia Montană ­mining project, Romania. (Source of images: https://www.libertatea.ro/stiri/rosia-­montana-­scoate-­ din-­nou-­romanii-­strada-­manifestatie-­de-­protest-­organizata-­vineri-­ce-­facut-­guvernul-­de-­s-­ajuns-­ iarasi-­aici-­2284512, https://romania.europalibera.org/a/care-­erau-­riscurile-­dac%C4% 83-guvernul-­nu-­relua-­procedura-­pentru-­%C3%AEnscrierea-­ro%C8%99ia-­montan%C4%83-­ %C3%AEn-­patrimoniul-­unesco/30410044.html, https://ziare.com/rosia-­montana/proiect/protest-­ de-­amploare-­in-­bucuresti-­uniti-­salvam-­rosia-­montana-­trafic-­blocat-­la-­universitate-­live-­1254665)

the development or conservation alternatives or at least learning about the mining facilities and risks in the area is a mistake made by both parties: by the mining authorities for their lack of transparency on the one hand, and the affected population, for complying with them without studying the possible consequences of the mining hazards that are on the agenda, on the other hand. In turn, the inhabitants must always be aware of the alternatives to exploitation (what the benefits are for resuming mining activities in a mine in a conservation/disadvantaged mining area and what the environmental and economic consequences are on the short, medium and long term). At least for the moment, the Roșia Montană case can be seen as a positive example, as public pressure (protests and campaigns against the mining project) has stopped the exploitation and processing of gold-silver ore. Thus, as 2020 dawned and, under sustained public pressure for more than 10  years, the Romanian Government resumed, at the last moment in the aftershocks of the local community and the opinion of the national and international civil society, the procedure to consign Roșia Montană to UNESCO World Heritage Site list. Thus, it can be considered that the success of avoiding mining hazards in Roșia Montană is due to the mobilization and fight of society for the conservation of the cultural and natural heritage of the area and to stop the mining activities at any costs.

88

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Fig. 4.5  Mining risk memory and rehabilitation of closed mines following the accident at the Moura coal mine (1994) in Australia

Another case study illustrating this excessive willingness to go ahead with mining despite severe risks and in the absence of sufficient information comes from Australia, where risk-based management systems were implemented only in the 1990s, following an unfortunate mining accident at the Moura coal mine, where an explosion took the lives of 11 miners (Hopkins, 2000). This disaster spurred the national regulatory bodies to mandate the adoption of safety management plans for principal hazards in the mining industry. Following the coal mining hazards in the last decades, regulations are nowadays being enforced across Australia, with Decipher Green company assisting around 60,000 mining sites for compliance and progressive closure and rehabilitation.5 The adoption of resilience measures on mining risk management in Australia has also been facilitated by the promotion of risk memory, through awareness campaigns and investments in pronature postmining management and support for local communities to participate in the decision-­ making process regarding the fate of former mining areas (Fig.  4.5).Another example of good practice would be Lignite mining in the North-Rhine Westphalia region, SW Germany, where the coal industry remains as iconic as it was just a few decades ago, and just as controversial today as it was then. A number of mining areas such as Garzweiler 1 and 2 and Hambach continue their extraction operations on the new quarries while rehabilitating the lands of the former extraction perimeters (Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz, 2017). Figure 4.6a, b illustrates the mining site Rheinisches Braunkohlerevier (an active area of the Hambach mine).

 https://www.decipher.com.au/blog/industry-news/60000-abandoned-mines-and-millions-inrehabilitation-costs

5

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

89

Fig. 4.6  Rheinisches Braunkohlerevier mining site in SW Germany: (a) active area of Hambach mine; (b) the natural channel which will be connected to a lake extending over an excavated area of 40 m2; (c) Involvement of civil society through groups of environmental activists against coal mining, nonrenewable resource. (Photos’ source – Moroșanu, 2016)

Therein, the Sophienhöhe hill (the oldest tailing dam reaching 200 m elevation), rendered in the natural circuit by recovering the stored mining waste with woodland (reforestation began in 1978 and currently has 10 million trees planted). In the future, a 40 km2 lake for leisure activities is planned, after the entire mining activity is stopped (RWE, 2017). This lake will be filled from the groundwater and the Rhine River through a pipeline. However, the continuation of mining works in the area is not to everyone’s liking, despite daring projects to rehabilitate closed perimeters, such as groups of environmental activists who support renewable energy and declaim government measures. With a lifestyle adapted to living in nature in a nearby forest offering them only shelter, these groups of hippie activists do not tolerate even the minimum amount of resilience to mining risk, but militate for the total abolition of the extractive industry (Fig. 4.6c).

3.2  C  onservation and Rehabilitation: A Necessary Step for Mining Risk Reduction and Resilience Putting mining hazards in the context of risk reduction and resilience achievement, this chapter aims to address the issues which accompany mining activities from both a community and an environmental perspective. One of the ways to reduce the impact that the mining activity has on the environment, which, increasingly, is caused by mining waste, would be to come up with mining and postmining management strategies that would take into account the reuse of mining substances and materials resulting from the processing of the raw materials extracted. This type of approach would have a dual role, namely: (1) to reduce the immediate impact of the mining industry by nipping in the bud the uncontrolled discharge in the environment of mining waste, which would otherwise pollute the soil, water and air; and (2) to contribute to the prevention of risk phenomena, such as the pollution of natural elements following the release of mining processing and preparation by-products or raw waste substances into the environment, or the stability processes of tailings dumps and tailings ponds. Also, reducing

90

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Fig. 4.7  Diffuse mining risks in the Petroșani coal basin. Loading of Jiu river water with coal particle suspensions, with hydrosedimentary impact. One way to achieve resilience would be to clear the accumulation lake downstream of the mining area and economically reuse the coal sludge. (Source: authors)

mining risks by reusing waste mining is a very robust measure of concrete support for the actions that will be carried out in the context of a circular economy, a concept that the European Union also strives toward by adopting the new Circular Economy Action Plan (a priority axis of the European Green Deal, an integral part of the European Agenda for Sustainable Growth). In the case of waste products from metal and nonmetal mining, there is a place for measures and initiatives for their efficient reuse in the spirit of the legislative proposals provided in the Waste Package of the European Union (2015). For example, in the coal extraction industry, the mining tailings can be reused by extracting coal sludge from the tailings ponds and from the accumulation lakes in order to keep the hydro technical constructions safe and, finally, to revalue the coal residues for heating individual households. As an example, in the Petroșani bituminous coal mining basin situated in SW Romania in the upper sector of the Jiu river, the specific activities of the coal industry in the processing centers naturally led to particular consequences for the environment, both in the extraction, washing and preparation stages, and, subsequently, for the users of this nonrenewable resource (Haneș, 2006). The impact on air, water, and soil, on the ecological balance on local or larger scale, and the risks related to

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

91

the instability of tailings dumps are sometimes severe enough to reach the magnitude of a hazard (Moroșanu, 2019). Having a major impact on the environment and society one can list a series of negative effects of the chemical nature (the emissions of polluting substances by burning coal, the mineral debris in rivers and waste waters following coal processing) and the physical risks associated with the tailings deposits (Fig. 4.7). Over the last two decades, against the backdrop of the demands for ensuring a sustainable and circular economy, with adequate care for the environment and local communities, the problem of rethinking technologies for coal preparation has been raised, in the sense of not only reducing the release of noncombustible substances, by decreasing the content of ash, but also by eliminating harmful mineral compounds, bound to the fuel mass. This would be done, if possible, during the coal processing phases. The measures of resilience still in the project stage regarding this mining sector in the south-west of Romania are aimed at the ecological rehabilitation of the areas affected by mining activities, accompanied by a maximum usage of the secondary resources resulting from the solid suspensions present in the wastewater and in tailings deposits: combustible material, useful secondary elements resulting from coal extraction, construction materials, etc. (Traistă & Ionică, 2006). This concept of reducing the mining impact associated with the extraction and processing of coal, globally entails the rehabilitation plans of the areas occupied by deposits of solid mining residues, which are thought to create the conditions necessary for the regeneration of soil fertility and the resuming of cultivating plants, or for biological redevelopment, by recovering, from an environmental point of view, the surfaces occupied by coal and coal waste storage facilities. The technical-mining and environmental measures support the effort to achieve resilience in the face of mining risks and to increase the circulating potential of both primary and secondary products of coal mining. All these aspects could be put into practice by redesigning mining facilities (mining constructions with different destinations, tailings dumps, tailings ponds) so as to create the premises for restoring to the economic circuit the affected areas and for involving local communities in taking over mining-related decisions. In Europe, the foundations of sustainable mining are already laid, in accordance with the principles of circular economy, which would also include measures to prevent mining hazards and to combat them through the resilient behavior of local communities. The measures for a more efficient organization of mining activities at European level are currently closely linked to the obligations of producers and users of extractive raw materials to apply the EU Mining Waste Directive (Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the management of waste from extractive industries). The “circular economy” package put forward by the European Commission in 2015 is an ambitious plan in the area of environmental protection (Jora et al., 2018). This legal framework represents an important step in replacing what was until recently known as the “linear economy” (an economic and social model in which citizens consume gross resources and net products and then throw them away, thus

92

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Fig. 4.8  Illustration of the concepts of circular versus linear economy

contributing to the overcrowding of environmental components with deposits of matter and substances difficult to process through natural circuits) with a circular economic system, which involves the reuse of resources (Fig. 4.8). On a recycling consumer goods and finished products level, experience has proven that in many countries, even in the economically developed ones, it is difficult to reach the recycling target imposed by the legislation, barring the technical and legislative means in the fields related to the production and the consumption of said goods (e.g., in the recycling of plastic and food waste, according to Directive 94/62/EC on Packaging and Packaging Waste—EUROPEN). However, in the mining sector (coal, ferrous ores, and rare and precious minerals), substantial efforts have already been undertaken, by means of citizen, legislative and technological initiatives, to intervene in order to mitigate the mining risks that may occur during the extraction, processing, and storage chain. In all cases, compliance with the principle of circularity in any branch of the mining industry should go through: disposal, recovery, recycling, preparing for reuse and ultimately prevention, a step which is quite often forgotten or neglected.

4  A  Framework for Community Resilience to Mining Hazards The classic definition of resilience, as conceived by the scientific community studying disasters, is that it refers to “the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions” (United Nation International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), 2011). How does this definition apply to the mining sector? In general, the definition of resilience includes the existence of a community affected by a hazard related to a mining site (e.g., physical or chemical in nature) and the ability of the community to deal with a mining-related hazard, either by resisting, by absorbing the impact, or

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

93

by adapting to the hazards in such a way that continues to preserve its basic structures and functions. In this way, the core of the definition pertains to the community and its abilities, so the efforts for managing mining-related disasters, apart from scaling down the hazard itself is to increase the ability of the affected community in dealing with the hazard. There are several frameworks and models used to assess community disaster resilience, using targeted indicators and indices that differ from a community to another and from a disaster to another. In the attempt to make the resilience concept operational, Ostadtaghizadeh et al. (2015) classified the indicators of resilience as being part of five domains: social, economic, institutional, physical, and natural. Kamara et al. (2019) proposed a framework for a sustainable, long-term resilience to disasters that ought to engage all aspects of society, proposing specific actions to build individual, family, community and overall societal resilience. In 2016–2017, the Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction (ALTER) undertook a project in Armenia regarding the establishment of public–private partnerships to address flood risks stemming from water and mine dam failures. The project also had a component aimed at increasing the community’s resilience by providing disasters training programs. However, the authors could not identify studies in literature having context-­ specific resilience actions adapted for the mining communities; therefore, this can become an idea for further research. When dealing with an industrial activity (i.e., mining), research took a new direction, by linking the concept of community resilience with that of corporate social responsibility (CSR), leading to the conclusion that mining companies should play an important role in strengthening the adaptive capacity and resilience of the community and encourage a proactive community (Rela et al., 2020). However, there are still many steps to be further taken to truly incorporate CSR commitment into the mining companies’ practice and to establish a meaningful community interface (Kemp & Owen, 2013; Stewart, 2019). The mining industry around the world has a bad reputation in terms of being highly destructive of the environment, and as lacking the transparency to communicate the risks to society. In terms of disaster risk reduction and enhancing the resilience of communities, the mining industry should undergo a big change in its mentality, taking the social responsibility for transparent planning, but also promoting partnerships with the authorities and citizens’ representatives for the common goods. Although nowadays social media has proved to be a major communication channel, helping people cope with a disaster, a proper community response during emergencies relies mainly on the level of trust in communication coming from the authorities and from companies themselves (Yell & Duffy, 2018). Based on different frameworks proposed in literature debating disaster risk reduction and resilience (Turnbull et al., 2013; IFRC, 2016; Rojahn et al., 2019; HM Government, 2019), this chapter proposes several guidelines tailored to the mining industry for integrated disaster risk reduction at community level, in a joint effort to reduce the risk of the mining company and that of the authorities. Any actions taken toward better preparedness, response and recovery from a mining-related hazard can only build community resilience and put the mining company on a sustainable

94

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Table 4.2  Proposed preparedness, response, and recovery actions to be considered by the mining companies to enhance the community resilience to mining-related hazards Proposal Promote understanding of the hazards and risk at community level

Raising awareness and strengthening public participation

Promote collaboration and consultation at different level

Foster innovation

Ensure an appropriate response to disasters

Ensure a postmining management and monitoring

Concrete actions Each mining site should have hazard and risk maps outlining the main natural and technological hazards that may affect the site as well as the way the community could be affected The disaster risk management plans should be updated to include also the risk posed by climate change Understand the disaster impact on specific infrastructure systems Besides exposure, it is important to understand the vulnerability and adaptive capacity of the communities at risk Keep records of the historical hazards affecting the mining site Promote partnerships with the scientific community and local authorities to better understand the risks and action plan Use relevant informative materials and social media to inform the population at risk about specific threats to their health Identify key contacts and organize meetings with community leaders to discuss the emergency and action plans Support community access to the development of mining projects and inform on how such development is likely to increase their exposure to certain risks Provide training and material support for the community to increase their response to disasters Provide legal information for the population likely to be affected by a mining-related hazard Maintain a sustained collaboration and communication with the local authorities, relevant government department and other related authorities to inform them in due time about any change in your project’s development and operation Promote public consultations during all phases of the mine’s development Work in partnership with others and ensure that their advice is implemented Promote new technologies and innovative practices to reduce the exposure to hazards during all project phases Work together with the scientific community to identify innovative solutions for disaster risk reduction Ensure an environmental impact assessment of the mining operation Take responsibility for mining-related hazards and ensure appropriate support to the community Build back better: provide an appropriate response post disaster to reconstruct and decrease future vulnerabilities Work together with scientists to understand the long-term impacts of a mining project and make the best postmining decisions Ensure an adequate management of the mining facilities after closure promoting a proper conservation of the site Promote rehabilitation projects in partnership with the private sector and the community Ensure the monitoring of mining sites and report any changes to the authorities

Adapted for mining sector from the frameworks proposed by Turnbull et al. (2013), IFRC (2016), Rojahn et al. (2019), and HM Government (2019)

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

95

path. The proposed guidelines (Table  4.2) are based on understanding the risk, knowing the preparedness level of the community, and preparing an action plan with a view to strengthening the resilience to mining-related hazards. A meaningful partnership and collaboration between mining companies and local communities can prove useful not only in the disaster risk reduction context, but also in any aspect that concerns sharing mutual natural resources (water, land, forest) and their benefits. Many examples worldwide indicate the conflicts that exist in sharing the local resources between the industry and the community, which are expected to worsen considering the impact of climate change. However, there are also positive examples in this respect. A successful partnership in terms of water management is described by Fraser and Kunz (2018) in Peru and Mongolia, with the important role played by third-party groups (NGOs, academia, collateral institutions) triggering the collaboration. The new ideas framed by the sustainable development context is likely to give more voice to communities to be able to make the decisions regarding their future, thus a successful relationship should be based only on a dialogue driven by respect, integrity and transparency (Hodge, 2014) . The framework created by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) paints the picture of a promising future, ushering in an era of a change toward the authentic and integral collaboration between industry and community, promoting economic development with respect for the environment and society.

5  Summary and Conclusions This chapter reviews the hazardous phenomena deriving from mining operations in terms of their consequences for society and the environment. Mining is a sector with a high impact on the environment in each and every stage of operation, as emphasized in the paper. The stability of the tailings dumps is, without a doubt, the most disruptive mining hazards and, as such, it is the component to which as many of the resilience, mitigation and rehabilitation policies should be oriented. As a conclusion, a proper management of mining-related hazards is a prerequisite for achieving sustainable development. There is a need for better communicating the risks to the public and for a more active role of mining companies, taking social responsibility in terms of giving higher attention to the mining-affected communities so as to ensure a better preparedness and response to disasters. Promoting an open dialogue and partnership with different stakeholders’ groups is a good first step toward increasing the transparency of the mining sector, and to a more adequate management of mining-related hazards. Climate change is an additional risk to mining, and, as such, disaster management plans should consider not only the impact on the mining operations and facilities, but also the cascading effects on the communities at large. Lessons learnt from different mining projects should be better promoted, but, equally, good practice

96

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

initiatives worldwide in terms of successful partnerships developed at community level should also be more widely shared. This chapter has illustrated through a number of case studies how mining risks are perceived and what the legislative measures that currently exist in connection with these issues are, visiting examples from different countries, with their mining industries and the characteristic impacts. To this end, European legislations (EU directives, in particular) have been reviewed, as well as various measures and bodies of law in countries such as Canada, Australia, India, or Romania. Although, in general, no specific laws are yet enacted to protect mining objectives and, with them, human communities exposed to mining hazards, more and more legislative measures are being taken (investments for rehabilitation and conservation). In this context, both mining and postmining operations are being envisaged in the action of designing remedial and risk reduction measures, under the spectrum of the green and circular economy. The methodological approaches toward achieving mining risk resilience range from impact assessment (MHRA and HIRA frameworks) for mining hazards classification and reducing effects, to concrete actions to rehabilitate mining areas or to strengthen the coping capacity by cultivating mining risk memory. All these actions require efforts from mining companies, coupled with developing partnerships with the scientific community to better understand the environmental impact of mining and to find tailored solutions to meet local needs. The recent vision on managing mining for sustainable development (UNDP, 2018), promoting Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the EU vision on the circular economy adds a positive view toward a potential future where economic development is indissolubly tied to a conduct which aims to minimize environmental impacts and to protect human rights and health.

References Abbasi, S. (2018, April–June). Defining safety hazards & risks in mining industry: A case-study in United States. Asian Journal of Applied Science and Technology (AJAST) (Open Access Quarterly International Journal), 2(2), 1071–1078. Aznar-Sánchez, J. A., García-Gómez, J. J., Velasco-Muñoz, J. F., & Carretero-Gómez, A. (2018). Mining waste and its sustainable management: Advances in worldwide research. Minerals, 8, 284. https://doi.org/10.3390/min8070284www Bell, F. G., & Donnelly, L. J. (2006). Mining and its impact on the environment (547 p). Taylor and Francis. Bell, R., & Glade, T. (2003). Quantitative risk analysis for landslides-examples from Bildudalur. NW-Iceland, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 4, 117–131. Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz. (2017). Lignite mining in the Rhineland. Garzweiler II, 12 p. Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. (2012). laws-­lois.justice.gc.ca. Archived from the original on 2013-05-13. Retrieved 2012-10-19. Carpignano, A., Priotti, W., & Romagnoli, R. (1998). Risk analysis techniques applied to floating oil production in deep offshore environments. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, 1, 253–258.

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

97

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances. Crawford, R. L. (1998). European Industry Guideline for Risk-Based Assessment of Contaminated Sites. Contaminated Soil, 75–81. Available at: https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/ abs/10.1680/cs98v1.26759.0010 Culshaw, M.  G., McCann, D.  M., & Donnelly, L.  J. (2000, May 18th–19th). Impacts of abandoned mine workings on aspects of urban development. In The legacy of mineral extraction (pp. 1–16). Institution of Mining and Metallurgy and the North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK. Dictionary of Mining, Mineral and Related Terms. (1965). Available at: http://xmlwords.infomine. com/xmlwords.htm Donnelly, L. (2018). Mining hazards. In P. T. Bobrowsky & B. Marker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of engineering geology (Encyclopedia of earth sciences series). Springer. Donoghue, A. M. (2004). In-depth reviews: Occupational health hazards in mining: an overview. Occupational Medicine, 54, 283–289. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqh072 Dold, B. (2008). Sustainability in metal mining: From exploration, over processing to mine waste management. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 7(4), 275–285. Eiter, B., Kosmoski, C., & Connor, B. P. (2016). Mining publication: Defining hazard from the mine worker’s perspective. Mining Engineering, 68(11), 50–54. European Association of Mining Industries, Metal Ores & Industrial Minerals. Available at: https:// ec.europa.eu/environment/resource_efficiency/pdf/Euromines.pdf European Parliament and of the Council. (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water. European Parliament and of the Council. (2006). Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries. European Parliament and of the Council. (2008). Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe. Farooki, M., Hinde, C., & Lof, A. (2018). Supporting the EU Mineral Sector Capitalising on EU strengths through an investment promotion strategy. Final draft report. Oeko-Institut e.V. (Coordinator), 32 p. First Nations Energy and Mining Council. (2019). Mining risk and responsibility: How putting a price on risk can help British Columbia reduce, 32 p. http://fnemc.ca/wp-­content/ uploads/2019/06/Mining-­Risk-­and-­Responsibility.pdf Fraser, J., & Kunz, N. (2018). Water stewardship: Attributes of collaborative partnerships between mining companies and communities. Water, 10(8), 1081. Hamor, T. (2002). Legislation of mining waste management in Central and Eastern European candidate countries. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, ISPRA, EUR 20545 EN, 188 p. Hamor, T. (2004). Sustainable mining in the European Union: The legislative aspect. Environmental Management, 33(2), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-­003-­0081-­7 Haneș, N. (2006). Tehnologii ecologice pentru reducerea impactului proceselor de extracţie şi preparare a cărbunelui din Valea Jiului asupra apelor, solului şi aerului. Buletinul AGIR, 3, 7. Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (2014). The mines regulations. Published by the HSE. http:// www.hse.gov.uk/mining/mlr.htm HM Government. (2019). Community resilience development framework. June 2019. Available at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/828813/20190902-­Community_Resilience_Development_Framework_Final.pdf Hodge, R. A. (2014, December 1). Mining company performance and community conflict: moving beyond a seeming paradox. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84, 27–33.

98

M. Sima and G. A. Morosanu

Hopkins, A. (2000). A culture of denial: sociological similarities between the Moura and Gretley mine disasters. Journal of Occupational Health and Safety Australia and New Zealand, 16(1), 29–36. Iannacchione, A., Varley, F., & Brady, T. (2008). Mining publication: The application of major hazard risk assessment (MHRA) to eliminate multiple fatality occurrences in the U.S. minerals industry. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 142 p. IFRC. (2016). Road map to community resilience – operationalizing the framework for community resilience. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 p. IGA. (2009). Risk assessment workbook for mines. Metalliferous, extractive and opal mines, and quarries, 64 p. Ministry of Mines in India. (2011). Mining policy and legislation. Annual report 2010–2011, 13 p. International Comparative Legal Guides (ICLG). (2020). Mining law 2020 (7th ed.), 16 p. Jora, O.  D., Pătruți, A., & Iacob, M. (2018). The vicious circles of bureaucratic circular economy: The case of packaging waste euro-targets for Romania. Academy of Economical Studies, Bucharest. Conference Abstract. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2018/48/478 Kamara, J. K., Agho, K., & Renzaho, A. M. N. (2019). Understanding disaster resilience in communities affected by recurrent drought in Lesotho and Swaziland—A qualitative study. PLoS One, 14(3), e0212994. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212994 Kemp, D., & Owen, J. R. (2013, December). Community relations and mining: Core to business but not “core business”. Resource Policy, 38(4), 523–531. Khan, F. I., & Abbasi, S. A. (1998). Techniques and methodologies for risk analysis in chemical process industries. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 11, 261–277. Lambert, J. H., Haimes, Y. Y., Li, D., Schooff, R. M., & Tulsiani, V. (2001). Identification, ranking, and management of risks in a major system acquisition. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 72, 315–325. Metesh, J. J., Terrie, J., & Rivets, S. (1998). Treating acid mine drainage from abandoned mines in remote areas. 9871 2821 Missoula. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Missoula Technology and Development Centre, 18 pp. Mining Act 1978 (Australian Legislation). Available at: https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_604_homepage.html. Last time accessed (21.04.2020). Mining Hazards Database for the State of Queensland in Australia. (2019). Excel version. Available at https://www.business.qld.gov.au/industries/mining-­energy-­water/resources/safety-­health/ mining/hazards/hazards Mishra, R. K., & Rinne, M. (2014). Guidelines to design the scope of a geotechnical risk assessment for underground mines. Journal of Mining Science, 50, 745–756. https://doi.org/10.1134/ S1062739114040152 Moroșanu, G. A. (2019). La dynamique hydro-sédimentaire du bassin versant de la rivière Jiu. Approche systémique et multi-échelle (PhD Thesis). University of Bucharest, Romania/ University of Grenoble Alpes, France, 670 p. Naheed, S. (2021). Chapter 1: Understanding disaster risk reduction and resilience: A conceptual framework. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience, Vol. 1: new frameworks for building resilience to disasters. Springer Nature Switzerland Nelson, A. (1965). A dictionary of mining. Philosophical Library Inc., New York, 523 pp. Nelson, J., & Schuchard, R. (2011). Adapting to climate change: A guide for the mining industry. BSR.  Available at https://www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_Climate_Adaptation_Issue_Brief_ Mining.pdf NSWDPI. (1997, May). Risk management handbook for the mining industry: How to conduct a risk assessment of mine operations and equipment and how to manage risk. New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, MDG 1010, 95 p. Odell, S.  D., Bebbington, A., & Frey, K.  E. (2018). Mining and climate change: A review and framework for analysis. The Extractive Industries and Society, 5, 201–214.

4  Mining Hazard Risk Reduction and Resilience

99

Ostadtaghizadeh, A., Ardalan, A., Paton, D., Jabbari, H., & Khankeh, H.  R. (2015, April 8). Community disaster resilience: a systematic review on assessment models and tools. PLoS Currents, 7. pii: ecurrents.dis.f224ef8efbdfcf1d508dd0de4d8210ed. https://doi.org/10.1371/ currents.dis.f224ef8efbdfcf1d508dd0de4d8210ed Owen, J. R., Kemp, D., Lebre, E., Svobodova, K., & Perez Murillo, G. P. (2020). Catastrophic tailings dam failures and disaster risk disclosure. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 42, 101361. Paithankar, A. (2011). Hazard identification and risk analysis in mining industry (Bachelor of Technology in Mining Engineering Thesis). Department of Mining Engineering, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, India, 84 p. Rela, I. Z., Awang, A. H., Ramli, Z., Taufik, Y., Sum, S. M., & Muhammad, M. (2020). Effect of corporate social responsibility on community resilience: Empirical evidence in the nickel mining industry in Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Sustainability, 4, 1395. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su12041395 Rojahn, C., Johnson, L., O’Rourke, T. D., Cedillos, V., McAllister, T. P., & McCabe, S. L. (2019, July 1). Increasing community resilience through improved lifeline infrastructure performance. Summer Bridge Issue on Engineering for Disaster Resilience, 49(2), 34–42. RWE. (2017). Fact and figures. Available at: https://www.group.rwe/en/our-­portfolio/our-­sites/ hambach-­mine-­site. Last time accessed – 3.02.2022. Scanell, Y. (2012). The regulation of mining and mining waste in the European Union, 92 p. Segura-Salazar, J., & Tavares, L.  M. (2018). Sustainability in the minerals industry: Seeking a consensus on its meaning. Sustainability, 10, 1429. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051429www Statista Platform. https://www.statista.com/statistics/. Last time accessed: 17.04.2020. Stewart, A.  G. (2019). Mining is bad for health: A voyage of discovery. Environmental Geochemistry and Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-­019-­00367-­7 Tayebi-Khorami, M., Edraki, M., Corder, G., & Golev, A. (2019). Re-thinking mining waste through an integrative approach led by circular economy aspirations. Minerals, 9, 286. https:// doi.org/10.3390/min9050286 The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). (2008). Mining publication: The application of Major Hazard Risk Assessment (MHRA) to eliminate multiple fatality occurrences in the U.S. minerals industry. Traistă, E., & Ionică, M. (2006). Influenţa activităţilor industriei miniere asupra calităţii apelor de suprafaţă din Valea Jiului. Buletinul AGIR, 3, 53–57. Thrush, P. W. (Ed.). (1968). A dictionary of mining, mineral and related terms. U.S. Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior. Turnbull, M., Sterrett, C.  L., & Hilleboe, A. (2013). Toward resilience a guide to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. Available at https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/ files/resources/ECB-­toward-­resilience-­Disaster-­risk-­reduction-­Climate-­Change-­Adaptation-­ guide-­english.pdf Uitto, J., & Shaw, R. (2016). Sustainable development and disaster risk reduction: Introduction. Springer Japan KK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­4-­43155078-­5 UNISDR. (2011). Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. ISDR. UNDP and UN Environment. (2018). Managing mining for sustainable development: A sourcebook. United Nations Development Programme. Vogel, A. (2013). Failures of dams – challenges to the present and the future. In: IABSE workshop on safety, failures and robustness of large structures, Inter. Assoc. Bridge Struct. Eng. (IABSE), pp. 178–185. Wu, G., Li, A., Tongda, Y. J., & Neal, J. (2018). Mining in China: Overview. Accessed on https:// uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/ Yell, S., & Duffy, M. (2018, April edition). Community empowerment and trust: Social media use during the Hazelwood mine fire. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 33, 66–70.

Part II

Resilience Strategies

Chapter 5

Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local Risk Management Charlotte Heinzlef and Damien Serre

Abstract  Faced with increasing risks and uncertainties in urban environments, local planners and decision-makers are forced to innovate their risk management strategies. In the 2000s, this strategy, which used to be focused on a hazard management, integrated new concepts such as the concept of resilience. Resilience, a multidisciplinary concept, is defined in the context of risk management as the capacity of a system to absorb a disruption and return to equilibrium following this disruption. This concept refers to technical, urban, architectural, political, economic, social, management, and environmental innovations in order to (re)question our risk management systems and approaches. This injunction to innovation perfectly suits our complex and evolutive urban world. Nevertheless, and despite a significant increase of the resilience concept in urban risk management, concrete advances still have to be made. For many actors, resilience remains at the level of discourse and political leitmotivs, without being integrated into strategies, management, and projects that are achievable and adapted to the territories. Faced with this observation, several research projects have sought to adapt this concept to the needs and requirements of local stakeholders in order to promote its adoption and integration into risk management strategies. This chapter will analyze some of these strategies. Keywords  Urban resilience · Risk management · Disaster reduction · Uncertainties hazard

C. Heinzlef Univ. Paris Saclay, UVSQ, CEARC, Guyancourt, France D. Serre (*) Univ. Avignon, UMR 7300 ESPACE, Avignon, France Univ. Montréal, ARIACTION, Ecole d’Urbanisme et d’Architecture du Paysage, Montréal, QC, Canada e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_5

103

104

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

1  Introduction In the last decade, disasters have increased considerably compared to the last centuries. Data from Munich Re show an increase in extreme weather disasters from 200/ year in the early 1980s to almost 400/year in the early 2000s (De Graaf, 2013). In 2018, 61.7 million people were affected by 289 natural disasters and 10,733 people died as a result (Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), 2018). Storms, hurricanes, and floods were responsible for 90% of disaster victims (Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), 2018). At present, 971 million people live in climate-risk areas. This number of people at risk is likely to change as disasters increase. The economic cost, related to the intensity and recurrence of disasters, has also increased. Between 1978 and 1997, this cost was estimated at $895 billion. However, from 1998 to 2017, this amount increased by 151% to $2.25 trillion (Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), 2018). The increase in these costs is due in particular to the concentration of issues in urban areas. Urban areas today concentrate the economic, political, urban, and social components of territories. At the same time, the population rate in urban areas has increased enormously, reaching 50% of individuals living in cities (Zevenbergen et al., 2010; Zevenbergen, 2016). This concentration of assets and populations in urban areas increases the exposure of these territories to the increased flooding. Indeed, it can be observed in urban areas, due to the interconnection of material (e.g., urban networks) or immaterial (e.g., economic flows) networks, that a service disruption due to flooding can have a lasting impact on the territory and its population, especially due to multiple failures (Lhomme et al., 2013). The vulnerability, defined as the propensity to be impacted, of these territories is therefore increasing. Urban managers also face the new challenges related to the many growing uncertainties. These uncertainties are linked both to climate change (Gersonius et  al., 2013) and its evolution, but also to urban growth, forecasting models, data acquisition, etc. Risk management is therefore faced with inadequate strategies to deal with the increase in risks in urban areas (Nazif et al., 2021). This is why there is a transition in risk management with the emergence of new concepts such as resilience (Fig. 5.1). Urban resilience has become a planning imperative to prepare and adapt urban populations and territories to the significant increase in risks. However, despite the adequacy of this concept to mitigate the impact of the negative effects of risks, its operationalization is still very limited. This concept is currently over-used, solicited in many fields (psychology, ecology, political science,

Climate change: increasing intensity and recurrence of risks

Urban population growth + urban sprawl

Fig. 5.1  Risk management evolution (Heinzlef, 2019)

Increased uncertainties

Evolution in risk management: Integrating the concept of urban resilience

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

105

physics, geography, etc.) and linked to many notions (Emrich & Tobin, 2018). This multitude of uses has turned it into a buzzword, a word “suitcase” (Reghezza-Zitt & Rufat, 2016; Rufat et  al., 2015) that complicates its understanding and operationalization. This chapter aims at developing the concept of resilience as a necessary and unavoidable concept to prepare territories and populations for climate change and the associated risks and uncertainties (Part 1). However, despite the theoretical adequacy of the concept, its adaptation in operational strategies remains weak. The key is to involve local stakeholders in order to adapt the concept to their needs and tools (Part 2). The purpose of this chapter is to present some methodologies that have focused on collaborative approaches in order to produce tools aimed directly at local actors in order to appropriate and operationalize the concept of resilience.

2  Risks and Urban Issues 2.1  The Challenges of Climate Change and Associated Risks Every decade since 1850 is considered the warmest decade on the earth’s surface. The period 1983–2012 is now described as the thirty warmest years in 1400 years. The average increase in land and ocean temperatures is +0.85 °C between 1880 and 2012 (Carter et al., 2015; Pachauri et al., 2015). This trend is increasing as it is now almost certain that it will be impossible to contain the temperature increase of +2 °C since the preindustrial era. Ocean warming concentrates 90% of the energy accumulated between 1971 and 2010 (Levitus et al., 2012). Globally, the oceans warmed by 0.11 °C per decade over the period 1971–2010 over the first 75 meters (Pachauri et  al., 2015). This increase is growing and 40% faster than the United Nations thought 5 years ago (Cheng et al., 2019). Temperatures have broken records, especially in 2018. The consequences of this increase in marine temperatures are the disappearance of ecosystems, the rise in sea levels (Kulp & Strauss, 2019) and the recurrence of catastrophic events such as storms, hurricanes, etc. A review of recent rise projections shows that, across methodologies and emission scenarios, median values of future sea-level (Fig.  5.2) range from 0.2 to 0.3  m (2050), 0.4–1.5  m (2100), 0.6–4.1 m (2150), and 1.0–11.69 m (2300), with 95th percentile projections for RCP8.5 (a high-emission scenario) reaching as high as 2.4  m in 2100, and 15.5 m in 2300 (Horton et al., 2018). The recent study shows that for the case of, no coastal protection or adaptation, and a mean RCP8.5 scenario, there will be an increase of “48% of the world’s land area, 52% of the global population and 46% of global assets at risk of flooding by 2100. A total of 68% of the global coastal area flooded will be caused by tide and storm events with 32% due to projected regional sea level rise” (Kirezci et al., 2020). The consequences of these risks associated with climate change are manifold. Between 1998 and 2017, climate and geophysical disasters killed 1.3 million people

106

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Fig. 5.2  Dynamic sea-level contribution to sea surface height (mm/year) from 200§-2100 under the RCP 8,5 scenario (Horton et al., 2018)

and left 4.4 billion others injured, homeless, or displaced. The climate-related risks caused 91% of all disasters with floods, storms, droughts, heat waves and other extreme weather events (CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters) and UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction), 2018). Of all the risks, floods are the most frequent with 43% of the events recorded over the period 1998–2017 and 2  billion of people affected. Regarding economic losses, climate-related disasters caused 77% of disaster-related costs, representing US$ 2245 billion in 1998–2017 (Fig. 5.3). This increase in costs is also linked to the recurrence of disasters (Hay & Mimura, 2010) with an increase in the number of disasters of about 2% per year over the past 15 years (Catastrophes Naturelles-Observatoire permanent des catastrophes naturelles et des risques naturels, 2016) but also the increasing stakes.

2.2  Urban Risks and Vulnerability Meantime, the increase in the number of people and goods in urban areas is making cities considerably more vulnerable. Today, nearly 3/5 cities with a population of 500,000 are at risk. Yet urban areas produce between 70% and 80% of the world economy and are home to 50% of the world’s population (Zevenbergen et al., 2010). Such a concentration of issues increases the impact of disasters and raises questions about the future of cities.

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

107

Fig. 5.3  Top 10 countries/territories for cumulative losses compared to top 10 countries/territories for losses relative to GDP 1998–2017 (CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters) and UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction), 2018)

Urbanization accelerated considerably in the second half of the 20th century in order to cope with the growth of the urban population. Countries such as Brazil have grown from 55% urban population in 1970 to 83% today, but occupy only 0.25% of Brazilian territory (Zevenbergen et al., 2010). This tendency to focus on a specific area can be observed on a global scale: cities occupy only 1% of the world’s territory. Developed countries have therefore never concentrated “more value added per km2 than at present. Human and urban concentration poses a problem in the face of the issues related to the risk of flooding in cities. The rapidity of this phenomenon, with urban areas having increased from 10% in the 1990s to 50% in only two decades (Meerow et al., 2016; UNDESA, 2014), makes the territory more fragile as cities are not prepared or equipped to manage the needs of such a population concentration. However, this concentration is likely to accelerate, with 70% of the population projected (Fig. 5.4) to be urban by 2050 (Zevenbergen et al., 2010). This concentration of population in such a small area has increased the exposure and therefore the vulnerability of populations and territories. Indeed, more populations and economic values and issues are concentrated in a precise area, more damages will be important (Mitchell, 1999). Hazard as such only becomes a risk when issues are impacted. Xynthia storm in France is a good illustration of the impacts of over-urbanization. This storm affected 85% of some areas (Duvat-­ Magnan & Magnan, 2014). The magnitude of the disaster was due to several elements, and the mostly to the demographic change and rapid urbanization. Indeed, in low-lying (and therefore floodable) areas, the population has doubled or even tripled (DuvatMagnan & Magnan, 2014). The population was trapped in their homes, with water heights of over 1 m in some places. Xynthia was therefore such a dramatic event because of the “modes of occupation of space (which) have gradually neglected the

108

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Fig. 5.4 Projections of urban areas 1970–2030. (Heinzlef, 2019) adapted from (United Nations, 2012)

hazards of submersion and flooding” (Duvat-Magnan & Magnan, 2014). Therefore, urbanization and concentration lead to over-vulnerability, and to risk amplifications (Mitchell, 1999).

2.3  Vulnerable Urban Areas Facing Cascading Effects Urban areas are composed by several infrastructures and some of them are more essential than others. They are called critical Infrastructures and concentrate all the functions (Pescaroli & Kelman, 2017) necessary for the proper functioning of a community. They integrate elements as “telecommunications, power generation systems, oil and gas storage and transportation systems, banking and finance, passenger transportation, water supply and distribution, emergency services (medical,

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

109

Fig. 5.5  Visual representation of domino effects: a linear trajectory of events in the event of a disaster and a cascading trajectory, with amplification and secondary events (Pescaroli & Alexander, 2015)

police, fire), and those that ensure the continuity of government” (Serre, 2018, 2016; Serre & Heinzlef, 2018). However, these infrastructures are extremely connected with each other and, consequently, create interdependencies (Serre, 2018). In urban areas, interdependencies may be a risk diffusion factor (Lhomme et al., 2013). Indeed, because of the domino effect (Nones & Pescaroli, 2016; Pescaroli & Kelman, 2017; Pescaroli & Nones, 2016; Serre & Heinzlef, 2018) (Fig. 5.5), some territories and infrastructures may be impacted by a flood, even if they were not directly located in the flood hazard extension zone (Boin & McConnell, 2007; Zuccaro et al., 2018). Therefore, some damages are caused by indirect impacts linked to interruption of activities. Urban networks are a crucial element to understand impact of domino effects. They are essential for developing dynamics, relationships and economies, but they are also extremely vulnerable face to a crisis. As they are interconnected, a single failure may have cascading effects and affect several networks and, due to a reticular urban system, the whole city. To take an example, in Ile-de-France, populated by a dozen million inhabitants, some 830,000 people could be directly exposed to floods. Thus, a 1910-type flood would have a long-term impact on Paris and its region (Table 5.1). Thus, urban territories and their population are extremely vulnerable to crisis disruptions (Boin & McConnell, 2007). Nature–society hybridization, human actions and practices in their environment, transforms hazards in risks. Faced with these observations of increasing risks and the growing vulnerability of urban areas, risk management has had to evolve in order to adapt their strategies.

110

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Table 5.1  Floods impacts in Paris region (Heinzlef, 2019) Networks impacts 200 km of flooded tunnels 48 impractical bridges 4 closed highways 320,000 homes without gas Drinking water supply reduced by 30%. Three closed incineration sites

Economic impacts 964 commercial buildings affected 40% of companies under 1 m of water

Heritage impacts 3 flooded libraries (François Mitterrand, Mazarine, and the institute’s library) Museums affected (Musée du Louvre, Musée d’Orsay, Museum of Natural History, etc.)

Impacts administratives Archives of the police, gendarmerie and insurances

3  U  rban Resilience, Between Theoretical Adequacy, and Lack of Appropriation on the Part of Local Stakeholders Resilience has gradually become part of risk management. However, its definition remains nebulous and the use of the term resilience often remains at the level of political discourse or media rather than being part of concrete actions. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the different definitions, origins, and interpretations that are linked to this concept.

3.1  Historicity of Resilience Concept The first use of the concept of resilience in science is in the field of physics. It refers to the capacity of a material to return to its initial state despite a continuous pressure. Resilience is therefore an intrinsic—measurable—capacity. Then, resilience has been used in psychology. It was defined as an individual’s ability to adapt in the face of tragedy, trauma, disruption, threats or stress (Booth & Neill, 2017; Luthar et al., 2000; Luthar, 2015). Risk or stress is then necessary to express and prove its resilience (Rutter, 1999, 1987; Rutter & Zigler, 2000). Resilience has been integrated to ecology field in 1973 with the definition of Holling. Resilience is defined as the ability of an eco “system to maintain its qualitative structure” (Holling, 1973). This definition emphasizes the capacity of a system to maintain its qualitative structure (Holling, 1973) and to absorb a shock without changing behavior or function. Yet, several years later, Holling evolved by introducing the idea of evolution without relying on necessarily on a return to a pre-­ existing equilibrium (Walker et al., 2004).

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

111

The multiple disciplinary origins of the concept of resilience make it difficult to define. There are many meanings behind this disciplinary identity, creating a lack of understanding between scientific experts and/or local actors.

3.2  Which Definitions for Resilience in Risk Management? These different origins explain the multitude of definitions and capacities that are associated with the concept of resilience. These capabilities are often derived from these different disciplines (Table  5.2). These abilities, capacities, or capabilities may be pre-existing to the shock, innate, or acquired. These different capacities can be self-sustaining or, on the contrary, contradict each other (such as the capacities of resistance and adaptation). Faced with these different positions, the notions and concepts associated with that of resilience accentuate the abstraction and incomprehension of the concept.

3.3  Tensions Related to the Concept Operationalizing resilience is a complex, even conflicting subject. Because of its multidisciplinary origin and the multitude of approaches, interpretations of resilience and its operationalization are sometimes contradictory. This contradiction is essentially due to the fact that resilience belongs to many disciplines, including Table 5.2  Resilience characteristics Capacities Resistance Absorption Adaptive

Reaction To rebuild

Learning

To bounce back

Definitions Ability to determine the physical damage to the network as a result of the hazard To absorb negative impacts and recover from these Ability of systems, institutions, humans, and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences A capacity of systems to reorganize and recover from change and disturbance To reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure identity, and feedbacks The degree to which the system can build and increase the capacity for learning and adaptation Equilibrium which implies to bounce back to equilibrium previous disturbance

References Serre et al. (2013) and Serre (2018) Cardona (2004) and UNISDR (2009) Pelling (2011)

Pickett et al. (2004) and Ahern (2011) Walker et al. (2004)

Carpenter et al. (2001), Klein et al. (2003) and Walker and Salt (2006) Holling (1996) and Davoudi et al. (2012)

112

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

physics, psychology, ecology, and risk management. This disciplinary and conceptual vagueness makes the use of resilience and its integration into risk management strategies complex. The concept of resilience is faced with a problem of formalization, which makes it difficult to move from theory to practice (Reghezza-Zitt et al., 2012). Despite its growing success, the operational relevance of the concept is therefore constantly questioned and questioned. Operationalizing resilience necessarily involves its (re)definition and evaluation. It is therefore necessary to produce adequate indicators in order to “objectify resilience.” However, as each approach to this concept is different, defining resilience as a process, a state, a quality or an objective, the term resilience is therefore subjectivized by users. So how can the concept be operationalized, and therefore objectified, while retaining its wealth of interpretations? Some approaches also combine other concepts such as vulnerability (Burton, 2010). According to some schools, resilience is one of the components of vulnerability, while for others, vulnerability represents the inability to cope with a shock and is therefore the contradiction of resilience. This difficult formalization, linked to the multitude of interpretations and approaches, results in a complex transition from theory to practice. However, this is the challenge posed by all studies on resilience, in order to use this concept to build adequate risk management strategies. Several approaches have therefore attempted to respond to these challenges by proposing methodologies that aim to operationalize the resilience. This operationalization translates into the design of tools for measuring resilience, spatial decision support systems or approaches that promote collaboration between experts and local stakeholders. In this section, some of these works will be analyzed, such as frameworks, structures, and methodologies. Some authors have attempted to synthesize all of the existing models (Schipper & Langston, 2015) but the forty or so models mentioned (Bahadur et al., 2015) underline the (over)abundance of approaches to resilience. An attempt is made to present some methodologies aimed at creating collaborative work in order to operationalize resilience.

4  I nvolving Stakeholders, a Guarantee for the Adoption and Operationalization of the Concept of Resilience Integrating resilience into risk management cannot be done properly and sustainably without a collaborative and/or participatory approach. The implementation of collaborative approaches at different time frames will facilitate the autonomy, the understanding of actors and territories, the appropriation of the concept and the transcription into resilient risk management strategies.

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

113

4.1  Resilience Through Collaborative Approaches Ensuring the involvement of local people in risk management issues seems completely necessary (Toubin et al., 2015). Integrating different point of views, horizons, with different and even contradictory backgrounds and experiences, enriches the discussions and debates and allows to explore the world of possibilities. This approach allows to be more measured, incisive, and adapted to the local context and issues. Scientific discourse and approaches cannot have a global vision and understanding of a territory and “expert” results are often questioned when applied locally. Resilience in risk management, a social but also vague and abstract concept, requires necessarily the confrontation of experiences, personal and professional stories, perceptions and interpretations. However, although the population is often the first to be impacted by natural hazards and their inappropriate management, the fact remains that the inhabitants are not sufficiently involved. The objective is the creation of a hybrid knowledge to integrate different point of views from the inhabitant to the manager through the scientist. This approach would help and support the urban resilience operationalization through an appropriation of the concept and its issues. This appropriation leads to a collaborative dynamic. Collaboration therefore goes beyond the simple exchange of knowledge and information but allows to “create a shared vision and articulate strategies to bring out common interests that go beyond the limits of each particular project”. Operationalize resilience and integrate this concept into risk management necessarily involves collaborative and/or participatory approaches (Serre et  al., 2013). Involving local managers and decision-makers in the construction of resilient risk strategies ensures their understanding and application of the strategy in times of crisis, but also allows for a long-term approach through the gradual, personal, and community adoption of the concept and the strategies developed. Several experiences of collaborative approaches between researchers and urban actors can be highlighted. Some have developed tools, and others have developed the principles of resilience. The approach developed by Benoît Robert in Montreal aims to measure urban resilience based on the level of disturbance and operational continuity. The methodology has been tested with the city’s critical infrastructure managers. This collaborative approach has borne fruit by enabling scientists to validate and refine their results of the DOMINO tool in contact with managers, in particular through simulation exercises, workshops, and training sessions organized jointly. This work continues today in order to update the tool and to invest sustainably in improving the resilience of critical—or essential—infrastructures. The concept of urban resilience calls for multiple, cross-cutting and interpretative issues that require a transdisciplinary approach that allows the different actors in the city to be integrated from the design phase of resilience strategies. Recognizing that there cannot be a single good answer to the question of urban risks, systemic and collaborative approaches make it possible to formulate and respond to the difficulties encountered by putting into perspective the different academic and

114

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

practical knowledge of the actors. Moreover, this collaborative work guarantees the acceptance and appropriation of a concept that is still abstract on many points.

4.2  The Collaborative Process in Risk Management In recent years, the issue of risks, and more specifically environmental risks, has been a recurring theme in the political and public arena. The terms “environmental justice,” “sustainable development,” “environmental equity,” or “ecosystem services” have been used to raise the profile of citizens’ issues and interests. Increasingly involved in environmental issues, but also in human and civic issues, people are being made responsible for their way of life. The environment is therefore becoming a common good, especially in Sweden, where every citizen can enjoy nature as he or she sees fit, but is also responsible for his or her own actions. Events, such as the Climate Walks since 2015, underline this feeling of individual and collective responsibility on environmental issues. This transition in practice and environmental awareness shows an increasingly strong involvement of stakeholders. However, these implications can only be sustained if there is transparency, clarity, communication, and consensus among the various stakeholders (Mustajoki et al., 2004). Because of the complexity of environmental issues, which are themselves linked to urban issues, communication, and understanding, but also necessarily integration and action can only exist through the support of local experts and stakeholders. To appropriate concepts as complex and abstract as risks or resilience, one must be able to express them and then translate them into precise objectives to be achieved. Thus, in order to translate a concept into precise action, it is necessary to clarify the issues, uses, and objectives. This work is essential to ensure the involvement of stakeholders in a problem that is above all common and to increase the chances of providing real and concrete answers and solutions to a multifaceted complexity.

4.3  Involving Local Actors for a Better Acceptance It is therefore a paradigm shift that must take place in order to integrate stakeholders. While this transition may seem insurmountable for some, unproductive for others, it is nevertheless proven that the construction of knowledge shared by experts and laymen “makes it possible to reduce complexity, to take into account the interests of everyone, but also to promote the acceptance and appropriation of solutions” (Toubin et al., 2015). Thus, despite the difficulties in building this trust, this collaboration, this common dialogue, the result is better integration and acceptance of the experts’ work. Moreover, since these subjects, such as environmental issues, urban risks, climate change, affect and involve all stakeholders, integrating them not only

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

115

makes it possible to address new points of view and approaches but also to build equity of knowledge. In this way, the integration of the different stakeholders has a doubly positive impact, and makes it possible to meet the objectives of a project by improving its proposals, but is also an objective in itself by responding to the desires of consultation. It is then a question for managers to “become more flexible in order to adapt” and to “negotiate in order to convince” (Toubin et al., 2015) in order to formalize from the beginning of the project a vision and knowledge coconstructed between the different actors. As a result, the result will be all the more legitimate and, above all, relevant. Thus, through dialogue, compromise, raising the awareness of individuals, adaptation strategies in the face of risks will have an even greater chance of having a positive and real impact on the territory and its population. The operationalization of resilience therefore necessarily requires the involvement of multiple actors in order to propose coherent urban planning and adaptation strategies to best respond to the threat of growing risks in urban environments.

4.4  Participation or Collaboration? It seemed important to us to dissociate the different actors from each other but also the tools that already exist to encourage collaboration between different actors. First of all, when we talk about collaboration and consultation, the question arises: With whom? Should each stakeholder be involved at every stage of the project? Here it is necessary to differentiate between participation and collaboration. When we talk about participation—citizen or otherwise—the decision is “open to individuals and groups that are not in charge of a formalized decision-making power,” whereas collaboration is the mobilization not of a single “but several individuals or groups, integrated on an equal footing” (Toubin et al., 2015). It should be understood here that when the general public is involved in debates and questioning on complex subjects, it is a question of participation, since it is rarely a question of equality of decision in the face of official decision-makers. On the other hand, when several decision-makers are confronted with each other, even beyond the official hierarchy, we can speak of collaboration, effective collaboration at several levels (Fig.  5.6). The practice of action research aims to foster this collaboration at all levels and at the different stages of learning, decision and action. This new form of research combining experts and researchers makes it possible to frame questions using scientific concepts but also to provide practical answers to problems thanks to the experience of experts—private and/or public. However, the common denominator between these two approaches—participatory and/or collaborative—remains a process of learning and innovation combining different sources of knowledge, tacit, explicit, experiential or academic knowledge. It is a whole network of knowledge and relationships that is built up through exchanges, common experiences and various emulations. Each actor acquires an

116

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Professional actors

Public = citizens, associations

Professional actors = companies, private interest representatives

Experts

Collaboration

Participation

Public

Decisionmakers

Experts = scientific, private experts

Decision-makers = local authorities, State, managers,

Fig. 5.6  Between participation and collaboration, which actors? (Toubin, 2014)

essential place in the exchanges and, like a meticulously made canvas, fulfills his role. The studies have sought to understand the place that each stakeholder occupied in the exchanges, the forces in action and the interactions according to the roles assigned—sometimes officially, sometimes unofficially. These studies highlighted the importance of a broker, an intermediary, a mediator who would then be the “glue” between the different stakeholders. This intermediary role would allow a better transmission of information, which would generate a greater capacity for innovation and adaptation. Thus, intermediaries who would (re)link the stakeholders together would be a source of respect, trust and therefore better collaboration. It is therefore certain that certain collaborative formulas and tools promote the dialogue and understanding.

4.5  Examples of Collaborative Approaches • DS3 Model, Am Sandtorkai/Dalmannkai (Hamburg) case study • The DS3 model (Fig.  5.7) was developed to analyze the resilience of critical infrastructures and more specifically of urban networks. Resilience is defined here as the ability of a system to absorb a disturbance and subsequently recover its functions. This model has defined three capabilities: resilience, absorption, and recovery: –– Resistance capacity: it consists in determining the material damage following a risk. It is considered that the more a network is damaged, the more likely it is to malfunction and the slower and more complex it is to return to service.

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

117

Fig. 5.7  DS3 Model (Serre, 2018)

–– The absorption capacity: it illustrates the weaknesses and strengths of the network allowing the construction of alternatives to the network following a component failure. –– Recovery capacity: this represents the time required to bring the network and its components back into service. The DS3 model has been tested in a neighborhood of Hamburg in the Northwest of HafenCity (Serre et al., 2016) in order to build an attractive living environment. The Am Sandtorkai/Dalmannkai neighborhood is a dense urban area, with a young population coexisting with seniors. As it is outside the Hamburg’s dike line, this area is subjected to flooding. Affected by storm surges up to 5 or to 6 m and pluvial floods, Hamburg, and specifically this neighborhood, is vulnerable. The neighborhood is vast (about 10 ha) and its density is 137.61 inhabitants per hectares. This area is connected with the city by 4 bridges, but only one of them is flood-secure. However, the neighborhood developed several modes of transport, “soft” modes of transport as bicycle, and has integrated the flood risk, building roads above the flood-line reference. Based on the three resilience characteristics, resistance, absorption, recovery capacities, some characteristics have been defined as increasing resilience ability of the neighborhood or not (Fig. 5.8). The analysis of the neighborhood was carried out using the DS3 Model analysis model and combined with the views of local actors through interviews. Their practical knowledge of the area made it possible to integrate the precise analysis components. Integrating local actors has enabled them to be involved in the concerns, analyses, and awareness of the state of resilience, but also in the appropriation of advice and prospects for improvement.

118

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Fig. 5.8  Synthesis of results (Serre & Heinzlef, 2018)

After analyzing the components according to these capabilities, the methodology led to suggestions for improvement. The diversity in transportation—public, soft, private modes and particularly urban networks above the higher reference water level—connecting the neighborhood to the entire city is a good element to develop and increase resistance, absorption, and recovery capacities. Developing and mixing energy supply (renewable energy source for instance), promoting the multifunctionality of buildings, and integrating the water level reference in every construction are also aspects which could increase the resilience. This approach brings a consequent improvement in the operationalization of the concept of resilience. Essentially, revolving around technical resilience, the model has been tested, applied and adapted to the needs and expectations of managers in an urban neighborhood. This methodology has made it possible to educate the local actors on the resilience and/or vulnerability of critical infrastructures and to guide

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

119

them on the strategies and improvements to be implemented in order to increase their level of resilience. • Improving Urban Resilience Through Collaborative Diagnosis Toubin (Toubin et al., 2015) has developed a methodology to contribute to the improvement of the conditions of urban resilience and more particularly the resilience of urban networks. Her analysis of the interactions and interdependencies of urban networks highlighted the intrinsic fragilities of urban systems and their management in the event of a crisis. Faced with the challenges observed, the research objective was therefore to develop methodological approaches and tools to help urban service managers identify and characterize the technical and organizational interdependencies in order to ensure service continuity despite a disruption. The approach was built by integrating the main managers of the City of Paris’ urban services (Table 5.3). The methodology allows to construct interviews in order to assess the criticality of the resources required for the system to function properly. It was therefore possible to prioritize the resources according to their importance and use. In the same way, a grid to determine the resources produced for users was created. This research made it possible to draw up and analyze the interdependencies of the Paris urban networks. It highlights the certain dependencies, particularly those on electricity, telecommunications, and travel. The collaborative approach made it possible to involve managers in thinking about strategies to mitigate or at least manage these interdependencies. Moreover, the collaborative process has illustrated the need to move beyond isolated approaches but instead to foster a common vision. The Table 5.3  Urban services (Toubin et al., 2015) Urban services ERDF GRDF CPCU Climespace Eau de Paris SAP SIAAP Propreté SYCTOM PC Lutece PC Berlier EVESA Fonctionnelle Voirie RATP Orange

Utility Electricity Gas Heating Air conditioning Clean water Sanitation Sanitation Rubbish collection Rubbish collection Traffic regulation Traffic regulation Lighting Viability Displacement Transport Telecommunications

120

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

interweaving of scales but also of services makes cooperation and transparency between operators and decision-makers indispensable for the construction of a more resilient city. • Inclusive Resilience Indicators (Heinzlef, Becue, & Serre, 2020) • These precedent researches highlight technical resilience, focusing on critical infrastructures and urban networks. A third approach sought to develop the idea that the “resilience approach must be concentrated on both multiple social and territorial dimensions and interactions. The goal is to understand and to point out the characteristics which could decrease or increase urban resilience. Bearing in mind that resilience is considered as an ability, a capability of a society or a territory to plan for, adapt, absorb, recover from, learn, evolve, An attempt is made to select some inherent traits which would participate to develop a resilience territory. In this research, several indicators have been developed, themselves divided into specific variables, in order to study both inherent vulnerabilities and resilient characteristics of a society and a territory. It is established here that these variables indicate a potential for resilience in order to revive a social, economic, urban, and systemic activity after a shock. These indicators have been built after a translation of the Baseline Resilience Indicators for Communities (BRIC) methodology (Cutter et  al., 2008; Singh-Peterson et  al., 2014) and constitute a hierarchical resilient index constructed on the basis of three indicators (Fig. 5.9) of urban, social, technical resilience” (Heinzlef et al., 2019), a city being composed by populations, networks, environment, infrastructures, buildings etc. (Lhomme et al., 2013). –– Social resilience: Social resilience is defined as the capacity of a population to adapt and recover from disturbances (Hutter & Lorenz, 2018). Several elements factors can allow a social entity to proactively act, react, and redevelop activities or interactions, such as the age (Cutter et  al., 2010), the political investment (Voss, 2008), the socioeconomic status (Flanagan et al., 2011), the risk knowledge and perception (Kasperson et al., 1988), diversity, etc. This study understands social resilience as a social community resilience (Wilson, 2013) and not individual resilience (Hutter & Lorenz, 2018). –– Technical resilience: Technical resilience integrates urban networks (Serre, 2016) such as transport, electricity, gas and drinking water networks. Defined as essential and “critical,” these infrastructures determine the “proper” functioning of the territory. Their resilience has been defined around their diversity and their accessibility within a radius of 100 m. –– Urban resilience: This indicator includes physical and virtual urban dynamics (age of buildings, density, functionality, critical infrastructure, economic dynamics, creation or disappearance of new commercial properties, etc.). It has been established few variables to understand the urban resilience degree, considering critical infrastructures (fire, police and defense forces) influence area, the health access (Norris et al., 2008; Opach & Rød, 2013), the density

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

121

Fig. 5.9  Global resilience indicators (Heinzlef et al., 2019)

of social housing (Johansson et  al., 2016), the touristic dynamic (Tierney, 2009) and the economic dynamic (creating new companies, keeping old ones). Specific work on resilience cannot be envisaged without a specific study area and subject to the risk of flooding. This project is based in the Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur regional area (PACA), and more precisely in Avignon, city subject to flood risk (Rhône-Durance confluence). Well known for either its flash flood, usually unpredicted, fluvial flood (the unpredicted Durance river), the area is submitted to flood uncertainties. Due to climate and social issues, the collectivity needed a decision support-tool in order to integrate and adapt the resilience concept into urban practices. It is represented “by a collaborative work (Heinzlef, Robert, et al., 2020), a partnership with the urban and technical services (GIS) of Avignon. The goal of collaborative approaches is to structure a complex problem in a transparent manner (Mustajoki et al., 2004) to enhance mutual understanding of stakeholders and

122

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

consensus. The co-construction of expert and local knowledge can reduce complexity, consider the interests, the needs and point of views of everyone, but also promote acceptance and appropriation of solutions to facilitate decision-making. The implementation of urban resilience as a combination of good management of resources and services, coherent urban planning and considering the risks and possibilities of adaptation is also part of the need to involve multiple stakeholders (Serre & Heinzlef, 2018; Toubin et al., 2015). Furthermore, the main goal of this project is to include the concept of resilience in the very beginning of any urban project and strategy” (Heinzlef et al., 2019). In this perspective, to build a vision coconstructed by the different actors makes more legitimate and relevant the reflection on a territory (Heinzlef et al., 2019). More specifically, on such a complex subject as urban floods with so many uncertainties, a “collaborative approach enriches knowledge and perceptions on a complex and abstract topic and it sensitizes and motivates each person who has and will have a role to play (Toubin et al., 2015). These characteristics facilitate the implementation of adaptation strategies (Frommer, 2011). In this case study, the collaboration is particularly illustrated by the exchange of so-called sensitive data, although 90% of the data are Open Data, and the co-­ construction of the tool by using a Data Management Engine (ETL), the Feature Manipulation Engine, used by the GIS service of French cities. By paying particular attention to using the same processing tool as French communities, the accessibility of the tool is reinforced, as it does not require specific learning that would lengthen access time but also considerably reduces its use” (Heinzlef et al., 2019). The undeniable advantage of working jointly with the city’s actors and the city’s GIS department makes it possible to ensure the involvement of managers in the reflection on urban resilience. In addition to their involvement, thinking about the construction of a spatial decision support system on the ins and outs is necessary to adopt a concept and a methodology. The results show that it is necessary and obvious to ensure that local actors understand the definitions and notions of the concept of resilience in order to transform the theory into risk management strategies.

5  Discussion Collaborative approaches have several assets and advantages, facilitating the analysis of a situation, the search for solutions, and, ultimately, the implementation of solutions. In addition to the increase in knowledge fostered by collaborative approaches, the learning and buy-in of participants have been demonstrated by numerous experiments; it is essential for improving territorial resilience. Different levels of learning are distinguished. Short-term learning from direct participants in the process is the primary objective, but the possibility of extending knowledge and transformation of structures to institutions and regulations can be considered. To do this, it will be necessary to carefully choose the actors involved in this network and to study the opportunity and the means to maintain the dynamic driven by collaboration through translation theory. Collaborative approaches can involve a

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

123

Table 5.4  Advantages of the approaches presented References Serre et al. (2016)

Case Resilience study approach Hamburg Technical-­ functional

Toubin Paris et al. (2015) Heinzlef Avignon et al. (2019)

Technical-­ functional Organizational

Collaborative temporality After the development of the method and the tool During

Before, during and after

Results Specific temporality

Advantages Network indicators

Specific temporality

Networks indicators

Disadvantages Collaboration after the implementation of the model

Collaboration just for the case study Need for Long-term Long-term collaboration collaboration feedback and long-term + inclusive follow-up indicators

wide range of actors, both from civil society and the private sector. How they are involved strongly influences the approach, its purpose, and the tools used. The methods presented (Table 5.4) in this chapter focus on local actors, managers, and decision-makers. These have been more or less integrated into the process of evaluation and increasing the territorial resilience depending on the aims of the strategies. The technical-functional approach tested in Hamburg involved local actors in order to ask them questions, integrate their knowledge of the territory, their perceptions, but also their long-term visions of the territory and the possibility of implementing resilience strategies. Concerning the approach developed by Toubin and applied in Paris, the vision was to focus on urban networks. The objective was to analyze the interdependencies between the different critical infrastructures and more specifically the electricity, drinking water, transport and waste management networks. In order to do so, the risk management strategies of network managers were analyzed. They were confronted and served as an anchor for the study. The analysis also focused on the autonomy, self-sufficiency, resource and production capacities of each urban service. Knowing the capacity for autonomy and the impact on the production of the resource or service enables the manager to qualify his overall dependence on the various resources as indispensable to negligible. Conversely, if the resource is no longer supplied, the manager can evaluate the restart time that he will have to consider, once supply is restored, to restart his system and produce his service again. Then the identification and prioritization of its users allows it to identify the most critical outgoing resources for the rest of the urban system. This collaborative approach alerted managers to the effectiveness of their management strategies, their interdependence on each other, and the need for collaboration between local actors and involved them in the process of developing a resilient risk management strategy. The third approach, which sought to apprehend resilience as comprehensively as possible (urban, technical, and social resilience), also involved local actors. The collaborative approach was established with the desire to involve local actors in the

124

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

reflexive process, theory and practice. In contrast to the first two methodologies that were confronted with local actors after their elaboration, the Avignon approach developed the methodology with the actors at each stage. Whether it was the choice of data, tools or the visual enhancement of indicators, managers were involved to ensure their understanding and future adoption of the methodology. This collaborative approach to developing a resilience strategy is a guarantee that resilience strategies adapted to specific risks and territories will work properly and be implemented over the long term.

6  Conclusion This chapter has illustrated the challenges of operationalizing urban resilience. Urban resilience is a concept that has become essential in risk management in order to prepare territories and populations for their increase and their consequences. Although adequate in theory, this concept remains complex to operationalize, and managers struggle to adopt it and translate it into risk management strategies. This is why collaborative approaches have been developed to overcome this lack of ownership of the concept. This chapter presented three methodologies that sought to operationalize resilience. Some of them revolve around a technical-functional approach, others around global resilience. They all sought to create collaborations with urban managers in order to integrate their points of view, perceptions, experiences, and habits. Collaboration was possible at different stages of the resilience strategy development process. This can take place at the end of the research, in which case an already developed tool is presented to the stakeholders in order to present the results and qualify the proposals for improving resilience. Collaboration can also be developed at the heart of the methodology, with managers’ perceptions serving as the basis for the analysis. Finally, the collaborative research can be an “egalitarian” process between scientific experts and local stakeholders in order to jointly build a resilience analysis tool. The sustainability, adoption, and vision of resilience over the long term remain the common objectives of these collaborative approaches.

References Ahern, J. (2011). From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world. Landscape and Urban Planning, 100, 341–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. landurbplan.2011.02.021 Bahadur, A., Wilkinson, E., & Tanner, T. (2015). Measuring resilience: An analytical review (draft under review). Climate and Development. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1300.1444

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

125

Boin, A., & McConnell, A. (2007). Preparing for critical infrastructure breakdowns: The limits of crisis management and the need for resilience. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 15, 50–59. Booth, J. W., & Neill, J. T. (2017). Coping strategies and the development of psychological resilience. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 20, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF03401002 Burton, C.  G. (2010). Social vulnerability and hurricane impact modeling. Natural Hazards Review, 11, 58–68. Cardona, O. (2004). The need for rethinking the concepts of vulnerability and risk from a holistic perspective: A necessary review and criticism for effective risk management. In Mapping vulnerability (pp. 56–70). Routledge. Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J.  M., & Abel, N. (2001). From metaphor to measurement: Resilience of what to what? Ecosystems, 4, 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10021-­001-­0045-­9 Carter, J. G., Cavan, G., Connelly, A., Guy, S., Handley, J., & Kazmierczak, A. (2015). Climate change and the city: Building capacity for urban adaptation. Progress in Planning, 95, 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2013.08.001 Catastrophes Naturelles-Observatoire permanent des catastrophes naturelles et des risques naturels. (2016). Bilan statistique des catastrophes naturelles survenues dans le Monde entre 2002–2015. Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). (2018). Cred crunch: Natural disasters in 2017-lower mortality, higher cost. Cheng, L., Abraham, J., Hausfather, Z., & Trenberth, K. E. (2019). How fast are the oceans warming? Science, 363, 128–129. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav7619 CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters), UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction). (2018). Economic losses, poverty and disasters (pp. 1998–2017). Pegasus. Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., & Webb, J. (2008). A place-­ based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environmental Change, 18, 598–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013 Cutter, S. L., Burton, C. G., & Emrich, C. T. (2010). Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking baseline conditions. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-­7355.1732 Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G.  D., Wilkinson, C., Fünfgeld, H., McEvoy, D., Porter, L., & Davoudi, S. (2012). Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end? “Reframing” resilience: Challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture management system in northern Afghanistan urban resilience: What does it mean in planning practice? Resilience as a useful concept for climate change adaptation? the politics of resilience for planning: A cautionary note: Edited by Simin Davoudi and Libby Porter. Planning Theory and Practice, 13, 299–333. https://doi.org/10.108 0/14649357.2012.677124 De Graaf, R. E. (2013). Flood-proof ecocities: Technology, design and governance. In Resilience and urban risk management (pp. 39–47). CRC Press. Duvat-Magnan, V., & Magnan, A. (2014). Des catastrophes … naturelles? Pommier. Emrich, C. T., & Tobin, G. A. (2018). Resilience: an introduction. In Vulnerability and resilience to natural hazards (pp. 124–144). Cambridge University Press. Flanagan, B.  E., Gregory, E.  W., Hallisey, E.  J., Heitgerd, J.  L., & Lewis, B. (2011). A social vulnerability index for disaster management. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 8(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-­7355.1792 Frommer, B. (2011). Climate change and the resilient society: Utopia or realistic option for German regions? Natural Hazards, 58, 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-­010-­9644-­0

126

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

Gersonius, B., Ashley, R., Pathirana, A., & Zevenbergen, C. (2013). Climate change uncertainty: Building flexibility into water and flood risk infrastructure. Climatic Change, 116, 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-­012-­0494-­5 Hay, J., & Mimura, N. (2010). The changing nature of extreme weather and climate events: Risks to sustainable development. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 1, 3–18. https://doi. org/10.1080/19475701003643433 Heinzlef, C. (2019). Modélisation d’indicateurs de résilience urbaine face au risque d’inondation. Co-construction d’un système spatial d’aide à la décision pour contribuer à l’opérationnalisation du concept de résilience (Thèse de doctorat). Avignon Université, Avignon. Heinzlef, C., Becue, V., & Serre, D. (2020). A spatial decision support system for enhancing resilience to floods: Bridging resilience modelling and geovisualization techniques. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20, 1049–1068. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-­20-­1049-­2020 Heinzlef, C., Becue, V., & Serre, D. (2019). Operationalizing urban resilience to floods in embanked territories – Application in Avignon, Provence Alpes Côte d’azur region. Safety Science, 118, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.003 Heinzlef, C., Robert, B., Hémond, Y., & Serre, D. (2020). Operating urban resilience strategies to face climate change and associated risks: Some advances from theory to application in Canada and France. Cities, 104, 102762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102762 Holling, C. S. (1996). Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In P. E. Schulze (Ed.), Engineering within ecological constraints (pp. 31–43). National Academy Press. Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1–23. Horton, B. P., Kopp, R. E., Garner, A. J., Hay, C. C., Khan, N. S., Roy, K., & Shaw, T. A. (2018). Mapping sea-level change in time, space, and probability. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 43, 481–521. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-­environ-­102017-­025826 Hutter, G., & Lorenz, D. F. (2018). Social resilience. In Vulnerability and resilience to natural hazards (pp. 190–213). Cambridge University Press. Johansson, J., Opach, T., Glaas, E., Neset, T., Navarra, C., Linner, B.-O., & Rod, J. K. (2016). VisAdapt: A visualization tool to support climate change adaptation. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 37(2), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2016.49 Kasperson, R.  E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H.  S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J.  X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-­6924.1988.tb01168.x Kirezci, E., Young, I. R., Ranasinghe, R., Muis, S., Nicholls, R. J., Lincke, D., & Hinkel, J. (2020). Projections of global-scale extreme sea levels and resulting episodic coastal flooding over the 21st century. Scientific Reports, 10, 11629. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-­020-­67736-­6 Klein, R. J. T., Nicholls, R. J., & Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to natural hazards: How useful is this concept? Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 5, 35–45. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.hazards.2004.02.001 Kulp, S. A., & Strauss, B. H. (2019). New elevation data triple estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise and coastal flooding. Nature Communications, 10, 4844. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-­019-­12808-­z Levitus, S., Antonov, J. I., Boyer, T. P., Baranova, O. K., Garcia, H. E., Locarnini, R. A., Mishonov, A.  V., Reagan, J.  R., Seidov, D., Yarosh, E.  S., & Zweng, M.  M. (2012). World ocean heat content and thermosteric sea level change (0–2000 m), 1955–2010: World ocean heat content. Geophysical Research Letters, 39(10). https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051106 Lhomme, S., Serre, D., Diab, Y., & Laganier, R. (2013). Analyzing resilience of urban networks: A preliminary step towards more flood resilient cities. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-­13-­221-­2013 Luthar, S. S. (2015). Resilience in development: A synthesis of research across five decades. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology (pp. 739–795). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470939406.ch20

5  Understanding and Implementing Urban Resilience for Comprehensive and Local…

127

Luthar, S.  S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543–562. https://doi. org/10.1111/1467-­8624.00164 Meerow, S., Newell, J. P., & Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011 Mitchell, J. K. (Ed.). (1999). Crucibles of hazard: Mega-cities and disasters in transition. United Nations University Press, Tokyo. Mustajoki, J., Hämäläinen, R.  P., & Marttunen, M. (2004). Participatory multicriteria decision analysis with Web-HIPRE: A case of lake regulation policy. Environmental Modelling & Software, 19, 537–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2003.07.002 Nazif, S., Mohammadpour Khoie, M. M., & Eslamian, S. (2021). Urban disaster management and resilience, handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience. In S.  Eslamian & F.  Eslamian (Eds.), New frameworks for building resilience to disasters (Vol. 1). Springer Nature. Nones, M., & Pescaroli, G. (2016). Implications of cascading effects for the EU floods directive. International Journal of River Basin Management, 14, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.108 0/15715124.2016.1149074 Norris, F.  H., Stevens, S.  P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K.  F., & Pfefferbaum, R.  L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10464-­007-­9156-­6 Opach, T., & Rød, J.  K. (2013). Cartographic visualization of vulnerability to natural hazards. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 48, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.3138/carto.48.2.1840 Pachauri, R. K., Mayer, L., & Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Eds.). (2015). Climate change 2014: Synthesis report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Pelling, M. (2011). Tracing the roots of urban risk and vulnerability. In M.  Pelling (Ed.), The vulnerability of cities to disasters and climate change: A conceptual framework (pp.  3–18). Springer. Pescaroli, G., & Alexander, D. (2015). A definition of cascading disasters and cascading effects: Going beyond the “toppling dominos” metaphor. Planet@risk, 3, 58–67. Pescaroli, G., & Kelman, I. (2017). How critical infrastructure orients international relief in cascading disasters. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 25, 56–67. https://doi. org/10.1111/1468-­5973.12118 Pescaroli, G., & Nones, M. (2016). Cascading events, technology and the floods directive: Future challenges. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 7, p. 07003). EDP Sciences. https://doi. org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160707003 Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., & Grove, J. M. (2004). Resilient cities: Meaning, models, and metaphor for integrating the ecological, socio-economic, and planning realms. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 369–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.035 Reghezza-Zitt, M., & Rufat, S. (2016). Resilience imperative: Uncertainty, risks and disasters. ISTE Press – Elsevier. Reghezza-Zitt, M., Rufat, S., Djament-Tran, G., Le Blanc, A., & Lhomme, S. (2012). What resilience is not: Uses and abuses. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography. https://doi. org/10.4000/cybergeo.25554 Rufat, S., Tate, E., Burton, C. G., & Maroof, A. S. (2015). Social vulnerability to floods: Review of case studies and implications for measurement. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 470–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.09.013 Rutter, M. (1999). Resilience concepts and findings: Implications for family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 21, 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-­6427.00108 Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57, 316–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-­0025.1987.tb03541.x Rutter, M., & Zigler, E. F. (2000). Resilience reconsidered: Conceptual considerations, empirical findings, and policy implications. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early

128

C. Heinzlef and D. Serre

childhood intervention (pp.  651–682). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511529320.030 Schipper, L., & Langston, L. (2015) A comparative overview of resilience measurement frameworks. Analyzing Indicators and Approaches; Overseas Development Institute: London, UK, 422. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2430.0882. Serre, D. (2018). DS3 model testing: Assessing critical infrastructure network flood resilience at the neighbourhood scale. In A.  Fekete & F.  Fiedrich (Eds.), Urban disaster resilience and security (pp.  207–220). Springer International Publishing. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­68606-­6_13 Serre, D. (2016). Advanced methodology for risk and vulnerability assessment of interdependency of critical infrastructure in respect to urban floods. In E3S web of conferences (Vol. 7, p. 07002). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160707002 Serre, D., Barroca, B., Balsells, M., & Becue, V. (2016). Contributing to urban resilience to floods with neighbourhood design: The case of Am Sandtorkai/Dalmannkai in Hamburg. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 11, S69–S83. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12253 Serre, D., Barroca, B., & Laganier, R. (Eds.). (2013). Resilience and urban risk management. CRC Press. ISBN 9780415621472. Serre, D., & Heinzlef, C. (2018). Assessing and mapping urban resilience to floods with respect to cascading effects through critical infrastructure networks. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.02.018 Singh-Peterson, L., Salmon, P., Goode, N., & Gallina, J. (2014). Translation and evaluation of the baseline resilience indicators for communities on the sunshine coast, Queensland Australia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 10, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijdrr.2014.07.004 Tierney, K. (2009). Disaster response: research findings and their implications for resilience measures. (Carri Research Report No. 6). CARRI research report. Toubin, M. (2014). Améliorer la résilience urbaine par un diagnostic collaboratif: l’exemple des services urbains parisiens face à l’inondation (Thèse de doctorat). Paris-Diderot, Paris. Toubin, M., Laganier, R., Diab, Y., & Serre, D. (2015). Improving the conditions for urban resilience through collaborative learning of Parisian Urban Services. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 141, 05014021. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-­5444.0000229 UNDESA. (2014). World urbanization prospects, the 2011 revision. Popul. Div. Dep. Econ. Soc. Aff. U. N. Secr. UNISDR-United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. (2009). Terminology on disaster risk reduction. UNISDR. United Nations. (2012). World urbanization prospects: The 2011 revision highlights. Voss, M. (2008). The vulnerable can’t speak. An integrative vulnerability approach to disaster and climate change research. Behemoth-A Journal on Civilisation, 1(3), 39–56. https://doi. org/10.1524/behe.2008.0022 Walker, B., Holling, C.  S., Carpenter, S.  R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecologial systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5. Walker, B.  H., & Salt, D. (2006). Resilience thinking: Sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Island Press. Wilson, G. (2013). Community resilience and environmental transitions. Routledge/Taylor & Francis. Zevenbergen, C. (2016). Flood resilience. In Resource guide on resilience (p. 2016). IRGC. Zevenbergen, C., Cashman, A., Evelpidou, N., Pasche, E., Garvin, S., & Ashley, R. (2010). Urban flood management. CRC Press. Zuccaro, G., De Gregorio, D., & Leone, M. F. (2018). Theoretical model for cascading effects analyses. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 30, 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijdrr.2018.04.019

Chapter 6

Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction Jorge Olcina

Abstract  Land use planning has become an effective technical-administrative process that is used in many countries for reducing natural hazards in recent years. With the support of risk maps, land use planning prevents the occupation of lands that often suffer extreme events. In this context, green infrastructure has recently emerged as an effective planning and management tool for sustainable land use planning. Green infrastructure concept lacks a universal accepted definition, but it has been incorporated into laws and land use plans to reduce natural hazards and also the effects of climate change. This chapter reviews conceptual and methodological questions in relation on the use of land use planning and green infrastructure like tools for reducing natural hazards in the context of climate change. Keywords  Land use planning · Green infrastructure · Natural hazards · Climate change · Disaster reduction

1  Introduction Since the beginning of this century, actions to reduce natural hazards have undergone changes within the context of sustainable development and climate change. From the traditional conceptions based, mainly, on the civil engineering work in territories affected by a disaster, it has progressively passed to the consideration of territorial planning as a tool for risk reduction. In this sense, the correct allocation of land uses, avoiding the occupation of areas with high natural hazard, can reduce the risk in a territory and, thus, reduce the economic losses and loss of human life caused by the episodes extremes. J. Olcina (*) University of Alicante, Department of Physical and Regional Geography, Alicante, Spain e-mail: [email protected] © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_6

129

130

J. Olcina

To guarantee its effective application, land use planning must be based on the best knowledge of the different dimensions of risk from the elaboration of updated risk maps with the appropriate scales. Risk mapping is therefore a key tool to strengthen the transition to preventive and effective risk management. Progressively developed countries have approved laws that regulate the use of spatial planning as a measure to reduce risk. And green infrastructure is managed as an effective cartographic tool, because it is an instrument that favours the agile allocation of new land uses. In this book chapter, the author has compiled the existing knowledge on Climate Change in Spatial Planning by using the green infrastructure tool. It analyses the usefulness of land use planning and green infrastructure as tools for natural risk reduction. A proposal for the integration of elements in green infrastructure for reducing natural risk and the effects of climate change is offered, being aware of the limitation that a new proposal entails and of the requirements imposed by its adaptation to specific territories with their geographical specificity. And an interesting example of plan that has used green infrastructure for sustainable land use in coastal is analysed. This plan has taken into account climate hazards- and climate change-­ like important elements into green infrastructure.

1.1  Spatial Planning as a Natural Risk Reduction Procedure Spatial planning is the ‘geographical expression of the economic, social, cultural, and ecological policies of society. It is at the same time a scientific discipline, an administrative technique, and a policy developed as an interdisciplinary and comprehensive approach towards balanced regional development and the physical organisation of space according to an overall strategy’  – European Charter for Spatial Planning, 1983. Every land or spatial planning process integrates an administrative action (generally public) that is governed by specific legal regulations and a scientific-technical study in which proposals to improve the territory are addressed. Spatial planning is a practical action that involves a process of choosing between various options so that a plan for alternative uses is justified on the basis of criteria (environmental and socio-economic) that determine the new territorial model. The implementation of this new action programme requires political will; hence, spatial planning is largely the expression of an ideology about a territory. In this paper, the expression ‘spatial planning’ is understood as the process of territorial planning that consists of the allocation of land uses, covered by law, carried out by public administrations at different scales (local, regional, state). In this sense, the term is equivalent to ‘land use planning’. There are other ‘non-normative’ processes that can plan future uses in the territory, but their development depends on the will of the corresponding administration; they are the so-called strategic plans, which are more agile in their processing than the normative plans, but which no have legal commitment for its execution.

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

131

Spatial planning starts from the principle that all the geographic space on the Earth’s surface is organised. Established social groups have endowed a space of land with a system of relationships on which the development of that society is based. This organisation usually needs modification in one or several of its elements (including natural, social, economic, and infrastructural) because adaptation is required to new realities. At this moment, a spatial or land planning process begins that culminates in the development of a plan that describes the new spatial model. Spatial planning processes involve three phases. The first is legal in nature and involves drafting a text defining the principles, objectives, and instruments of spatial planning. The planning phase follows, which includes drafting a territorial plan with the new model applied. Finally, this plan is carried out, which culminates (at least in theory) with the transformation of the territorial reality in accordance with the provisions above. An essential aspect of spatial planning is scalarity, so that the lower (local) work scales incorporate the territorial planning decisions contained in higher-level legislation and plans (state and supra-state). The political-administrative organisation of the state must be considered, since some states give prominence to the national state, while others ensure that regions take the lead. Generally, the local scale has urban planning powers. The main aims of spatial planning in any democratic society are as follows: (a) to ensure the participation of the affected population; (b) coordinate various sectorial policies; (c) advancement for the values, cultures, and interests of the regions and counties; (d) continuance for current trends and the long-term evolution of policies in the territory. Spatial planning faces challenges in the framework of sustainability and so planned actions must: (1) consider the resources and risks of the physical environment; (2) incorporate environmental regulations issued by the relevant administrations; (3) comply with the hierarchy of work scales that are fundamental in legal practice; and (4) incorporate a continuous diagnostic phase based on the design of monitoring indicators for the continuous evaluation of plans. All of this should be achieved under the principle of transparency and open information by the administrations involved. If need to adapt spatial planning to the socio-economic and environmental dynamics of the territory is considered, then there is a current process that will determine territorial planning in the coming years: climate change. Thermal warming and the expected effects on temperatures and rainfall will condition the planning of a territory and so planning must become an effective tool for adaptation to climate change. The loss of thermal comfort that is expected in the coming decades has resulted in efforts to reduce its impact by changing the design of buildings (bioclimatic architecture) and creating green areas within cities. For its part, increasingly intense rain and flooding that is already occurring in various regions of the world, must be mitigated with spatial planning proposals based on risk mapping and the precise definition of areas where intensive land uses must be avoided. Also, in case of existing intensive land use, ways for mitigating existing or emerging hazards can also be identified with the use of spatial planning (e.g. inundation parks). The

132

J. Olcina

effects of climate warming on coastal areas by rising sea levels must be considered and will determine territorial actions in coastal areas for decades ahead. Procedures and working methods using spatial planning have advanced in recent decades with the appearance of norms that have emphasised consideration of the natural and cultural elements as important factors in land use planning. Many Western countries have progressed from basic economic conceptions of spatial planning, that consider land as a space of possibilities, to the direct assignment of new uses, and positions that value natural resources and historical and artistic heritage as key elements and so require that new land uses be compatible with cultural and natural factors. The confidence placed in the supposed capacities of resistance and control of natural processes with structural actions (such as dams and channels) encouraged the development of irrigated agriculture in unsuitable climates, forced the integration of the final sections of river courses, and led to the urban development of river flood plains  – with the subsequent problems that these actions implied (Pérez-­ Morales et al., 2016). This has been especially intense in those coastal areas that concentrate much of the economic activity in many large cities and metropolis. Flood policy worldwide continues to mirror water resource policy in that, with different rhythms and intensities, it appears to be evolving from single actions (such as hard engineering approaches to tame excess water flows) to a wider acceptance of the ‘range of choice’ approach developed by Gilbert White over 75 years ago (White, 1945). This range of choice approach includes flood control works and other actions such as: the development of warning systems and emergency planning; the adaptation of the built environment to flood levels; and the land use planning of flood insurance. The 2007 European Flood Directive indicates the need of non-structural approaches to the problem of flooding, and some countries go further and speak of the need of ‘room for rivers’. In parallel, a growing number of voices from the environmental field are stressing the critical importance of flooding for certain socio-ecological processes, and in some cases flooding and other supposed natural hazards may be incorporated into the array of ecosystem or natural services. These new and more integrated approaches are gaining momentum in many areas where exposure to flooding continues to increase. The pace of urbanisation, in particular, is changing many fluvial environments in the general direction of making flooding more likely through changes in hydrological parameters, or the occupation of flood-prone land, or both actions. The result is that an increasing volume of material wealth accumulates in dangerous areas to the point that losses may be significant following even relatively modest flooding. Thus, growing exposure translates into mounting losses – although not necessarily into growing vulnerability because of the effect of the parallel increase in adaptive capacity (White et  al., 2001). In other words, areas exposed to flooding and other natural hazards in the developed world have been able, for the most part, to absorb the impacts caused by natural hazards without major economic, social, and environmental disruptions. Even losses, when these are normalised in economic terms, do not always appear to show the increasing trend that was assumed in many analyses, particularly those bringing into the equation the effects of climate change (Barredo, 2009). Therefore, it is

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

133

possible to speak plausibly of an increasing societal resilience to a hazard following the development of adaptive capacities that consider every stage in the process of a disaster. Two new elements have been incorporated into the spatial planning of European countries in recent decades. Landscape has become an operational instrument when establishing new uses in a territory. The principles contained in the 2000 European Landscape Convention have been integrated into the urban and territorial regulations of the countries and regions in the European Union. ‘Landscape units’ have become a main object of work in environmental sustainability studies. Territorial green infrastructure is a basic instrument in any planning process. It is a concept that emerged in North American landscape architecture in the first decades of the 20th century (Frederick Law Olmsted), and which gathered environmental ideas from the 18th and 19th centuries (Mell, 2008). Green infrastructure has been incorporated in the last 30  years in spatial planning at a variety of scales  – but mainly regional and local (Breuste et al., 2015). Green infrastructure is defined as an interconnected network of landscapes of great environmental, cultural, and visual value. Accordingly, green infrastructure integrates as an object of planning, the set of landscapes defined in a territory, and also designs the connection between them based on existing or proposed natural or artificial connectors.

2  G  reen Infrastructure: A Good Tool for Sustainable Land Use Planning 2.1  Concepts The expression ‘green infrastructure’ does not have a universally accepted definition due to the variety of purposes for which it is used in territorial planning (EEA, 2011). Some authors refer to ‘green infrastructure’ as a ‘concept-umbrella’ (Feria & Santiago, 2017), covering many components, from ‘green belts’ on an urban scale to regional, national, or supranational networks for the conservation of natural habitats. Benedict and McMahon (2002) defined green infrastructure as an interconnected network of green spaces that conserve natural values, preserve the functioning of the ecosystem, and provide benefits for people. Weber (2006), for his part, described green infrastructure as the presence and distribution of natural features in the landscape that facilitates ecological processes and contributes to human health and well-being. The ‘natural’ concepts of ecosystem and landscape combine with other basic aspects in the functioning of societies (such as health and well-being) (Lafortezza et al., 2013). The aspects of green spaces, landscape, network, and improvement of the living conditions of societies are behind the conceptualisation of green infrastructure. Other authors emphasise its usefulness as a cartographic tool in territorial planning processes (Elorrieta & Olcina, 2020).

134

J. Olcina

Despite these diverse meaning, the concept of green infrastructure is widely used in developed nations and members of the European Union. Here, since it was introduced by the European Commission White Paper on the Adaptation to Climate Change (2009), several countries are pursuing similar policies. The EU Biodiversity Strategy (Comisión Europea, 2011:5) set a goal for 2020 to ensure that ecosystems and their services are maintained and improved ‘by establishing green infrastructure and restoring at least 15% of degraded ecosystems’. The first networked park system in the world is attributed to Frederick Law Olmsted, a landscape architect who in the second half of the nineteenth century devised various projects to improve the quality of life in various American cities. His proposals include large urban parks (he designed New York Central Park) and greenways linking parks (or ‘scenic reserves’). In addition, thanks to his understanding of engineering and natural processes, he ensured that urban parks play a role in reducing flood risk. Despite these bold antecedents, it would not be until the 1990s when the expression green infrastructure appeared. It was again in the United States, in a context of growing concern about the environmental implications of the phenomenon of urban sprawl. Green infrastructure was based on Olmsted’s visionary idea of an interconnected network of green spaces whose functions include water management. This initial concept, however, would continue to evolve so that the functions attributed to green infrastructure today encompass a wide range of supply, regulation, and cultural services (CICES, 2019). The European Commission (Comisión Europea, 2014:7) defines green infrastructure as ‘a strategically planned network of high quality natural and semi-­natural areas with other environmental features, which is designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services and protect biodiversity in both rural and urban settings’. This definition includes the three essential features of green infrastructure that are common to most definitions (EEA, 2011): firstly, a high level of connectivity between spaces; secondly, a multifunctional vocation (with environmental, social, and productive functions); and finally, the adoption of a strategic approach in planning and management. Green infrastructure is not only a network of protected spaces and ecological corridors, it is a concept that covers much more territory from a multi-scale, multi-­ functional, and multi-sector perspective (Calzada, 2019). Elements that make up green infrastructure are diverse, specific to each territory, and highly dependent on scale (Fernández de Gatta, 2018). The methodologies for the management of green infrastructure represent a qualitative leap since they include strategic planning and go beyond the traditional conservationist vision (Feria & Santiago, 2017) that focused on limiting the use of resources and regulating land uses.

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

135

2.2  Green Infrastructure in Europe: A Firm Commitment The international spread of the concept of green infrastructure has been rapid, particularly in Europe, where in addition to a long history of environmental policies, there is major concern about recent changes in land use. Studies by the European Environment Agency reveal that Europe is undergoing a progressive loss of biodiversity and an artificialisation of the soil, and urbanised areas are growing more quickly than the urban population (EEA, 2011). This reflects an increasingly dispersed population with direct repercussions on the fragmentation of the landscape. The EU is undertaking various projects to monitor and protect biodiversity and European landscapes, as well as managing green infrastructure. The European green infrastructure strategy aims to create a robust framework for encouraging and facilitating green infrastructure projects through existing financial, political, and legal processes. The strategy consists of four main elements: encouraging green infrastructure in the main EU policy areas; supporting green infrastructure projects; improving access to finance for green infrastructure projects; and improving information on and promotion of innovation. The EU considers that it is necessary to encourage green infrastructure on a European scale so that the actions from lower levels are coherent. In this context, the European Union has made a firm commitment to Nature-­ Based Solutions (NBS) for the sustainable planning of urban areas in the context of the current process of global warming. This issue was already covered in the 7th EU research programme (2007–2013) and has been implemented in the EU Research and Innovation Agenda for Nature-Based Solutions and Re-Naturing Cities (European Commission, 2015). It is a commitment to the sustainable solution for the challenges that will affect urban centres in the coming decades and that integrate among others the unsustainable urbanisation and related human health issues, degradation and loss of natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides (clean air, water and soil), climate change and an alarming increase of natural disaster risks. In the specific case of adaptation to the effects of climate change, NBS integrate actions, urban planning actions, green infrastructure tools, and SDUs. In September 2017, the ESPON Observatory launched the GRETA project (Green Infrastructure: Enhancing Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for Territorial Development) whose aim is a spatial analysis of green infrastructure and ecosystem services in European cities and regions (Fig. 6.1). This spatial analysis revealed very uneven patterns of distribution of potentially green infrastructure across the EU, which is explained by factors such as climatic and topographic conditions, population density, distribution, and the management of land uses (García-­ Blanco et al., 2019). In short, the EU has sought the integration of green infrastructure in its various policies, considering this infrastructure as a system for planning and decision-­ making processes (Gobierno de España, 2019). To encourage the development of green infrastructure, a framework to facilitate green infrastructure projects within the framework of existing legal, political, and financial instruments has been created

136

J. Olcina

Fig. 6.1  Green infrastructure in Europe: milestones. (Source: Own elaboration; figure from ESPON Greta project (www.espon.eu))

(Fernández de Gatta, 2018). As a result of this boost, green infrastructure is specifically identified as one of the investment priorities in Cohesion Funds, the Common Agricultural Policy, Horizon 2020, LIFE projects, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, and the European Fund for Regional Development. Accordingly, the EU has adopted the idea of green infrastructure as a strategic tool within the framework of territorial cohesion, nature conservation, and the encouragement of urban sustainability policies (Feria & Santiago, 2017). DG Regio published in 2013 ‘The Guide to Multi-Benefit Cohesion Policy Investments in Nature and Green Infrastructure’ highlighting the multiple benefits of these investments for the regional economy and providing recommendations and examples of good practices for developing investments in environmental matters (Comisión Europea, 2013). In short, by complying with the lines of action of the green infrastructure strategy, the EU has made a conceptual reflection, a diagnosis of its condition, and a commitment to the inclusion of green infrastructure in planning from a strategic vision. In addition, it has also assigned specific financing instruments and investment recommendations for projects. This European boost has also meant a considerable integration of green infrastructure in the spatial planning of member states (EEA, 2011). According to the results of the GRETA project, the 32 states who are members of ESPON include green infrastructure in their public policies, in addition to their own policies aimed

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

137

at biodiversity conservation. However, only 11 states have specific green infrastructure policies at the national level (García-Blanco et  al., 2019), and these states include Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Hungary, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and Austria. In any event, the regulatory framework, the system of governance, the scale of application, and the trajectory and focus of policies for the protection of ecosystems and natural processes naturally differ from one country to another. Outside the EU, there has also been a diffusion of green infrastructure, with a special incidence in its ‘birthplace’, the United States, where the creation of planning, financing, and research instruments has been extended. Good examples of the incorporation of the green infrastructure tool in spatial planning can also be found at regional and local scales. Thus, the initiatives developed in Wales (Pumlumon area), Flanders (Scheldt basin), the Ekostaden Augustenborg initiative (Sweden), or the recovery of the old Limburg mining area (Hoge Kempen National Park) stand out among others. Supra-regional and supra-­ state initiatives include the creation of the ‘Alps-Carpathian’ 120 km corridor, and the ‘European Green Belt’ from the Barents Sea to the Black Sea and crossing 23 countries. In Spain, various actions have developed green infrastructure in urban areas (Vitoria-Gasteiz and Zaragoza) and in regional spaces (Basque Country and Valencia) (Fig. 6.2).

Fig. 6.2  Green infrastructure in Spain: milestones. (Source: Own elaboration. Figure from www. vitoria-­gasteiz.org)

138

J. Olcina

Two recent aspects of urban planning have gained prominence as elements of green infrastructure at a local scale within the framework of the process of global warming: the development of sustainable drainage systems (greening of urban river courses, floodplain parks, and rainwater tanks) and actions to improve thermal comfort that avoid the effects of urban heat, especially in summer (green roofs, facades, and streets). The effects of climate change will also be incorporated as elements of green infrastructure at regional and local scales, based on the use of increasingly specific models (Vera-Rebollo et al., 2019). This incorporation takes place in two ways: the process of climate change and its impacts on climatic elements (changes in temperatures and precipitation) and the expected increase in extreme weather events (including the rise in sea level in coastal areas, changes in flood areas, increases in sea storms, and the consequences on the coastal strip, droughts, and the impact on urban water supply – see Fig. 6.3).

2.3  G  reen Infrastructure: A Good Tool for Sustainable Land Use Planning. A Proposal Green infrastructure represents a key mapping tool in the spatial planning process that protects land (with various levels of protection), as well as in the processes by which decisions are made regarding new urban growth that aim to improve the order of things in a given territory under criteria of environmental, economic, and social sustainability. This is the principal value applied in this territorial planning methodology: it is intended to be an efficient cartographic data server that facilitates territorial planning processes (Elorieta & Olcina, 2021). From an instrumental point of view, two options can be considered to integrate green infrastructure into spatial policies: specific management instruments for green infrastructure can be developed; or green infrastructure can be incorporated into land use plans (Fig. 6.3). Green infrastructure as a tool for spatial planning must integrate the various territorial elements and resources within the natural environment of a geographical space. Elements that make up green infrastructure are shown in (Table 6.1).

3  R  esults: Spatial Planning and Green Infrastructure to Reduce Natural Risk and Climate Change Green infrastructure is managed in a bi-directional and complementary approach as a tool for the sustainable management of land: an example could be a set of urban infrastructures designed with sustainability criteria for stormwater evacuation and as a mapping tool for sustainable spatial planning.

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

139

Fig. 6.3  Constituent elements of sustainable spatial planning in Europe. (Source: Own elaboration) Table 6.1  Proposal of components and elements that make up the green infrastructure in spatial planning processes Components Elements Environmental Natural spaces protected at a national, regional, and local level. Areas protected by international agreements (Ramsar sites, world heritage, biosphere reserves, geoparks, as well as adjacent spaces) Network of ecosystems of interest (Red Natural 2000) Marine areas whose area, organisation, and management must be made jointly with the coastal areas to which they are associated Tidal and coastal public domain (‘blue infrastructure’) Coastal areas of environmental and cultural interest Common lands, areas of protected forest land, and land needed to maintain the functionality of protected forest areas Cultural Spaces of cultural interest (caves, archaeological sites, historical irrigation systems) including surrounding environments Areas or buildings with recognised historical value Highly productive farmland Connector Livestock rights of way Footpaths Areas at risk from natural events (floods, coastal storms, landslides, geological Natural Hazards risks, and forest fires) Proposal of components that make up green infrastructure in spatial planning Climate Change processes Source: Own elaboration

Several cities around the world have designed sustainable stormwater drainage systems with large-capacity collectors and storm tanks, or floodable parks to reduce the danger of urban floods.

140

J. Olcina

Elements for risk management and climate change are beginning to be incorporated into spatial planning processes based on the use of green infrastructure. The aspects that green infrastructure must specifically address in urban and territorial planning to reduce the effects of global warming include: a) increased temperatures and loss of thermal comfort – the effects of which can be mitigated through design measures such as more public parks, green spaces in houses (terraces and green facades); b) rising sea levels in coastal areas – the effects of which must be lessened with structural actions, in some cases, and with territorial planning (regulation of coastline uses and abandonment of the seafront); and c) changes in rainfall with an increase in intensity and irregularity, which requires the design of large-capacity spaces for drainage, as well as larger water storage tanks to guarantee urban supply (Dayani et al., 2017). As noted, Nature-Based Solution (NBS) is a particularly useful tool to address these issues. All of this must be based on the development of rigorous behavioural models of climatic or environmental elements (such as sea level) that enable periodic updating of projections in spatial planning (Fig. 6.4). A key element for incorporating climate change and associated risks in spatial planning processes are maps. Indeed, green infrastructure must be mapped in scalar detail. In many countries, maps have become documents of legal accreditation for the level of risk in a territory. A flood risk map is a key document for urban land use classification and requires precision and detail. It is not only a hazard map. A risk

CLIMATE CHANGE

CLIMATE HAZARDS

-Increasing temperatures (urban design)

-Heavy rains (risk mapping, SDUs, urban design) -Heavy storm surge (housing retreat frontline coast) -Intense droughts (urban design, rain tanks)

-Sea level rise (models, land use planning)

Fig. 6.4  Climate change and climate hazards elements that may be incorporated into green infrastructure and land use planning. (Source: Own elaboration; maps based on: Valencia metropolitan area (Spain) sea level rise and flood risk map. Source: Climate Central and Patricova, on-line and free)

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

141

map includes hazard map and vulnerability – social, economic, and patrimonial – map. The map scale must reveal urban plots, and so it is necessary, in addition to cartographic adjustments, to perform field work to confirm the results presented on official map portals (Olcina & Díez, 2017). The relevant urban planning administrations must ensure that the natural risk maps that accompany urban planning documents are carefully prepared on the ideal scale for the geographic space undergoing transformation. Ideally, the team that draws up an urban planning document draws its own risk maps showing, where appropriate, what is shown in official risk maps. In Europe, for example, official flood risk maps must meet the provisions of Directive 60/2007 and several regional administrations in member states have improved on the cartographic requirements of the directive. Every map, in addition, must be accompanied by an explanation of how the map was made and the criteria chosen to determine the risk levels. Such maps should be prepared by specialists trained in geography, geology, or hydrology.

3.1  A  Good Example of Climate Change and Climate Hazards Adaption Across Land Use Planning: The Valencian Region Coastal Spatial Plan (Spain) The Valencia region on the Mediterranean coast of Spain is undoubtedly a ‘space of conflict’ in terms of economic interests and spatial planning, as it concentrates on population and economic activities, particularly ‘sun and sand’ tourism, which is an essential engine of the Valencian economy (Ariño & García, 2018). It is not surprising, therefore, that the Valencian Region tops the list of Spanish regions that suffer ‘aggressive urbanisation’ on the coast (Burriel de Orueta, 2009). As a result, there is a need for effective protection of the coastal strip and management of the territory. Valencia began a new stage in regional and sub-regional spatial planning under the criteria of sustainability in 2011, with the approval of a Territorial Strategy for the Valencia Region (Generalitat Valenciana, 2011). The strategy states that one of the main objectives of landscape policy is to define green infrastructure, and it defines green infrastructure as a key tool for spatial planning that must guide growth and that the most valuable land must be excluded from the urbanisation process. The specific expression of the use of green infrastructure as the main tool for spatial planning in the Valencian region has been the drafting and approval of PATIVEL, the Territorial Action Plan for Green Infrastructure on the Valencia Region Coast (Generalitat Valenciana, 2018). PATIVEL is a supra-municipal territorial planning action plan designed with urgency and pragmatism for the rapid protection of economically valuable land through the application of the principles and philosophy for the management of green infrastructure. The areas selected for protection aim to avoid the consolidation of continuous buildings and urban barriers, meaning that this is an attempt to protect the last

142

J. Olcina

Fig. 6.5  Management plan showing types of protected land. Sector of Cabanes-Torreblanca (Castellon). (Source: PATIVEL. Generalitat Valenciana (2018))

remaining pieces of undeveloped land on the Valencian coast. The two aims are to protect these landscapes and natural environments, while also using this protection to offer tourists a quality experience. In accordance with the principles of a comprehensive management of the coastal space and coastal strip, this plan affects three areas (Fig. 6.5) defined by their distances inland from the coastline (Generalitat Valenciana, 2018): (a) Narrow coastline: which includes the lands of the coastal municipalities located in a strip 500 meters wide measured inland from the interior limit of the seashore and coinciding with the area subject to coastal legislation. (b) Wider coastline: up to 1000 meters in width measured inland from the inner limit of the seashore and which provides ecological, functional, and visual ­continuity to the land defined in the previous section and reduces impacts on the narrow coastline. (c) Connecting area: up to 2000 meters measured inland from the inner limit of the seashore and where the ecological and functional connectivity of the coastal space with the rest of the territory is analysed and managed. In the PATIVEL action plan, the components of the green infrastructure initially defined in the Territorial Strategy of the Valencia Region are employed. The plan is structured into a series of components that form: the basic pillars (basically protected natural spaces); several environmental services (forest and agricultural); spaces requiring special attention (pollution and risks); and connectors and urban-­ scale green infrastructure (parkland, walks, and squares). However, some new

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

143

Fig. 6.6  Map of coastal regression effects on the Valencian coast incorporated as a criterion in green infrastructure in the PATIVEL action plan (orange: regression; yellow: accretion; green: stability). (Source: PATIVEL, Generalitat Valenciana (2018))

infrastructure has been incorporated as a criterion for defining the areas of protection: marine zone areas; coastal areas of environmental and cultural interest; and areas subject to climate change in the coastal strip (rising sea level and areas at risk of more frequent river flooding). In this final aspect, the PATIVEL plan is novel in the whole of Spain. The plan reflects a report on the effects of climate change on the Spanish coast, endorsed by the Ministry of Ecological Transition (Losada et al., 2014) to estimate changes in the Valencian coast in two aspects: coastal drift erosion and the effects of sea storms. In addition, a detailed map of the coastal spaces less than 1 metre above sea level is included to determine conflictive areas (Fig. 6.6). The PATIVEL action plan identifies 52 areas that should be preserved from development as key coastal elements of green infrastructure (Generalitat Valenciana, 2018). This means that when added to areas previously declared as protected, some 1426 ha of land have been delisted as land suitable for urban development on the coastal strip (Vera-Rebollo & Olcina, 2017). The PATIVEL action plan specifies the protection of a total of 7500 ha of the regional coastline, representing 12% of the land that has not yet been built on in the strip of land 500 m inland from the coast.

4  Summary and Conclusions Spatial sustainability is an inalienable commitment of advanced societies, and spatial planning is an effective measure for the sustainable management of territories. All spatial planning processes must start from the detailed analysis of the physical environment (understood as a system) with its resources and risks. This principle is reaffirmed by climate change, in which models indicate a high probability of extreme events in the coming decades. The territories must adapt to minimise the negative effects. Green infrastructure, a concept that originated at the beginning of the 20th century, has been recovered in recent years in a double sense: either as a set of structural actions (using ‘soft’ infrastructures) in urban areas to reduce risks associated with

144

J. Olcina

floods; or as a working tool in map-based spatial planning to support decisions regarding the allocation of land uses. Understood as a tool for sustainable land use planning, green infrastructure is gaining prominence in the process of determining land uses at various scales. The preparation of territorial information systems in territorial plans enables the incorporation of layers of information that include the green infrastructure of a geographic space. Moreover, in recent years, the effects of climate change and natural hazards have been incorporated as elements for map-based decision-making on the assignment of land uses. Maps have become an element of administrative accreditation for the adaptation of territories to natural risk and climate change. Europe has made a clear commitment to the use of green infrastructure in territorial planning. Examples of good practices have been developed in various European countries for the design of green infrastructures at regional and local levels. In some cases, natural hazards and climate change processes have been incorporated as criteria for the allocation of land uses. For this, it is necessary to develop map-based projections and models that reveal the expected medium- and long-term effects. Although this chapter has basically analysed European policies on green infrastructure, there are very interesting examples of use of green infrastructure, in its double conception (sustainable urban drainage actions and a tool for territorial planning) in North America (New York, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Ontario) and Asia (Seoul, Singapore). In Australia, in addition, cities such as Sydney, Adelaide, Darwin, and Melbourne have opted for green infrastructure as an instrument for capturing CO2 and to improve thermal comfort in cities. Spatial planning, with criteria for reducing the effects of climate change and natural hazards, is a positive strategy for adapting a geographical space to the consequences of these processes with a simultaneous awareness of the degree of risk for populations. Compliance with international agreements to combat climate change and the sustainable management of territories can be furthered with spatial planning intervention procedures based on green infrastructures that respect the environment and anticipate the sometimes extreme changes foreseen as part of climate change.

References Ariño, A., (dir.) & García, P. (coord.). (2018). La sociedad valenciana en transformación (1975–2025). Publicaciones de la Universitat de València. Barredo, J. I. (2009). Normalized flood losses in Europe: 1970–2006. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9, 97–104. Benedict, M. A., & McMahon, E. T. (2002). Green infrastructure: Smart conservation for the 21st century. Renewable Resources Journal, (20), 12–17. Breuste, J., Artmann, M., Li, J., & Xie, M. (2015). Introduction (special issue on green infrastructure for urban sustainability). Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 141(3), 1–5. Burriel de Orueta, E.  L. (2009). La planificación territorial en la Comunidad Valenciana (1986–2009). [En línea]. Scripta Nova. Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias sociales, Vol. XIII (306). http://www.ub.es/geocrit/sn/sn-­306.htm.

6  Land Use Planning and Green Infrastructure: Tools for Natural Hazards Reduction

145

Calzada, P. (Dir.). (2019). Guía de infraestructura verde municipal. [En línea]. Red de Gobiernos Locales + Biodiversidad, Federación Española de Municipios y Provincias, Asociación de Empresas de Gestión de Infraestructura Verde, Asociación Española de Parques y Jardines Públicos. http://www.redbiodiversidad.es/sites/default/files/GUIA_Biodiversidad_ CAPITULOS1_5.pdf. CICES. (2019). Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services. V5.1. Available on: https://cices.eu/ Comisión Europea. (2011). Estrategia de la UE sobre la biodiversidad hasta 2020: nuestro seguro de vida y capital natural. Unión Europea. Comisión Europea. (2013). Infraestructura verde: mejora del capital natural de Europa. Unión Europea. Comisión Europea. (2014). Construir una infraestructura verde para Europa. Unión Europea. Dayani, S., Sabzalian, M. R., Hadipour, M., & Eslamian, S. (2017). Water scarcity and sustainable urban green landscape, Ch. 30. In S.  Eslamian & F.  Eslamian (Eds.), Handbook of drought and water scarcity, Vol. 2: Environmental impacts and analysis of drought and water scarcity (pp. 557–604). Taylor and Francis, CRC Press. Elorrieta, B., & Olcina, J. (2020). Infraestructura verde y ordenación del territorio en España. Ciudad y Territorio. Estudios Territoriales.. (in press). Elorrieta-Sanz, B., & Olcina-Cantos, J. (2021). Infraestructura verde y Ordenación del Territorio en España. Ciudad Y Territorio Estudios Territoriales (CyTET), pp. 23–46. European Commission. (2015). Towards an EU Research and Innovation policy agenda for Nature-Based Solutions & Re-Naturing Cities. Final Report of the Horizon 2020 Expert Group on 'Nature-Based Solutions and Re-Naturing Cities. on-line: https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/news/ towards-­eu-­research-­and-­innovation-­policy-­agenda-­nature-­based-­solutions-­re-­naturing-­cities European Environmental Agency. (2011). Green infrastructure and territorial cohesion. The concept of green infrastructure and its integration into policies using monitoring systems. Unión Europea. Feria, J.  M., & Santiago, J. (2017). Naturaleza y ciudad. Perspectivas para la ordenación de la infraestructura verde en los planes territoriales metropolitanos en España. Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, (74), 117–141. Fernández de Gatta, D. (2018). La Estrategia estatal de infraestructura verde y de la conectividad y restauración ecológicas: un nuevo instrumento para proteger la biodiversidad. Actualidad Jurídica Ambiental, (81), 57–120. García-Blanco, G., Carrao, H., & yFons, J. (2019). La Infraestructura Verde en beneficio del desarrollo territorial estratégico: ESPON GRETA. In FUNDICOT, 9° Congreso Internacional de Ordenación del Territorio: Planificación y gestión integrada como respuesta (pp. 514–531). FUNDICOT. Generalitat Valenciana. (2011). Estrategia Territorial de la Comunitat Valenciana, Valencia, España, Consellería de Infraestructuras, Territorio y Medio Ambiente de la Generalitat Valenciana. Generalitat Valenciana. (2018). Plan de Acción Territorial de la Infraestructura Verde del litoral, Valencia, España, Consellería de Vivienda, Obras Públicas y Vertebración del Territorio de la Generalitat Valenciana. Gobierno de España. (2019). Estrategia Estatal de Infraestructura Verde y de la Conectividad y la Restauración Ecológicas. Borrador mayo 2019. [En línea]. Ministerio para la Transición Ecológica, Gobierno de España. https://www.miteco.gob.es/images/es/borradoreeivcre_infopublica_tcm30-­497133.PDF. Lafortezza, R., Davies, C., Sanesi, G., & Konijnendijk Van den Bosch, C. (2013). Green infrastructure as a tool to support spatial planning in European urban regions. iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, (6), 102–108. Losada, I., Izaguirre, C., & Diaz, P. (2014). Cambio climático en la costa española, Madrid, España, Oficina Española de Cambio Climático, Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente.

146

J. Olcina

Mell, I.  C. (2008). Green infrastructure: Concepts and planning. FORUM Ejournal, 8(June 2008), 69–80. Olcina Cantos, J., & Díez-Herrero, A. (2017). Cartografía de inundaciones en España. Estudios Geográficos, LXXVIII/282, 283–315. Pérez-Morales, A., Gil-Guirado, S., & Olcina, J. (2016). La información catastral como herramienta para el análisis de la exposición al peligro de inundaciones en el litoral mediterráneo español. EURE, 42(127), 231–256. Vera-Rebollo, J. F., & Olcina, J. (2017). Análisis de la coherencia metodológica y de los datos utilizados en la memoria justificativa del PATIVEL. [inédito] Conselleria de Vivienda, Obras Públicas y Vertebración del Territorio de la Generalitat Valenciana, Universidad de Alicante. Vera-Rebollo, J. F., Olcina, J., & Sainz-Pardo, A. (2019). La incorporación de la infraestructura verde en la ordenación territorial. El plan de acción territorial de la infraestructura verde del litoral de la Comunidad Valenciana, PATIVEL. Ciudad y Territorio. Estudios Territoriales, LI (200), 467–490. Weber, T., Sloan, A., & Wolf, J. (2006). Maryland’s green infrastructure assessment: Development of a comprehensive approach to land conservation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(1–2), 94–110. White, G.  F. (1945). Human adjustment to floods. The University of Chicago. Department of Geography Research Paper n 29. White, G. F., Kates, R. W., & Burton, I. (2001). Knowing better and losing even more: The use of knowledge in hazards management. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 3(3), 81–92.

Chapter 7

Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System Myles Harris and Gina Charnley

Abstract  Defining disasters and their impacts has several difficulties and limitations due to the complexity of the term. In this chapter, we focus on health disasters, including how disasters impact health systems and how widespread health emergencies can create disasters. A health disaster describes an event that has a direct or indirect negative impact on people’s physical and psychological health. Disasters of all kinds are most impactful to vulnerable groups both in developed and developing countries, and it is important to implement effective disaster risk management to facilitate health systems resilience, mobilising them to resist, withstand and recover from disasters. Barriers and ways in which health systems are resilient are multi-­ faceted, some of which include financing, human resources, management, infrastructure, access, trust and education. Two case studies illustrate how these barriers have played out in real-world contexts and historical lessons learnt. These include the Chernobyl nuclear and health disaster of 1986 and the 2018 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. This chapter identifies four priorities for action: understand risk, strengthen governance, invest in resilience and enhance preparedness and considers these on all levels from international to individual. Hazards themselves will not cause health disasters but instead how society reacts and the barriers to resilience. By moving health system resilience to the forefront of legislation and governance, disasters can be mitigated and promote sustainable development throughout the world. Keywords  Disaster risk management · Health disasters · Resilience · Hazards · Health systems

M. Harris (*) Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] G. Charnley Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London, London, UK Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_7

147

148

M. Harris and G. Charnley

1  Introduction In his book, Disasters by Choice, Ilan Kelman defines disaster as an event which results in people declaring that they require additional help and support (Kelman, 2020). This definition can be applied to many disasters and is inclusive of different disaster severities. The COVID-19 pandemic beginning in 2019 is an example of a disaster which required an international effort to control the spread of a disease and support people at risk (Bedford et  al., 2020). The Chernobyl disaster in 1986 is another example of a disaster which resulted in detrimental physical and mental health impacts in a smaller geographical area (this is explored in a case study within this chapter) (Bromet & Havenaar, 2007). In both examples, people required outside help, and there was a declaration of disaster, thus Kelman’s definition is applicable. Having said this, there are limits to Kelman’s definition. The self-declaration of a disaster by local authorities or governments may expose people to disaster capitalism, driven by political sensitivity or opportunism (Patterson & Veenstra, 2016). There are many alternative definitions of disaster, and Quarantelli (2005) argued there is a distinct lack of consensus. Some literature suggests there are two paradigms to disaster, rather than an overall definition. First, the impacts of disasters are social phenomena, and second, disasters are embedded within societal systems (Quarantelli, 2005). In other words, the causes of disasters are not disasters themselves; disasters are the impact on people and societies. The two disaster paradigms correlate with the advocation that there are no such concepts as natural disasters – there are natural hazards that are caused by vulnerabilities. The complexity of defining disasters is a reflection of how convoluted disasters are and the many different categories that exist (Perry, 2007). This chapter focuses on health disasters. Health disasters can be described as an event that has a direct or indirect negative impact on people’s physical or psychological health (Chan & Shaw, 2020). Disasters are complex and can have cascading effects (Davis & Alexander, 2016). In other words, any disaster can negatively impact health systems at the start of the disaster or at subsequent time. Health systems are services in a country, region or local community which meet the health and social care needs of the population. The availability and comprehensiveness of a health system are dependent on the wealth and inequalities of the country (Sun, 2020). Furthermore, health systems relate to two of the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals – number 3, good health and well-being; and number 10, reduction in inequalities (United Nations, 2019a). However, all health systems are susceptible to damage caused by disaster. Some examples of impact are logistical limitations, damage to infrastructure or reduced availability of medicines (Sun, 2020). The majority of disasters, therefore, are a risk to health systems. On the other hand, there are many cases of health disasters, including the Swine Flu pandemic in 2009, Ebola outbreak in 2014 and Zika virus in 2015. Health disasters (and all other disasters) disproportionately affect people in vulnerable groups in developed and developing countries (Chan et al., 2020). People living in developing countries have reduced access to robust health systems and,

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

149

furthermore, the health systems are limited in resources, capacity and capability (Hanefeld et al., 2018). With this in mind, it is evident that the impact of disasters in developing countries is widespread and affects many people and communities. In developed countries, there is an unequal impact from a health disaster on the population, as people who have low socio-economic backgrounds are disadvantaged in comparison to those with more wealth. However, the available data about the impact of health disasters are dependent on reporting. Robust reporting of health disasters and their impacts is not always possible due to limited resources or political influence (Britton, 2007). The limited reliability of reporting suggests the true impact of health disasters is much worse than previously thought. Disaster risk reduction is a phrase used in disaster research and management to describe strategies that are developed to reduce the likelihood of a hazard causing disasters (Samuel et  al., 2019; Naheed & Eslamian, 2021). In relation to health, disaster risk reduction aims to promote the well-being of people, protect mental and physical health, and contribute to sustainable development (James et  al., 2019). Reducing the risk of health disaster can be achieved by implementing policy, using frameworks or guidelines and establishing strategies. Implementing initiatives to reduce the risk of disaster is known as disaster risk management – to manage hazards, exposure and vulnerability of disaster, thus strengthen resilience. Health disaster risk management aims to improve the resilience of health systems, or, in other words, the ability of health systems to resist, withstand and recover from a disaster (Aitsi-Selmi & Murray, 2015). Health disasters or disasters leading to health disaster can cause substantial damage to health systems; hence, disaster risk management is required to mitigate this risk. There are historical examples of disaster risk management guidelines. The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 (The Hyogo Framework) was an international strategy for reducing the risk of all categories of disasters. The overall aim was to strengthen resilience of countries and communities to disasters (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2007). In The Hyogo Framework, concern is raised over the impact disasters have on the global population, particularly for people in vulnerable groups and low socio-economic backgrounds. The Hyogo Framework was one of the first international efforts to mitigate disaster risks, but it lacked focus on health disasters, for developing and developed countries. However, in 2015, The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (The Sendai Framework) was published, which is the current UN-endorsed strategy for reducing the risk of disasters internationally (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015). The Sendai Framework was established following the UN third world conference, after three years of stakeholder and governmental collaboration, facilitated by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. In summary, The Sendai Framework is a movement from disaster management to focusing on disaster risk management (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015). There are multiple objectives set out to achieve this aim, foremost to no longer expect disaster to be inevitable. The creation of seven global targets to prevent new risk, reduce existing risk and enhance resilience is an objective to proactively manage the impact of

150

M. Harris and G. Charnley

disasters. There is an emphasis on disaster risk management to strengthen the resilience of health systems; hence, an objective of this chapter is to establish an evidence-­based approach of disaster risk management for resilient health systems. The chapter compliments The Sendai Framework, focusing on resilient health systems, and will explore answers to the following questions: 1 . What are the current barriers to achieving health system resilience? 2. What elements contribute to a resilient health system? 3. What can be learnt from contextual case studies? 4. What are the health-resilient priorities for disaster risk management? This chapter has been written based on a review of the literature. While a traditional literature review has limitations, such as the potential for selection bias, this method enables a comprehensive and thorough overview of the literature that encompasses all relevant material. In the next section of the chapter, what constitutes a resilient health system will be discussed in more detail.

2  Barriers for Creating Resilient Health Systems Resilient health systems are able to effectively prepare for, withstand the stress of and respond to the public health consequences of disasters. They can protect themselves and human lives from the impacts of disasters and produce good health outcomes both in good times and bad, an idea known as the resilience dividend (Olu, 2017). For example, health issues in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina were highly attributable to poor health care coverage of large portions of the population, an issue present well before the hurricane made landfall in August 2005 (Rudowitz et al., 2006). Resilient health systems are not a static construct and are highly productive and adaptive long before a disaster occurs (Kruk et al., 2015). Unfortunately, many countries do not have such systems in place, often for a variety of complex reasons. Issues with resilience are not limited to developing nations, with many countries across the globe falling short of system resilience, despite high gross domestic product (GDP) and economic resources. The fabric of health systems are highly politicised in many countries and often highlight both contemporary and historical social tensions. Due to these complexities, reasons for poor health system resilience are multi-faceted. Health systems need to be resilient to a variety of disasters, some of which may strike simultaneously. The barriers for health system resilience have been grouped into seven main clusters, with several elements in Table 7.1. This is an illustrative list of common themes that appear throughout disaster and public health literature. Several individual elements also link with other clusters and have the potential to form cascades. They are also not considered a static construct and are likely to change over time as health system adapt, improve and are faced with new challenges. This section of the chapter presents some of the issues that prevent or hinder the creation of resilient health systems for disaster risk management. Improving the

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

151

Table 7.1  Health system resiliency issues Financing and expenditure

Human resources and capacity

Management and governance

Supply chains, infrastructure and resources

Poor health expenditure Multi-donor and multi-distribution leads to fracturing Disproportional management costs No context-specific cost comparisons or benchmarks Not self-sustaining, e.g. require extensive external assistance Poor financial incentives to offer good services Little incentive to become a healthcare professional Education not meeting demand Ineffective workforce development/ advancement Waste, duplication and ineffective services Lack of accountability Healthcare must compete with other programmes for funding and visibility Lack of transparency Lack of communication between management/workforce towards a shared goal Workforce lack clear roles and responsibilities Legislation that is not measurable or unable to assess strengths and weaknesses Lack of international support and agreements Weak district healthcare makes them vulnerable to collapse and bypassing Lack of flexibility and adaptability Lack of quality control Insufficient stockpiling Poor technical assistance Healthcare facilities not being perceived as safe Poor water, gas and energy supply Poor site selection

Source WHO (2015) WHO (2015) WHO (2015) Kruk et al. (2017), WHO (2015) McKenzie et al. (2015) Soeters et al. (2011) WHO (2015) WHO (2015) WHO (2015) WHO (2015) WHO (2015) Dar et al. (2014), Martineau (2016) WHO (2017) WHO (2017)

WHO (2017) Kruk et al. (2017), Olu et al., (2016) Kruk et al. (2017) Porignon et al. (1998) Dar et al. (2014); Kruk et al. (2015) WHO (2015) Kruk et al. (2015) McKenzie et al. (2015) Herp et al. (2003), Murray et al. (2015) Norazam (2018) Norazam (2018) (continued)

152

M. Harris and G. Charnley

Table 7.1 (continued) Communication and information management

Healthcare access

Community trust and education

Poor surveillance and understand of population risks Not multi-sectoral or multi-disciplinary Lack of communication between regional, national and international levels No centralised data management system Inability to disseminate information quickly No multi-provider platforms to allow for collaboration and shared agenda setting Poor everyday healthcare programmes, e.g. Obstetric and sexual health, vaccination and mental health services Not accessible or cover a wide area Discriminatory/barriers to health coverage Inability to access care without fear of impoverishment Not integrating people into healthcare systems, instead just seeing them as recipients of care Mistrust due to poor dialogue and relationship building between healthcare providers and communities Not tailoring systems to community needs

Poor health education Inability to reduce spread of misinformation Poor understanding of social determinants of health and vulnerable groups Not considering local culture and values

Source Kruk et al. (2017), WHO (2015) WHO (2015) WHO (2015)

Kruk et al. (2015), WHO (2015) Okwuchukwu et al. (2016) WHO (2017)

Kruk et al. (2015)

Admasu (2016) Kieny and Dovlo (2015), Kutzin & Sparkes (2016) Kutzin & Sparkes (2016) Kruk et al. (2015)

Kieny and Dovlo (2015); WHO (2017)

Admasu (2016), Kieny and Dovlo (2015), Martineau (2016), Olu et al. (2016), Porignon et al. (1998) Admasu (2016) Sharma et al. (2017); Vinck et al. (2019) Olu (2017)

WHO (2017)

resilience of health systems is complex and requires long-term, strategic investment in thought and finance. The next section of the chapter aims to clarify how some of these issues may and are being addressed.

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

153

3  What Does a Resilient Health System Look Like? Gaining a clear understanding of the issues is an important first step in identifying solutions. The main clusters identified from the literature illustrate key areas of improvement; the salient points are shown below: • Financing and expenditure – Multi-donor but single distribution systems that are self-sustaining, to improve longevity and stability (McKenzie et al., 2015). These need to be implemented through novel and innovative systems, that encourage good performance for healthcare providers (Soeters et al., 2011). • Human resource  – Strong, compassionate and committed workforce, through effective management and professional development (Kruk et al., 2015). Making the health care profession an attractive option for individuals, providing good pay, sufficient personal protective equipment and adequate benefits (Robertson et al., 2016). • Management and governance – Starting with a strong and fair political system, building social and economic resilience (Allenby & Fink, 2005), through political will and unwavering commitment (Admasu, 2016; Olu et al., 2016). Strong governance needs little and no fragmentation, running efficiently on both the national and regional levels, with clear roles, responsibilities and targets (Olu et al., 2016). • Supply chains, infrastructure and resources – Functional infrastructure need to be in place, retrofitted as needed, where communities feel safe using them (Herp et al., 2003; Norazam, 2018). A strong scientific community, driven by science-­ based solutions is needed to inform health providers with the correct technician assistance, stockpile of resources and sufficient time (McKenzie et  al., 2015; Murray et al., 2015). • Communication – Good national surveillance to understand population risks and identify issues quickly via benchmarks that account for local contexts. Information can then be discussed at meetings where all healthcare providers can be heard and share agendas (Kruk et al., 2017). • Healthcare access – Good range of basic services for both communicable and non-communicable diseases, along with vaccination campaigns and strong family planning services. Where state-paid healthcare is not possible, prices are fair, with open communication between providers and recipients to negotiate price (Admasu, 2016; Kutzin & Sparkes, 2016). • Trust and education – Bottom-up healthcare approaches that are built on a relationship with communities, respecting local values, needs and culture. Populations are strong actors in their own care, with a good understand of how to protect their health and support their families (Admasu, 2016; Olu et al., 2016). Disaster risk management also needs to be incorporated into healthcare legislations, to make sure the whole system is prepared and understands the risks during disasters. When crises do strike, systems need to be highly proactive and functioning long before and be able to quickly adapt (Olu, 2017), to reduce the likelihood of

154

M. Harris and G. Charnley

the hazard causing disaster. As aforementioned, health disaster risk management aims to promote well-being, protect physical and mental health and contribute to sustainable development (James et al., 2019). In order to achieve this, a good understanding of vulnerable groups and the broad range of post-disaster issues is needed, from enhanced psychological problems to post-disaster violence (Fukuma et  al., 2017; Kruk et al., 2017). If systems do fall short, the disaster should be a catalysts of change to improve systems (Olu et al., 2016), to prevent similar damage to the health system in the future and mitigate against known risks. At this point in the chapter, there has been an appraisal of what constitutes a resilient health system for disaster risk management and the potential barriers to resilience. The introduction highlighted each heath disaster is unique and forced comparison often does not accurately inform disaster risk reduction. The next section of the chapter will critically discuss two case studies, which will exemplify different perspectives of health system resilience for disaster risk management.

4  Case Study 1 – Chernobyl Health Disaster 4.1  What Happened During the Chernobyl Incident? The Chernobyl disaster in 1986 has been described as the most devastating civilian nuclear incident is history, which required an international collaboration to manage the disaster (United Nations Scientific Committee, 2008). The long-term impacts of this disaster are still being researched, particularly the effect on the environment, economy and society (Ostroumova et  al., 2020; Jaworowski, 2010). Although Chernobyl was a nuclear disaster, it catalysed a health disaster for the local people of Ukrainian Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and across Europe (Nussbaum, 2007). This case study will focus on the Chernobyl health disaster and critique the evidence of disaster risk management and health system resilience. There are different types of nuclear power plants. One of the debated causes of the Chernobyl disaster is a fault with the design of the reactor, although human error is labelled as another influencing factor contributing to the incident (Stang, 1996). The type of nuclear power plant at Chernobyl generated 6% of the total energy output from residual heat, which continues to emit power after the chain reaction of the nuclear agent has stopped. As a result, a cooling agent must be used to control the temperature of the reactors; at Chernobyl, water is pumped from a reservoir underneath the reactor. One risk to Chernobyl’s nuclear reactors was if there is a power outage, water (the cooling agent) must still be pumped to the reactor to control the temperature. Three generators were in place to provide the energy required to pump the water to the reactors in the event of a power outage. However, the generators took up to 1 minute and 15 seconds to reach full output, thus the nuclear reactors would have uncontrolled temperature increase for too long. One hypothesis being tested in the 1970s and 1980s was residual nuclear power could be used as an

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

155

interim power source to pump the water during the time it took the back-up generators to reach full capacity (ApSimon et  al., 1986). In 1986, Chernobyl’s nuclear reactor Number 4 (No4) was to be the fourth test site to determine if this hypothesis was correct; all previous tests at different sites in USSR had failed. To test this hypothesis, power to the nuclear plant needed to be gradually reduced and the back-up generators needed to be temporarily disabled to allow the residual nuclear power to be channelled to the emergency cooling system. A series of influencing factors caused two explosions at No4 reactor, causing the plant to be set on fire and expose the nuclear reactor core. Large quantities of nuclear material were emitted and spread across the continent by wind. The raging fire posed a secondary risk of a third, larger explosion of the water reservoir as pressure built up inside. This explosion could have catapulted substantially more radioactive material out of the reactor, but thanks to the work of local fire service the third explosion was averted. At this point in time, Chernobyl was the epicentre of a nuclear disaster. However, the radioactive mass bled into the atmosphere and into the homes of people living in neighbouring Pripyat. Initially, people were not evacuated. Some concern was raised, as the two explosions had woken some people and news quickly spread of a fire at the nuclear power plant. Many people soon developed Acute Radiation Sickness (ARS), thus Chernobyl’s health disaster began.

4.2  How Is the Chernobyl Incident a Health Disaster? The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES) is a standardised measure of how serious nuclear incidents are (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2019). INES has seven levels and each increase in level represents an impact increase of times ten; the Chernobyl disaster was graded the maximum, 7/7. Chernobyl is described as the worst nuclear event in history, which caused significant impact on the environment and people’s health. Early reports focused on identifying immediate lessons learnt and the short-term consequences of radiation exposure. The UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (SCEAR) report in the year 2000 collated the early findings, which included the impact on emergency worker’s health, how monitoring systems can be introduced and potential long-term co-morbidities. There was consensus of all UN member states of the findings; however, the public of USSR states most effected by Chernobyl were rooted in deep mistrust of the scientific community. (This is an example of how a health system could be developed for greater resilience.) As a result, eight constituents of the UN bodies and Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine were brought together to establish the Chernobyl Forum (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2005). The Chernobyl Forum wrote a report with an aim to authenticate statements on the environmental and health disasters, plus inform future health systems and research topics. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) led the investigations of the environmental impact, whereas the World Health Organization (WHO) focused on the health disaster. The Chernobyl Forum

156

M. Harris and G. Charnley

report (2005) reaffirmed the findings published in the UNSCEAR report (2000). The compilation of IAEA and WHO findings is important for health system resilience, as global health is interdependent on the environment. For example, Fig. 7.1 map illustrates the geographical areas affected by the spread of nuclear material, hence food and water sources needed to be monitored. In 2006, the WHO published its report on Chernobyl. The international collaborative effort to understand this disaster was applauded and the contribution to advancing nuclear science was recognised. However, public scepticism of the previously published consequences to health was also acknowledged. The WHO Radiation and Environmental Health Programme was tasked to research the health

Fig. 7.1  Radiation hotspots resulting from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant incident. (Source: Central Intelligence Agency, USA, 1992)

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

157

impact of Chernobyl and aimed to clarify the health disaster evidence. Research methodologies and health impacts were separately presented and critically appraised within the report: dosimetry, thyroid disease, leukaemia, other cancers, non-cancer and thyroid health impacts, mortality and regional public health systems (see Fig.  7.1 for geographical area). The primary methodology used to research the nuclear related health impact was epidemiology; the study of incidents and demographic spread of disease and health. Two methods were used – 1. Comparative modelling from data collected from people effected by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs during World War II. 2. Empirical research with people effected by the Chernobyl disaster. Both methods enabled the collection of data to understand the impact of the disaster and valuable information contributing to health systems resilience. However, each method had limitations. The first method is exposed to many independent variables; that is, the circumstances and contexts of Chernobyl incident and World War II atomic bombs are very different. Having said this, the differences can be accounted for, hence the statistical significance of comparative modelling is reliable. Notwithstanding, empirical studies provided the immediate collection of representative data, although this method takes longer to provide results. There is a place for both methods, but the WHO report on Chernobyl’s health effects focused predominantly on empirical evidence involving Belarusian, Russian and Ukrainian populations; however, other studies were taken into account (Bennett et al., 2006).

4.3  W  hat Methods Were Used in Researching the Chernobyl Health Disaster? Dosimetry is the measurement of absorbed ionising radiation. It is evident large amounts of nuclear material were released into the atmosphere but calculating the amount of absorption determined the severity of physical health effects. Doses of each radionuclide (different type of ionising radiation) were distinguished, as each elect has a different half-life; in other words, how long the radionuclide is radioactive for. Furthermore, identifying the sources of exposure to the radioactive material was equally as important and determining the quantity of absorption. For example, many children were exposed to the radiation as a result of drinking cow’s milk. Research highlighted children were drinking large amounts of milk (the same volume as adults), possibly due to the accessibility of family-owned cattle (Labunska et  al., 2018). Many local communities had a low social-economic background; hence cow milk was an important source of calcium, protein and nutrition, which could be an explanation of why children were drinking so much cow’s milk. Thyroid glands in children are still developing, therefore, exposure to the same quantity of radioactive material in cow’s milk as adults led to a high incidence of childhood thyroid cancer. Establishing a holistic perspective of dosimetry, including the source

158

M. Harris and G. Charnley

of ingested radioactive material, informs and influences the short-term disaster management; public health advice was amended to educate people about drinking cow’s milk from cattle within the contamination zone. However, long-term monitoring is important for disaster risk management.

4.4  W  hat Were the Physical Health Impacts of Chernobyl’s Health Disaster? The thyroid gland is located in the throat, behind the larynx (Adam’s apple) and is a similar shape to a butterfly. The thyroid gland secretes a variety of hormones into the blood stream to regulate metabolism. The thyroid gland is very sensitive to exposure to ionising radiation, hence large numbers of children developed thyroid cancer as a result of eating and drinking local produce. The total number of children (in the three countries the WHO report focused on) who developed thyroid cancer between the years of 1986–2002 is 4837 (Tuttle et al., 2011). It is acknowledged this figure is disputed in various studies, but nevertheless, the agreed total number of reported cases is greater than 4000 (Nikiforv, 2006). The age group of children with the largest increase in thyroid cancer is aged between 0 and 4 years at the time of Chernobyl disaster, which reaffirms the previous explanation of large consumptions of local cow’s milk being a significant cause of thyroid cancer. Adults did develop thyroid cancer too; however, the statistical significance of these studies is small; hence, conducting longitudinal studies of adults and thyroid cancers in the affected areas was a recommendation for future research. Some studies investigated the incidence of leukaemia in children and adults (Howe, 2007). However, the results of these studies had poor statistical significance. In other words, leukaemia cannot be definitively ruled in or out as a health impact of the Chernobyl disaster. Other non-thyroidal cancers had low numbers of reporting, but this could be due to the small number of statistically significant epidemiological studies focusing on this topic; therefore, non-thyroidal cancers similarly cannot be ruled in or out as a health impact of Chernobyl, hence a WHO recommendation for research in the mid-2000s and early 2010s was continual monitoring. Results of these studies would inform the development of local and regional health systems to care for the effected communities and populations. It is important to note, however, an increase in cancers was not the only consequences of the Chernobyl health disaster. Few studies investigated other health impacts of the Chernobyl disaster; therefore, the evidence is not conclusive. Furthermore, the studies had low academic rigour due to the presence of many uncontrolled variables. One example is the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) (Cardis & Hatch, 2011). Some studies findings suggest CVD could have been caused by acute radiation sickness (ARS). Other studies suggest people who were exposed to the radiation felt their lives were permanently damaged, hence there was an increase in alcoholism, smoking and

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

159

adoption of other poor lifestyle choices. It is, therefore, not possible to definitively claim ARS and, or poor lifestyle choices caused CVD; further study is required to provide clarity. A different example is a distinctive low birth rate in the regions effects. Another example is there is no evidence of birth defects or hereditary disease increase as a result of the Chernobyl disaster, but local communities and populations were scared of the effect on their fertility and the health of future children, which explains an increase in abortion rates in some areas. Although these findings are not conclusive, the findings are evidence for the requirement of public health and education initiatives, which needed to be managed by regional and local health systems.

4.5  W  hat Were the Other Health Impacts of the Chernobyl Health Disaster? Changes in health and social behaviours suggest the Chernobyl disaster had an effect on mental health (Havenaar et al., 1997). No psychological disorders were reported in the epidemiological studies focusing on Chernobyl, but there were many reports of psychological symptoms – anxiety, stress, depression and suicide. In fact, mental health symptoms is the largest public health issue caused by the Chernobyl disaster (Bromet, 2012). These findings lead to an increase in mental health services provision, including psycho-social counselling and health promotion campaigns by regional and local health systems to support those with mental health needs. Despite mental health being the most reported health effect caused by Chernobyl, it is important to note there is a limited number of rigorous studies in this area. WHO recommendations for research were to focus on long-term mental health effects and the provision of mental health training for health and social care practitioners to support those with mental health needs. In addition, the WHO recommended future research to be transparent, inclusive and collaborative, which is an important consideration for health system resilience. Both of these recommendations have significance for health system resilience and disaster risk management. Although mental health was the most reported public health issue from the Chernobyl disaster, the mortality rate caused by exposure to radiation has been the most scrutinised. Fixation on Chernobyl’s mortality rate is likely to have been politically fuelled. Studies suggest life expectancy decreased whereas death rate increased in the three countries included in the WHO report on Chernobyl health effects. However, the true mortality rate of Chernobyl may have been masked by the paradigm shift of the political landscape, caused by the collapse of the USSR. One hundred and thirty four emergency workers were diagnosed with ARS, 28 of which died in 1986. People who were diagnosed with ARS, who were still alive after 1986, were known as ARS survivors. Nineteen ARS survivors died during the years 1987–2004. However, there is uncertainty of the ARS survivors’ causes of death, which could have been radiation related or due to other co-morbidities. The

160

M. Harris and G. Charnley

exposure of radiation to the wider populations was not enough to cause ARS, but the mortality rate is higher in comparison to neighbouring countries with similar economic backgrounds and health systems. A total of 49,000 Russian emergency workers were present in 1986, and 61,000 were involved in total during the international response; 4995 deaths were reported during the years 1991–1998. There is a similar challenge to determining the root cause of death for this population when considering the demographics, although, radiation exposure is a definite possibility. In the 2006 WHO report, the small statistical significance of mortality rate studies limits the representativity of results. However, the highly reported mortality rate is acknowledged as having significance for health systems providing services to those with long-term physical and psychological conditions.

4.6  H  ow Does Disaster Research Inform Disaster Risk Management for Health System Resilience? Research is of significant importance to public health systems within the Chernobyl region. Studies were initiated in the early stages of the disaster, without inhibiting the immediate contamination procedures for those who were exposed to the nuclear material (shower, change of clothes and evacuation). Initial data informed the major incident triaging system, thus ensuring people were referred to appropriate health and social care services that met their needs, both physical and psychological. The long-term care and recovery was divided into three categories – clinical, monitoring and epidemiological. Clinical data of how ionising radiation exposure effected health was collected during annual health assessments and informed the wider body of health disaster evidence. Cancer screening and monitoring of other health effects informed the provision of services, hence financial forecasts can be provided for regional health systems. Epidemiological studies strengthen the evidence-based for clinical practice within health systems. Moreover, the WHO endorse services based on rigorous evidence and recommend annual health assessments for people with a history of at risk to health exposure to radiation. Radiation-exposure related health assessments for people not at risk of radiation related health effects remove financial resources from other services and could induce unnecessary fear. In other words, the monitoring and provision of health and social care services within health systems should be informed by valid and reliable evidence to those who are in need. This is an example of how health systems resilience can be enhanced. In 2016, the WHO published another report, reviewing the previous 30 years of research. The findings in this report reaffirmed the findings and predictions published in the original 2006 report. For example, there has been an increase in incidents of thyroidal cancer, but at a similar rate to the predicted age-related increase. This suggests the original findings are accurate and reliable. Monitoring of health and well-being is ongoing, continuing approximately until the year 2065 to inform health systems. Psycho-social impacts have similarly been monitored closely. Up to

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

161

date studies confirm mental health is the largest public health impact; some studies suggest anxiety rates of people effected by the Chernobyl disaster are double in comparison to populations not effected. High levels of anxiety correlate with the 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan (this incident was less severe that Chernobyl, but still comparable in scale). Thus, a holistic perspective of health and social care services is required for health systems. Finally, the WHO emphasise an efficient dissemination of research findings and education of the population is paramount for long-term physical and psychological care of those effected by nuclear disaster. The Chernobyl incident is one example of how a disaster (nuclear event) catalysed a health disaster. The UN Human Development Programme publishes reports on measurements of quality life expectancy, knowledge accessibility and standards of living. Modern day Ukraine is not a developed country according to the UN Human Development Index but does rank 88/189  in the world (United Nations, 2019b). Comparing this case study with another from a country with a lower HDI value provides a different perspective of health system resilience for disaster risk management. The next case study will focus on the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is ranked 179/189 on the UN HDI (United Nations, 2019c).

5  C  ase Study 2 – Democratic Republic of Congo: Health Systems, Conflict and Ebola The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is the second-largest country in Africa and situated centrally on the continent, bordering nine countries (Fig.  7.2). The DRC is both land and resource-rich, with over 80 million hectares of arable land, >1100 listed mineral and precious metals and a population of over 81 million (2018). The DRC has the potential to be one of the richest and most rapidly growing economies in the region. Recent growth in gross domestic output (GDP) and its comparatively good recovery (compared to other sub-Saharan African nations) from the global financial crash in 2008, have shown promising signs for the country’s economy. Despite this, and the cancellation of 90% of its external debt as part of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries initiative (World Health Organization, 2015), the World Bank (2020) has listed the DRC’s extreme poverty rate at 73%, the second highest in sub-Saharan Africa. Reasons for this growth stagnation and its inability to infiltrate the general population has resulted from decades of unrest and upheaval. From the sixteenth century to the large-scale decolonisation of Africa in the 1960s, the DRC has received centuries of European involvement from Britain, the Netherlands, Portugal, France and Belgium. As with many other nations, this created social, political and economic struggles, namely a power vacuum and economic collapse. The 1990s were particularly unstable with several conflicts erupting, namely the First and Second Congo War (1996–2003), which was further complicated by the Rwandan genocide of

162

M. Harris and G. Charnley

Fig. 7.2  Map showing central Africa and the flag of the DRC. (Source: Apple Maps, 2020)

1994. The conflict resulted in the dissolution of Zaire, and the birth of the DRC (BBC News, 2020). After more than three decades of autocratic rule, the DRC adopted a constitution and held its first democratic elections in 2006 and again in 2011. Despite the signing of a peace agreement though, fighting has continued, funded by the vast natural resources, resulting in millions of deaths (World Health Organization, 2015). The social unrest and lack of a clear political direction has made the DRC particularly vulnerable to health disaster, as it meets several of the barriers discussed earlier including lack of financing, governance, access and education.

5.1  Current Health Situation in the DRC Much of this unrest, poor governance and extreme poverty has been felt by the health sector in the DRC and is presenting through devastating national health indicators, high levels of maternal and infant mortality and poor healthcare coverage (~37%) (Fig.  7.3 and Table  7.2) (Herp et  al., 2003; World Health Organization, 2016). Conflicts, refugee crises (from Congo, Angola and Rwanda), and disease outbreaks such as measles and Ebola have stretched the healthcare system and led to near collapse, along with several other healthcare challenges including malaria, diarrhoeal disease, protein malnutrition, respiratory tract infections, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. The burden of conflict has also resulted in significant mental health

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

163

Fig. 7.3  Development indicators for central Africa. (Source: World Health Organization, 2016)

challenges in the country, including the mentally traumatic experience for those fighting and use of sexual violence and rape as a weapon (World Health Organization, 2015), Health disaster risk reduction is desperately needed to promote well-­being, protect mental and physical health and enable sustainable development (James et al., 2019). The DRC health system is currently split into three levels: • District level – Split into 516 health districts, each with several health centres and one district hospital to serve around 100,000 to 200,000 people. • Intermediate level  – 26 provincial health departments providing technical and logistical support. • Central level – Mainly a normative role. Currently, government health expenditure is low at 11% and a large proportion comes from external aid. The reliance on external funding reduces self-sufficiency and therefore makes the system prone to economic collapse and fluctuations (World Health Organization, 2015). Examples of this instability include the following: • Financing and expenditure – Declines in aid contribution have occurred between Belgium and the DRC, due to diplomatic breakdown (Porignon et al., 1998). • Management and governance – Poor organisation and fragmentation of services such as duplication and waste.

47 4.2 14.7 0.047 41.2 116.5 829 53

81

4.33

11.06

0.091

28.3

88.1

473

60.5

Source: World Health Organization (2016)

Healthcare Access and Quality Index DTP vaccination coverage (%5y mortality (/1,000 live births) Maternal mortality (/100,000 live births) Life expectancy (both genders)

Central African Republic 28.6

Democratic Republic of Congo 40.4

Table 7.2  Health indicators for central Africa

58.6

1,150

98.6

40

4

2.74

49

South Sudan 38.8

62.5

375

46.6

19.9

0.093

10.97

7.22

93

68

248

35.3

15.9

0.064

9.86

7.53

97

60.1

548

58.5

21.7

0.026

13.19

7.54

90

63.9

524

53

21.3

0.022

12.31

5.58

98

62.3

213

57.8

23.5

0.091

11.31

4.99

90

62.6

241

77.2

28.5

0.144

5

3.31

59

64.3

378

50.1

20.3

0.108

8.71

5.15

75

Republic of Uganda Rwanda Burundi Tanzania Zambia Angola Congo 42.9 47.8 40.4 49.9 41.6 40.7 43.4

164 M. Harris and G. Charnley

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

165

• Management and governance – Disproportionate management costs, for example the EU Development Fund between 2006 and 2009 paid out €30.5 million in management costs, 38% of the total programme budget. • Community trust and education – Lack of accountability for international aid organisations and workers (World Health Organization, 2015). This lack of central funding also leads to corruption and informal taxation, resulting in many healthcare workers not being paid and decreasing the quality of care. Coupled with poor workforce development and a surplus in private sector health and education, certain professionals are in excess, while there are deficiencies in others (World Health Organization, 2015).

5.2  The 2018 Ebola Outbreak To complicate the DRC’s current resiliency issues, North Kivu in eastern DRC was hit by an Ebola epidemic in 2018, which is still ongoing. It is now the second-largest Ebola epidemic ever recorded (after the 2014–2016 West Africa outbreak), with over 3000 cases (Médecins sans Frontières, 2020). Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) and the WHO has been working together with the DRC Ministry of Health (MoH) to help tackle the outbreak. MSF is one of the few NGOs still working in the area with several others withdrawing assistance and aid, primarily due to safety concerns and cost savings (The Guardian, 2018). Several lessons were learnt from the West Africa outbreak, which acted as a catalyst and resulted in better technology, better treatments and an experimental vaccine. These lessons have played a role in the current crisis and the DRC can help strengthen these further, by identifying insufficiencies in the system and acting to build a more resilient programme (Kieny & Dovlo, 2015). Conflict, highly mobile populations, nosocomial transmission and difficulties accessing certain populations have made outbreak control challenging. For example: • Closing of the Congo River and destruction of roads has led to the isolation of many communities (Herp et al., 2003). • Several confirmed cases reported visiting healthcare centres, putting patients and healthcare workers at risk (Ilunga Kalenga et al., 2019). • Isolating contacts has been near impossible, due to frequent border crossing and movements of people displaced by conflict (Médecins sans Frontières, 2020). • Studies have shown that conflict events repeatedly hampered declining incidence, dampening Ebola vaccine effectiveness to a minimum of 4.8% (Wells et al., 2019). The crisis has shown a significant lack of trust between the population and healthcare workers, resulting in several attacks on workers and infrastructure, disrupted operations and many not seeking official care. Even the best biomedical response required social traction to work and, in this case, has resulted in the

166

M. Harris and G. Charnley

rejection of risk reduction strategies (Ilunga Kalenga et al., 2019). Reasons for this mistrust are largely related to the barrier of community mistrust and education and have steamed from Médecins sans Frontières (2020): • Communities being irritated by the attention Ebola receives compared to other illness that kill more people. For example, between 2010 and 2013, a measles outbreak resulted in 294,455 cases and 5045 deaths (Mancini et al., 2014). • Human rights abuses and perceived compliance has fostered mistrust in NGOs and the government, made worse by the militarisation of the Ebola response team (Ilunga Kalenga et al., 2019). • Several negative and factually inaccurate rumours have been spread rapidly via mobile phones and social media (Moran, 2018). • Overall the trust of how authorities represented the interests of the people are considered low (Vinck et al., 2019).

5.3  Ways Forward in the DRC In a country the size of western Europe, there is a need for flexibility and tailoring to specific area requirements (Herp et al., 2003). Policies need to work for everyone in the country and rapidly increase access to healthcare (World Health Organization, 2015). Through several regional and national initiatives, common themes to improve health system resiliency in the DRC have emerged. These initiatives include the Health System Strengthening Strategy (2005) and the five year Nation Health Sector Development Plan (2010), set out by the DRC (World Health Organization, 2015). Along with the Paris Declaration (2005) and the Accra Agenda for Action (2008) set across Africa (Kieny & Dovlo, 2015). Key areas coming out of these plans and how they can be applied to the barriers implicated in the DRC are as follows: 1. Develop health districts  – District health systems can often be unstable and prone to abandonment due to inadequate resources. Therefore, districts need improved leadership, distribution of resources and health coverage (Porignon et al., 1998). 2. Staff and education  – Improve training and staff development by enhancing human resources. Staff needed to be paid on time to form a committed workforce ready to respond to a crisis. 3. Pharmaceutical reform – To guarantee a constant supply of high-quality medicines via stronger regulation and quality assurance. 4. Health financing – Increase budget allocations, reduce management costs and prevent waste and fragmentation. Suggested methods for this are a single operational multi-donor plan and pooling of regional resources. 5. Collaboration – Pathogens do not respect boundaries and therefore regional, national and international partnerships are needed to improve knowledge and expertise, helping to create a multi-disciplinary workforce.

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

167

6. Accountability – Both for external aid and government organisations such as the MoH. This includes both the quality of the services offered and the management of resources and finances. This should also help foster community trust if accountability for actions are made clear. 7. Community/government dialogue – Do not view communities as just recipients of care but instead active members of their health and the system. Build education programmes to show people how to improve their health and make healthcare workers more visible through consultations, to understand healthcare issues and what services are needed (World Health Organization, 2015). 8. Data collection and surveillance – A central reporting system is needed to help disease surveillance but also to monitor the health of the general population. For example, calculating vaccination coverage is currently difficult as census data is from 1984 (Mancini et al., 2014). 9. A moving construct – The health systems need to be flexible and tailored to a large diverse country. They must be flexible to adapt in unprecedented circumstances and address a wide range of health challenges (Kruk et al., 2015). 10. Improve access – Large areas of the country are currently cut off, either through infrastructure damage or conflict. This needs to be addressed both for the rights of these people but also to prevent health blind-spots. Urban-centric policies will not work in a country where >60% of the population live in rural communities (World Health Organisation, 2015). Financing these systematic changes will be a significant barrier and increasing government expenditure will be an important first step, along with improving efficiency. A pilot performance-based financing programme has been carried out in South Kivu, showing promising results. Although spending was only $2/capita/year compared to $9 to 12/capita/year in control districts, the participating district still outperformed the control districts, mainly through improved efficiencies and better use of resources. Improved transparency and reduced corruption came out of open dialogue between patients and healthcare managers and uptake of services was high (Soeters et  al., 2011). Although this shows promising early results in addressing financing, management and trust barriers, there is still a lack of capacity to roll this out country-wide but the results suggest an expansion would be beneficial. It also shows how new and experimental ideas will be required to help execute the ten points above and how such policies can help to practically implement change. The two case studies represent how health disasters are unique and require specific interventions to improve the resilience of health systems for disaster risk management. In practice, achieving this aim can be challenging due to many influencing contextual factors. The next section of this chapter maps the priorities for health system resilience with the UN Sendai Framework (2015) and is applicable for all levels of society across the world.

168

M. Harris and G. Charnley

6  H  ealth Systems Resilience Priorities: Sendai Framework 2015–2030 Mapping So far in this chapter, the principles of how health systems are or are not resilient have been critically discussed and explored through two case studies. The case studies have distinctive contexts and impacts. The differences between the two case studies are representative of how each disaster is incomparable to others. Furthermore, the necessary responses to manage the disaster are bespoke, relative to the context. Bespoke disaster response links with the discussion in the introduction about how there is no consensus definition, but two schools of thought – the impacts of disasters are social phenomena and disasters are within societal systems. The impact on health systems is one example of how disasters impact society, rather than the route cause event. Strengthening systems resilience is a disaster risk management initiative and should be informed by robust evidence. However, disaster managers and those affected by disaster benefit from guidelines to channel research findings as they are disseminated. The Sendai Framework is a widely transferable resource to inform Governments and local authorities decisions about disasters, but it is not specific to health systems resilience. The aim of this section correlates with The Sendai Framework and complements its goal; to present evidence-based priorities, mapped to The Sendai Framework, to increase health systems resilience for disaster risk management (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015).

6.1  Expected Outcome and Aim Disaster risk management and health system resilience should have measurable outcomes to ensure evaluations are evidence-based. In relation to health systems resilience for disaster risk management, all initiatives should aim to reduce the risk of disaster, vulnerability and exposure of risk to people, personal and community infrastructure, and promote physical and mental well-being. Disaster risk management should be a proactive process to reduce the risk of health disaster.

6.2  Priorities for Action 1. Understanding disaster risk – Each health disaster is unique. Forcing a health disaster into a generalised definition increases the risk of misunderstanding the hazards and risks to the disaster, thus any disaster risk management strategies are vulnerable to misjudgement and error. Initiating empirical study will establish an evidence-based understanding of a health disaster, which can be supplemented by secondary research of similar, historic events. A holistic understanding of a

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

169

health disaster and the impacts is needed to inform health system resilience enhancement for disaster risk management. 2. Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk  – Evidence-­ based disaster risk management for health system resilience requires governance at all levels of society: international, national, regional, local and individual citizens. Legislation, policy and guidelines need to promote collaboration between public and private industries and explicitly define accountability and responsibility at all levels of society. 3 . Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience – Investment in disaster risk reduction is needed from public and private industries to strengthen health systems resilience, to reduce extended socio-economic, infrastructural and environmental impact. Investment in preparatory disaster risk management for health system resilience ultimately reduces the financial impact of natural hazards and disasters. 4 . Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to ‘build back better’ in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction – Proactive disaster risk management for health system resilience establishes capacity to manage disasters and enhances the ability of convalescence. Recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction preparation provides an opportunity to “build back better”. The principles of equality and inclusivity should inform disaster risk management for health system resilience.

6.3  Targets The following targets based on The Sendai Framework (2015) are integral to disaster risk management for health system resilience: 1 . Substantially reduce mortality in health disasters. 2. Minimise the incidences of people negatively affected by health disasters. 3. Mitigate the damage of health disasters to GDP and local economies. 4. Reduce health disaster impact to health systems infrastructure and disruption of health and social care services at all levels of society. 5. Establish health disaster risk reduction strategies at all levels of society. 6. Enable national and regional collaboration, including international support of developing countries, to implement evidence-based health disaster risk management initiatives. 7. Widen accessibility to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster research findings.

170

M. Harris and G. Charnley

6.4  Guiding Principles Disaster risk management is an inclusive principle. In other words, the responsibility of preparing for disasters and mitigating the risk is not one person, organisation, local authority or Government. All evidence suggests a collaborative approach is paramount to effective disaster risk management for health system resilience (and all other categories of disaster risk management). The following subsections are guiding principles at various societal levels. It is important to note, guiding principles are not rules, instructions, or a guarantee of reducing the risk of disaster. An evidence-based approach is most effective, as advocated in The Sendai Framework (2015). The following guideline principles are listed to inform disaster risk management for health system resilience at all levels of society. 6.4.1  International Guiding Principles • Empower people to develop, improve their quality of life and protect all human rights. • Enhance international collaboration in the interests of all global citizens. • Provide bespoke support to developing countries for the improvement of resilience health systems for disaster risk management. 6.4.2  National Guiding Principles • Lead national disaster risk management initiatives for health system resilience. • Establish inclusive and fair responsibility of Government, private and public industries and key stakeholders in disaster risk management for health system resilience. • Promote financially sustainable investment, from public and private industries, in health system resilience for disaster risk management response and recovery. • Adopt The Sendai Framework (2015) philosophy of “build back better” for disaster risk reduction. 6.4.3  Regional Guiding Principles • Engage cooperatively with national disaster risk management strategy and initiatives for health system resilience. • Ensure holistic, evidence-based disaster risk reduction strategy development and policy making, including key regional stakeholders. • Across all sectors and industries, establish coherent disaster risk reduction guidelines, policy and strategy for disaster risk reduction and disaster risk management for health system resilience.

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

171

6.4.4  Local Area and Communities Guiding Principles • Specifically risk assess disaster hazards and the impact on local communities and health systems, to be used in disaster risk management strategy and planning. • Enable local authorities and communities to access disaster risk reduction resources. • Involve local stakeholders in disaster risk management planning and decision making for health system resilience. 6.4.5  Individuals Guiding Principles • Have ownership of promoting and maintaining the health and well-being of self and dependents. • Ensure awareness of individual roles and responsibilities in health disaster, informed by education, research and international, national, regional and local disaster risk management initiatives. • Proactively prepare for appropriate response to health disasters within the scope of accessibility. • Cooperatively engage in and constructively contribute to the evaluation of disaster risk reduction policy, guidelines and initiatives. This section of the chapter presents the priorities of health system resilience for disaster risk management at all levels of society. The aim of this chapter is not to instruct, but to inform disaster risk reduction for health resilience from a global scale to individuals within local communities. The previous case studies represent disaster risk management for health system resilience is bespoke to each situation and area of the world. The current disparity of resources and divide between the developing and developed world requires proactive and collaborative disaster risk management for health system resilience to protect the interests of all global citizens.

7  Summary and Conclusions The aim of this chapter was to provide a broad overview of the issues of health system resilience and how they can potentially be improved via disaster risk management frameworks, such as the Sendai Framework (2015). This issue is hugely convoluted and difficult to compare across countries due to societal, political and economic differences. Despite this, some building blocks of resilience health systems have been provided, which can be tailored to individual nations, to make sure they are prepared for health disasters and can serve their population, reducing mortality and morbidity.

172

M. Harris and G. Charnley

It has been highlighted how resilient health systems can effectively work before, during and after a disaster and should be functioning in both good times and bad. There are many barriers that health systems face around the world, from poor management to a lack of financial resources. Two case studies have been provided as examples of health emergency contexts, including the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster and the 2018 DRC Ebola outbreak. Both these examples showed the very different consequences of disasters and how several impacts can strike at the same time, causing cascading disasters. The case studies highlight the need to consider both communicable and non-communicable diseases and to make sure psychological well-being is addressed. Both disasters show the need for tailored training and a strong, committed workforce to provide expertise. Furthermore, the case studies illustrate the need for rapid health assessment, as no two disasters or societies are the same; therefore, the implications of a disaster and the groups at risk will often be different and difficult to predict without robust assessment. Hence, governments and local authorities need to understand those at risk and how people will be affected by the heath disaster. Health system resilience priorities have been mapped to The Sendai Framework, establishing a specific perspective on health disasters. Implementing these priorities improves risk response and preparedness, through substantially increasing capacity and commitment. The need for a proactive, holistic and collaborative approach to disaster risk management for health systems resilience has been emphasised. International, national, regional and local cooperation can lead to benefitting economies, the environment and society at large. By prioritising health preparedness and response at all levels, loss of life and livelihoods can be reduced, improving health and well-being. The stakes have never been higher for more resilient health systems. Disaster will inevitably strike, as they have throughout history. However, Kelman’s (2020) definition reaffirms it is how society responds to hazards that determine disasters. It is important to learn from disasters and use them as a catalyst for change. To improve the visibility of health in societies and stress the need for a global understanding and agreement on how to contain these emergencies. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that pathogens do not discriminate or respect national boundaries; therefore, we must work together, viewing the planet as one, to contain these crises and protect human life and well-being. Health systems that are not resilience contribute to loss of life, suffering and societal tension and mistrust. This chapter has shown that these issues are not limited to developing nations, regardless of GDP, and all countries could benefit from investing in the resilience of their health systems for disaster risk management.

References Admasu, K. B. (2016). Designing a resilient National health system in Ethiopia: The role of leadership. Health Systems & Reform, 2(3), 182–186.

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

173

Aitsi-Selmi, A., & Murray, V. (2015). Protecting the health and well-being of populations from disasters: Health and health care in The Sendai Framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 31(1), 74–79. Allenby, B., & Fink, J. (2005). Toward inherently secure and resilient societies. Science, 309(5737), 1034–1036. Apple Maps (2020). The democratic republic of congo and central Africa. Available from: https:// www.apple.com/uk/maps/. Accessed 17 Apr 2020. ApSimon, H., Macdonald, H., & Wilson, J. (1986). An initial assessment of the Chernobyl-4 reactor accident release source. Journal of the Society for Radiological Protection, 6(3), 109–119. BBC News. (2020). DRC Congo country profile. [Online]. London, UK; BBC. Available at:https:// www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-­africa-­13283212. Accessed 17 Apr 2020. Bedford, J., Enria, D., Giesecke, J., Heymann, D., Ihekweazu, C., Kobinger, G., Lane, H., Memish, Z., Oh, M., Sall, A., Schuchat, A., Ungchusak, K., & Wieler, L. (2020). COVID-19: Towards controlling of a pandemic. The Lancet, 395(10229), 1015–1018. Bennet, B., Repacholi, M., & Carr, Z. (2006). Health effects of the Chernobyl accident and special health care programmes: report of the UN Chernobyl forum expert group “health”. [Online]. Geneva: World Health Organisation. Available at: https://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/ pub_meet/chernobyl-­accident-­health-­effects/en/. Accessed 06 May 2020. Britton, N. (2007). National planning and response: National systems. In H.  Rodríguez, E. Quarantelli, & R. Dynes (Eds.), Handbook of disaster research. Springer. Bromet, E. (2012). Mental health consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. Journal of Radiological Protection, 32, 71–75. Bromet, E., & Havenaar, J. (2007). Psychologcal and perceived health effects of the Chernobyl disaster: A 20-year review. Health Physics, 93(5), 516–521. Central Intelligence Agency, USA. (1992). Handbook of international economic statistics. University of California. Chan, E., & Shaw, R. (2020). Overview of health-EDRM and health issues in DRR: Practices and challenges. In E. Chan & R. Shaw (Eds.), Public health and disasters. Springer. Chan, E., Ho, J., Wong, C., & Shaw, R. (2020). Health-EDRM in international policy agenda III: 2030 sustainable development goals and new urban agenda (habit III). In E. Chan & R. Shaw (Eds.), Public health and disasters. Springer. Cardis, E., & Hatch, M. (2011). The Chernobyl accident  – An epidemiological perspective. Clinical Oncology, 23(4), 251–260. Dar, O., Buckley, E. J., Rokadiya, S., Huda, Q., & Abrahams, J. (2014). Integrating health into disaster risk reduction strategies: Key considerations for success. American Journal of Public Health, 104(10), 1811–1816. Davis, I., & Alexander, D. (2016). Recovery from disaster. Routledge. Fukuma, S., Ahmed, S., Goto, R., Inui, T. S., Atun, R., & Fukuhara, S. (2017). Fukushima after the Great East Japan earthquake: Lessons for developing responsive and resilient health systems. Journal of Global Health, 7(1), 1–8. Hanefeld, J., Mayhew, S., Legido-Quigley, H., Martineau, F., Karanikolos, M., Blanchet, K., Liverani, M., Mokuwa, E., McKay, G., & Balabanova, D. (2018). Towards an understanding of resilience: Responding to health systems shocks. Health Policy and Planning, 33(10), 355–367. Havenaar, J., Rumyantzeva, G., Kasyanenko, A., Kaasjager, K., Westermann, A., Van Den Brink, W., Van Den Bout, J., & Savelkoul, J. (1997). Health effects of the Chernobyl disaster: Illness or illness behaviour? A comparative general health survey in two former Soviet regions. Environmental Health Perspectives, 105(6), 1533–1537. Herp, M. V., Parqué, V., Rackley, E., & Ford, N. (2003). Mortality, violence and lack of access to healthcare in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Disasters, 27(2), 141–153. Howe, G. (2007). Leukemia following the Chernobyl accident. Health Physics, 93(5), 512–515.

174

M. Harris and G. Charnley

Ilunga Kalenga, O., Moeti, M., Sparrow, A., Nguyen, V. K., Lucey, D., & Ghebreyesus, T. A. (2019). The ongoing Ebola epidemic in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 2018–2019. New England Journal of Medicine, 381(4), 373–383. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2005). Chernobyl’s legacy: health, environmental and sociology-­economic impacts and recommendations to the governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. [Online]. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency. Available at: https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:36093263 [Accessed 06 May 2020]. International Atomic Energy Agency. (2019). International nuclear and radiological event scale. [Online]. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency. Available at: https://www. iaea.org/resources/databases/international-­nuclear-­and-­radiological-­event-­scale [Accessed 06 May 2020]. James, L., Welton-Mitchell, C., Noel, J., & James, A. (2019). Integration mental health and disaster prep-a redness in intervention: A randomised controlled trial with earthquake and flood-­ affect communities in Haiti. Psychological Medicine, 50(2), 342–352. Jaworowski, Z. (2010). Observations on the Chernobyl disaster and LNT. Dose-Response, 8, 148–171. Kelamn, I. (2020). Disasters by choice: How our actions turn natural hazards into catastrophes. Oxford University Press. Kieny, M. P., & Dovlo, D. (2015). Beyond Ebola: A new agenda for resilient health systems. The Lancet, 385(9963), 91–92. Kruk, M.  E., Ling, E.  J., Bitton, A., Cammett, M., Cavanaugh, K., Chopra, M., El-Jardali, F., Macauley, R. J., Muraguri, M. K., Konuma, S., & Marten, R. (2017). Building resilient health systems: A proposal for a resilience index. BMJ, 357, j2323. Kruk, M. E., Myers, M., Varpilah, S. T., & Dahn, B. T. (2015). What is a resilient health system? Lessons from Ebola. The Lancet, 385(9980), 1910–1912. Kutzin, J., & Sparkes, S. P. (2016). Health systems strengthening, universal health coverage, health security and resilience. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 94(1), 2. Lubunska, I., Kashparov, V., Levchuk, S., Saltillo, D., Johnston, P., Polishchuk, S., Lazarev, N., & Khomutinin, Y. (2018). Current radiological situation in areas of Ukraine contaminated by the Chernobyl accident: Part 1. Human dietary exposure to Caesium-137 and possible mitigation measures. Environmental International, 117, 250–259. Mancini, S., Coldiron, M.  E., Ronsse, A., Ilunga, B.  K., Porten, K., & Grais, R.  F. (2014). Description of a large measles epidemic in Democratic Republic of Congo, 2010–2013. Conflict and Health, 8(1), 9. Martineau, F. P. (2016). People-centred health systems: Building more resilient health systems in the wake of the Ebola crisis. International Health, 8(5), 307–309. McKenzie, A., Abdulwahab, A., Sokpo, E., & W Mecaskey, J. (2015). Building a resilient health system: lessons from northern Nigeria. Médecins sans Frontières. (2020). Democratic Republic of Congo. [On-line]. Geneva, Switzerland: Doctors Without Borders (Médecins sans Frontières). Available at: https://www.msf.org/ democratic-­republic-­congo-­drc. Accessed 17 Apr 2020. Moran, B. (2018). Fighting Ebola in conflict in the DR Congo. The Lancet, 392(10155), 1295–1296. Murray, V., Aitsi-Selmi, A., & Blanchard, K. (2015). The role of public health within the United Nations post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(1), 28–37. Naheed, S., & Eslamian, S. (2021). Understanding disaster risk reduction and resilience: A conceptual framework, handbook of disaster risk reduction for resilience, Chapter 1. In S. Eslamian & F. Eslamian (Eds.), New frameworks for building resilience to disasters (Vol. 1). Springer Nature. Nikiforov, Y. (2006). Radiation-induced thyroid cancer: What we have learned from Chernobyl. Endocrine Pathology, 17(4), 307–317. Norazam, A.  S. (2018). Resilient health infrastructure: Strengthening hospitals’ capacity to respond effectively during disasters and crises. Procedia engineering, 212, 262–269.

7  Disaster Risk Management: A Resilient Health System

175

Nussbaum, R. (2007). The Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe: Unacknowledged health detriment. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(5), 238. Okwuchukwu, O. G., Uche, N. I., Perpetual, O. N., & Onyebuchi, O. G. (2016). Health information dissemination in an era of globalization among the Igbos of southeast Nigeria: Harvesting resilient traditional mass media systems to advantage. Advances in Research, 7, 1–7. Olu, O. (2017). Resilient health system as conceptual framework for strengthening public health disaster risk management: An african viewpoint. Frontiers in Public Health, 5, 263. Olu, O., Usman, A., Manga, L., Anyangwe, S., Kalambay, K., Nsenga, N., Woldetsadik, S., Hampton, C., Nguessan, F., & Benson, A. (2016). Strengthening health disaster risk management in Africa: Multi-sectoral and people-centred approaches are required in the post-Hyogo framework of action era. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 691. Ostroumova, E., Schüz, J., & Kesminie, A. (2020). Future of Chernobyl research: The urgency for consolidated action. The Lancet, 395(10229), 1037–1038. Patterson, A., & Veenstra, G. (2016). Politics and population health: Testing the impact of the electoral democracy. Health and Place, 40, 66–75. Perry, R. (2007). What is disaster? In H. Rodríguez, E. Quarantelli, & R. Dynes (Eds.), Handbook of disaster research. Springer. Porignon, D., Porignon, D., Mugisho Soron Gane, E., Elongo Lokombe, T., Katulanya Isu, D., Hennart, P., & Van Lerberghe, W. (1998). How robust are district health systems? Coping with crisis and disasters in Rutshuru, Democratic Republic of Congo. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 3(7), 559–565. Quarantelli, E. (2005). A social science research agenda for the disasters of the 21st century. In R. Perry & E. Quarantelli (Eds.), What is a disaster? New answers to old questions. Xlibris. Robertson, H. D., Elliott, A. M., Burton, C., Iversen, L., Murchie, P., Porteous, T., & Matheson, C. (2016). Resilience of primary healthcare professionals: A systematic review. British Journal of General Practice, 66(647), e423–e433. Rudowitz, R., Rowland, D., & Shartzer, A. (2006). Health care in New Orleans before and after Hurricane Katrina: The storm of 2005 exposed problems that had existed for years and made solutions more complex and difficult to obtain. Health Affairs, 25(Suppl1), W393–W406. Samuel, K., Aronsson-Storrier, M., & Bookmiller, K. (2019). The Cambridge handbook of disaster risk reduction and international law. Cambridge University Press. Sharma, M., Yadav, K., Yadav, N., & Ferdinand, K.  C. (2017). Zika virus pandemic—Analysis of Facebook as a social media health information platform. American Journal of Infection Control, 45(3), 301–302. Soeters, R., Peerenboom, P.  B., Mushagalusa, P., & Kimanuka, C. (2011). Performance-based financing experiment improved health care in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Health Affairs, 30(8), 1518–1527. Stang, E. (1996). Chernobyl – System accident or human error? Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 68(4), 197–201. Sun, X. (2020). World health systems. Wiley. The Guardian. (2018). 'The wars will never stop' – millions flee bloodshed as Congo falls apart. [On-line]. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/03/ millions-­flee-­bloodshed-­as-­congos-­army-­steps-­up-­fight-­with-­rebels-­in-­east. Accessed 17 Apr 2020. Tuttle, R., Vaisman, F., & Tronko, M. (2011). Clinical presentation and clinical outcomes in Chernobyl-related paediatric thyroid cancers: What do we know? What can we expect in the future? Clinical Oncology, 23, 268–275. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. (2007). Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: building the resilient of nations and communities to disasters. [Online]. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/publication/ hyogo-­framework-­action-­2005-­2015-­building-­resilience-­nations-­and-­communities-­disasters. Accessed 24 April 2020.

176

M. Harris and G. Charnley

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. (2015). The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. [Online]. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-­framework-­disaster-­risk-­reduction-­2015-­2030. Accessed 24 April 2020. United Nations Scientific Committee. (2008). Sources and effects of ionising radiation. [Online]. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Available at: https:// www.unscear.org/unscear/en/chernobyl.html. Accessed 04 May 2020. United Nation (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. General Assembly, 23 June , Sixty-ninth Session, Agenda Item 19 (c), A/RES/69/283. United Nations. (2019a). Sustainable development goals. [Online]. United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/news/communications-­material/. Accessed 08 May 2020. United Nations. (2019b). Human development reports: Ukraine. [Online]. United Nations. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/UKR. Accessed 12 May 2020. United Nations. (2019c). Human development reports: Congo (Democratic Republic of the). [Online]. United Nations. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/COD. Accessed 12 May 2020. Vinck, P., Pham, P. N., Bindu, K. K., Bedford, J., & Nilles, E. J. (2019). Institutional trust and misinformation in the response to the 2018–19 Ebola outbreak in North Kivu, DR Congo: A population-based survey. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 19(5), 529–536. Wells, C. R., Pandey, A., Mbah, M. L. N., Gaüzère, B. A., Malvy, D., Singer, B. H., & Galvani, A. P. (2019). The exacerbation of Ebola outbreaks by conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(48), 24366–24372. World Health Organization. (2015). Improving health system efficiency: Democratic Republic of the Congo: improving aid coordination in the health sector (No. WHO/HIS/HGF/ CaseStudy/15.4). World Health Organization. World Health Organization. (2016). Key country indicators. Country summaries. [On-line]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation, Switzerland. Available at: https://apps.who. int/gho/data/node.cco.keyind?lang=en. Accessed 17 Apr 2020. World Health Organization. (2017). WHO community engagement framework for quality, people-centred and resilient health services (No. WHO/HIS/SDS/2017.15). World Health Organization. WorldBank. (2020). The World Bank in DRC. [On-line]. Washington DC, USA: WorldBank. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/drc/overview. Accessed 17 Apr 2020.

Chapter 8

Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local Scales Kaveh Deilami, Salman Shooshtarian, Julie Rudner, Andrew Butt, and Marco Amati

Abstract  An urban heat island (UHI) effect is a phenomenon that occurs when urban areas experience higher temperature than their surrounding rural areas. This contributes to global warming, risk of heat-related mortalities and unpredictable thermal conditions. Therefore, gaining insights into the knowledge of resilience and adaptation against adverse urban heat effects contribute to the development of sustainable cities. This chapter presents three case studies focusing on the contemporary Australian experience in mitigating UHI effects and thermal discomfort at regional, city and local scales. The case studies are based on satellite imagery, in situ observations and community engagement to deliver a comprehensive understanding of the contemporary efforts to reduce the effect of urban heat. On the regional scale, the role of strategic urban planning and related infill development policy on spatial variation of UHI was examined. This was conducted through diurnal and nocturnal moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) imageries in South East Queensland between 2005 and 2018. Subsequently, this chapter describes an innovative approach to integrate geospatial data and community opinions on urban greening and community shade to develop a shade mapping and (walking) route comfort model for the city as an adaptation approach to excess heat in urban areas. Finally, the survey findings on the human–place relationship in urban environments of Melbourne’s central business district (CBD) under various meteorological conditions at the local level were presented. The findings will significantly contribute to enhance the resilience and adaptation strategies for urban heat. K. Deilami (*) · A. Butt · M. Amati Centre for Urban Research, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia e-mail: [email protected] S. Shooshtarian School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia J. Rudner Community Planning and Development, La Trobe University, Bendigo, VIC, Australia © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 S. Eslamian, F. Eslamian (eds.), Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72196-1_8

177

178

K. Deilami et al.

Keywords  Urban heat · Thermal comfort · Resilience · Adaptation · Satellite images · MODIS · Digital planning · Shadeway · South East Queensland · Melbourne

Glossary CBD Cfb GIS LGA LST MODIS PET PGIS RH RMS RUCC SEQ SUH Ta Tg ToE TSV UHI USGS Va WHO

Central business district Oceanic temperate climate Geographic information system Local government areas Land surface temperature Moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer Physiological equivalent temperature The participatory GIS Relative humidity Root mean square RMIT University City Campus South East Queensland Surface urban heat island Air temperature Globe temperature Time of exposure Thermal sensation vote Urban heat island United States Geological Survey Wind velocity World Health Organization

1  Introduction It has been long recognised that cities generate a microclimate in which, typically, the air and surface temperature of urban zones are higher than those in surrounding rural areas (Gunawardena et al., 2017). This phenomenon is called the urban heat island (UHI) effect. Under the influence of the UHI effect, urban areas experience 1–3  K higher temperature values than rural areas. This could reach 12  K due to particular atmospheric and surface conditions (Mahdavi et al., 2016). The concept of the UHI was first introduced by Luke Howard in 1820 and was later conceptualised and completed by Emilian Renou and Wilhelm Schmidt in Paris and Vienna in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, respectively (Gartland, 2012). UHI effect is generated through the alteration of the surface energy balance over the process of urban development, in which porous (impermeable) surfaces are

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

179

Fig. 8.1  The potential impacts of the contributory factors on UHI variability. The red solid and grey dashed arrows represent the direct and indirect effects, respectively. (Source: Modified from Zhou et al., 2018)

converted into the three-dimensional impervious surface. As a result, moisture is not available to dissipate the sun’s heat from the impervious surface, resulting in increased surface temperature (Akbari et al., 2016). In addition to land cover change, there are other contributors to UHI that emerge from urban development. These include pollution, urban street canyons, reduced wind speed, the presence of low-­ albedo materials and intensive land use (Gunawardena et al., 2017). Figure 8.1 displays the relationship between these contributors. Researchers have classified UHI into three categories based on the altitude at which they are measured (Zhang et al., 2009). These categories include boundary layer heat island, canopy layer heat island and surface urban heat island (Oke, 1976). The boundary layer UHI measures temperature differences at altitudes ranging from general rooftops to the atmosphere. It is generally examined to investigate the UHI effect at the mesoscale (i.e. 1–10,000  km2). The canopy layer UHI is derived at altitudes ranging from the rooftop to the surface of the earth (Roth, 2013) and is suitable for microscale study. Generally, microwave radiometers and networks of meteorological sensors are used to derive boundary layer UHI and canopy layer UHI, respectively (Voogt, 2007). In contrast, the surface urban heat island (SUHI) measures the differences in temperature between urban and rural areas at the surface of the earth. The main derivation method of SUHI is to measure land surface temperature (LST) from thermal bands of remote sensing satellite imageries (e.g. Landsat, ASTER and MODIS). It is well documented that thermal remote sensing has revolutionised the scientific community’s understanding of urban heat. It is evident in a comprehensive

180

K. Deilami et al.

review by Zhou et al. (2018) that reported SUHI publications started to grow exponentially in 2005. The number of studies from 2006 to 2010 was 40% higher than the total number of publications from 1972 to 2005 (74 vs. 53). The use of satellite images thus has facilitated the assessment of UHI in various cities across the globe. From 1972 to 2018, per continent UHI has been derived for 304 cities in Asia, 199 cities in North America, 74 cities in Asia, 17 cities in Africa, 12 cities in central and south America and 8 cities in Asia (Zhou et al., 2018). The popularity of satellite images (thermal remote sensing) can be attributed to their ability to measure land surface temperature (LST)1 as the core proxy to measure UHI. The images thus deliver cost-effective and easy-to-process data to measure the UHI of a vast city during day and night over a given period. Despite these unique features, the availability and quality of satellite imagers are exposed to the climatic conditions (e.g. cloud) of the desired context. Among satellite imageries, Landsat and MODIS images have been used as the dominant data in past studies. Collectively, from 1972 to 2020, 53% and 25% of SUHI studies have used Landsat and MODIS imageries, respectively (Zhou et al., 2018). These provide a voluminous archive of long-term—for example, the Landsat archive includes data since 1972—consistent, reliable data for researchers to explore different aspects of SUHI. Predictions signal that UHI intensity will likely increase in the future due to rapid and unplanned urbanisation in the form of urban sprawl, the consumption of more fossil fuels and global warming (Miles & Esau, 2017). Therefore, urban heat is looming as a major threat to city dwellers and the environment. This threat can range from general discomfort to serious impact on human health and well-being such as dehydration and heat-related mortality (Heaviside et al., 2017). Other repercussions include but are not limited to the rise of energy demand (Magli et  al., 2015), poor air quality and increased greenhouse gasses emission (Fallmann et al., 2016). As a result, the notion of resilience and adaptation strategies to mitigate these impacts has received compelling interest from scholars (Shooshtarian, Rajagopalan, & Sagoo, 2018). To fully implement such strategies, urban planners and policymakers face the dilemma of the dynamic and multifaceted nature of the cities that lessen the effectiveness of resilience and adaptation strategies over the changing future (O’Malley et al., 2015). For instance, the increase of building density in urban zones and thus growth of impervious surfaces could reduce the cooling effect of existing vegetation in such zones (Shooshtarian, Rajagopalan, & Wakefield, 2018). Similarly, at a city scale, stakeholders may restrict the UHI adaptation policies to city centres due to financial priorities. Over time, this could lead to an increase of UHI intensity in other parts of the city, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of adaptation policies in these areas. Consequently, an effective resilience and adaptation strategy will have to be flexible enough to address the complexity of urban heat (Bosomworth et al., 2013). An approach here is to assign the strategies to describable scales (e.g. 1  Land surface temperature (LST) is the radiative skin temperature of the land derived from solar radiation. A simplified definition would be how hot the ‘surface’ of the earth would feel to the touch in a particular location. ESA (2019). [Accessed 17/11/2019].

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

regional, local and (Pissourios, 2014).

city)

through

top-down

or

bottom-up

181

approaches

In the top-down approach a previously generated set of criteria & indicators is used initially and a team of experts adapts and modifies this set according to the local situation, while in the bottom-up approach local communities actively engage in the development process in a participatory manner by proposing criteria & indicators based on their perception of the individual situation. (Khadka & Vacik, 2012)

Accordingly, stakeholders can avoid the diminishing impact of the strategies on each other while accumulating the related positive influences. It is in this context that this chapter presents three case studies to contextualise the implementation of resilience and adaptation strategies to mitigate UHI at the spatial levels of region, city and local scale in Australia. In Australian metropolitan cities, the UHI intensity is growing and the negative consequences have become more serious than ever (Iping et al., 2019). Studies have documented the occurrence of UHI in Adelaide (Soltani & Sharifi, 2017), Brisbane (Deilami & Kamruzzaman, 2017), Melbourne (Algretawee et  al., 2019), Perth (Rogers et al., 2019) and Sydney (Livada et al., 2019). Neave et al. (2016) showed that these five cities experience a strong winter UHI effect with the value ranging from about 3  °C up to 8  °C.  Furthermore, several reports predicted deteriorated thermal conditions with increased urban expansion and population growth in Australian major cities. For instance, Deilami et  al. (2016) demonstrated that increase in population density will increase the UHI effect in Brisbane. In addition to the UHI effect, hot weather is becoming more common and severe in Australia. Since 2005, Australia has recorded nine of its ten hottest years and extreme heat accounts for more deaths (55%) than all other natural hazards combined (Coates et al., 2014). In response to the rising urban heat issue, the government has commenced various UHI mitigation and adaptation strategies. In this chapter, the author has not endeavoured to create a new knowledge, but has rather compiled the existing knowledge on Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in urban heat, with an intention to disseminate it into an ever-expanding community of students, researchers and professionals. This chapter is structured in five sections. After this introduction, the next section discusses the dominant resilience and adaptation strategies implemented in urban areas. Next, case study 1, which investigates the use of MODIS imageries for regional investigation of UHI in South East Queensland between 2011 and 2016, is presented. Subsequently, this chapter presents the findings from the application of an online geographic information system (GIS) platform for a better understanding of the role of Shadeways in active travelling. Finally, the findings on the human– place relationship in urban environments of Melbourne’s central business district (CBD) under various meteorological conditions at the local level are presented. Figure 8.2 shows the location of the study sites.

182

K. Deilami et al.

Fig. 8.2  The location of study sites

1.1  R  esilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat Island In the field of urban heat studies and from an implementation perspective, the concepts of resilience and adaptation are inextricably linked and are used interchangeably. This is due to that stakeholders implement mitigatory and adaptive actions through similar measures. It should be noted that, inherently, resilience and adaptation refer to different concepts. Resilience is defined as to what extent UHI mitigation measures can sustain their effectiveness over the changing future (O’Malley et al., 2015). Adaptation refers to ‘actions taken to help communities and ecosystems cope with changing climate condition’ (Levina & Tirpak, 2006, p.5). Generally speaking, the practitioners implement these two concepts through the UHI mitigation strategies with the aim to develop the cool (heat-proof) city. This delivers various health and environmental benefits, such as (1) improved air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in environmental sustainability; (2) promotion of clean air and reduction of the carbon footprint, which can lead to a stable climate future; (3) decrease in the level of energy use by increasing thermal comfort; and (4) promotion of the cooling effect of the cities and reducing UHI intensity (Rehan, 2016). UHI mitigation strategies can be grouped into two broad classes. The first is employed within a building or on its facade building that contributes to the cooling effect in a microscale (local). These decrease the level of heat release into the atmosphere by restricting the heat exchange between the indoor and outdoor of a building, known as passive design. Table 8.1 shows different measures that can be applied

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

183

Table 8.1  Different measures used to mitigate the impact of building on urban heata Passive design category Building layout Considers external factors and the local context that influence the design of the building and access to natural light

Envelope thermophysics Use of insulation and thermal storage material to influence heat conduction

Building geometry Design features that effect natural ventilation and influence solar gain

Air-tightness and infiltration Control unfavourable heat gain

Measures Passive cooling Lighting and access to natural daylight height to width ratio Self-shading effects Building orientation Flat area Window area Glazing type Shading or colour of external facade Building shape Thermal insulation Thermal properties of building wall, roof and fenestrations (glazing and windows) Advanced window technologies (low-­ emissivity coatings, vacuum or gas-filled cavities and aerogels) Opaque envelope—wall and roof Lightweight structures (e.g. ventilated wooden facades) Moisture buffering materials Wall thickness Window area and location Solar shading Balconies Window overhangs and hoods Greenery Natural ventilation Cross-ventilation Stack ventilation (also called buoyancy or chimney ventilation

Source: Chen et al. (2015)

a

to achieve a passive design in a building. It is worth mentioning that these measures also can be used to develop a green building (Chen et al., 2015). The outdoor strategies are adopted under five main categories as shown in Fig. 8.3 (Yamamoto, 2006): 1. Implementing environmental management system or plan 2. Modifying the albedo (thermal properties) of building and construction materials in urban areas 3. Fostering green and blue city policy 4. Improving urban ventilation 5. Raising community awareness of and participation in adaptation to urban heat (C2ES, 2017; Rehan, 2016) It should be noted that the categories could have overlap in some respects. Environmental management is an umbrella strategy that enables any organisation (here, cities) to control the effect of its activities, products and services on the

184

K. Deilami et al.

Fig. 8.3  Urban heat island mitigation strategies and related measures

natural environment (Cheremisinoff et al., 2008). In the urban areas, effective environmental management processes will have to be implemented in parallel with or in the framework of proper strategic urban planning. According to United Nation Habitat (2007): Urban strategic planning helps the city to respond to fast-moving events, to manage change and to improve the quality of life. It is not a static process: it must change to reflect the changing situation in the city. Inevitably, the process moves forward and backward several times before arriving at the final set of decisions. Urban strategic planning helps to answer questions like: • Which areas should receive which type of growth? • How can the existing economic base be preserved and expanded? • How can the quality of life be protected and enhanced?

From this perspective, infill development (urban consolidation) and transit-­ oriented development have emerged as the core of strategic urban planning to grow cities in many countries (Kamruzzaman et al., 2018; Shatu et al., 2014). This promotes the notion that future urban growth will have to be directed to vacant or underused lots (parcels) within the existing built-up areas (Biddle et al., 2006). As a result, the pressure of development could be reduced from peri-urban or outlying areas, contributing to protecting lands with important environmental values (e.g. vegetated areas) (EPA, 2014). Clearly, infill development restricts the expansion of sprawl areas as an underlying cause of UHI generation. The second strategy focuses on promoting the use of high-albedo materials in the built environment. Albedo is defined as ‘the reflectivity of a surface to solar irradiation’ (Sailor et al., 2006). Accordingly, the high albedo reduces the LST and related

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

185

UHI intensity by reflecting solar heat rather than absorbing it. These materials can be installed on pavement, roofs, road surfaces and building exteriors (Enríquez et  al., 2017). Past studies have documented the significant impact of using high-­ albedo materials in reducing UHI intensity. For example, Morini et al. (2016) simulated the effects of albedo increase as a strategy to tackle UHI. The results showed that improving the albedo of materials in the roof, walls and road of the whole urban area would lead to the decrease of UHI to 2 °C both in the daytime and at night-time. The aim of the third strategy is to increase the extent of green zones in cities. This is conducted by planting trees, building parks and gardens and increasing the area of green roofs and walls (Aleksandrowicz et al., 2017). Green zones mitigate UHI intensity in two ways. First, green zones (vegetation) increase the amount of evapotranspiration and, thereby, generate a cooling effect around them. Second, green zones that contain a high number of plants with elongated stems or trunk (i.e. trees) cool the atmosphere and air by creating the shading effect (reducing the level of sky view factor) (McPherson et al., 2005). Known as Shadeways, they represent corridors (e.g. a sidewalk) through the city that has a relatively higher amount of natural and artificial shading. The shaded areas generate a cooling effect between 2.30 °C and 2.5 °C based on the tree species and environmental conditions of the related urban areas (Hsieh et  al., 2018). The other factors that contribute to the cooling effect of shaded and green areas include but are not limited to leaf area index, leaf area density (Napoli et  al., 2016; Sanusi et  al., 2017), crown shape and height (Kuuluvainen & Pukkala, 1987), leaf type, tree species (Roy et al., 2012; Takács et  al., 2016), plant area index (PIA) (Zhao et  al., 2012), tree view factor (TVF) (Gong et al., 2018), canopy light interception (Giuliani et al., 2000; Zarate-Valdez et al., 2015), elevation (Deilami et al., 2012), and composition and configuration of vegetated areas (Zhou et al., 2011). Improving the urban ventilation corridor can also mitigate UHI intensity. This is classified into four categories of normal, polluted, cool fresh air and biometeorological-­related (Ren et al., 2018). A corridor can reduce the urban heat when they meet a least one of the following criteria (Ren et al., 2018): • • • •

Constructed in a manner that follows the prevailing wind directions Has low surface roughness and relatively high potential wind dynamics Is able to link the CBD and green areas of the city Is able to connect the city zones with high ventilation volume to low ventilation volume

The last strategy focuses on the rise of community awareness of and participation in resilience and adaptation to urban heat (Akompab et  al., 2012; Dalezios & Eslamian, 2017). This is critical due to the fact that the UHI effect is inevitable in cities and possibly will grow over time despite the implementation of various mitigation policies. More importantly, while a successful and effective resilience and adaptation approach needs to put the community at its centre, it also needs the full support of the community. Community awareness and participation can be improved by empowering people with a suitable level of knowledge about different aspects of climate change including urban heat (Corburn, 2009; Kalafatis et al., 2015). When

186

K. Deilami et al.

communities have acquired climate change and UHI knowledge, they will better cooperate with authorities to mitigate the undesirable effects. An example of this cooperation is currently underway in Australia through the concept of Citizen Science into biometeorological research (Rajagopalan et  al., 2017). Having been employed in other disciplines ((Newman et al., 2012, Trumbull et al., 2000), Citizen Science in this field can facilitate public engagement in urban design and planning, and empower citizens to adopt different thermal adaptive strategies (Shooshtarian, Rajagopalan, & Sagoo, 2018). The researchers in this programme are collaborating with 12,200 local community members through 22 councils across Australia. Last but not least, it is unimaginable to overlook the potential role of smartphones and linked technologies to inform communities about UHI.  Twitter, Facebook and Instagram allow policymakers and advocates to present communities with customised awareness actions and plans at any time (Iping et al., 2019). Weather and navigation apps warn people in case of excess heat and assist pedestrians to navigate through cool routes.

2  C  ase Study 1: Regional Impact of Infill Development on the Variation of UHI: A Case Study in South East Queensland, Australia South East Queensland (SEQ) is the third largest urban region in Australia, with the most populated and a heavily urbanised conurbation in the state of Queensland (Simmons et al., 2018; Matthews & Marston, 2019). Figure 8.4 shows the location of SEQ and its local government areas (LGAs) in Australia. The region covers an area of 22,420 km2 and consists of Brisbane (state capital) and 11 local government areas (LGAs). These are grouped into four sub-regional groups including the following: 1. Metro sub-region (Brisbane, Logan, Moreton Bay and Redland) 2. Southern sub-region (Gold Coast) 3. Northern sub-region (Noosa and the Sunshine Coast) 4. Western sub-region (Ipswich, Locker Valley, Scenic Rim, Somerset and Toowoomba) SEQ has experienced a substantial population increase, from 1.9 million in 1991 to 3.5 million people in 2017 (ABS, 2019). Across the region, this growth has triggered massive urbanisation and land clearing. In the aftermath, SEQ has been exposed to a progressive increase in urban heat (Deilami & Kamruzzaman, 2017). To address these negative environmental impacts in tandem with accommodating the additional two million population of SEQ (2040), the state government has introduced multiple regional plans to guide urban development in the region. In this context, infill development and shrinking sprawl growth were implemented as the core policies to grow urban areas in SEQ. Initially, this was implemented through

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

187

Fig. 8.4  Location of SEQ and related local government areas in Australia

the 2005 Regional Plan as the first statutory regional plan for SEQ. The subsequent SEQ regional plans include South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009–2031 and Shaping SEQ – South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017 (Matthews & Marston, 2019). While SEQ has been developed under multiple urban strategic plans since then, no study has examined how these plans shaped the spatial pattern of relevant UHI effect. To address this need, imageries were used to examine the spatiotemporal variation of UHI on a regional scale. It is expected that this study will contribute insights for urban planners and policymakers into the regional impact of infill development on variation of UHI.

2.1  Data The MOD11A2 imageries were used to derive the LST of SEQ. The MOD11A2 is a product of MODIS images and provides an average 8-day per-pixel LST and emissivity with a 1 km spatial resolution. The MOD11A2 file comprises 11 sub-­ datasets (layers) including daytime and night-time LSTs, quality assurance assessment, observation times, view angles, bits of clear sky days and nights, and emissivities. The past studies widely confirmed the suitability of MOD11A2 images for LST analysis (Eleftheriou et  al., 2018; Fu & Weng, 2018). The comparison between MODIS LST and in situ measurements across various test sites indicated

188

K. Deilami et al.

the accuracy was better than 1 K with a root mean square (RMS) (of differences) less than 0.5 K in most cases (Wan, 2008). Two criteria to determine suitable dates to obtain the MODIS imageries were considered. First, UHI intensity is higher during the summertime than other seasons; therefore, December 2005–February 2006 and December 2018–February 2019 were considered as the desired time periods. Second, in order to use the MOD11A2 LST values, it is important to obtain the images with the utmost quality, which is presented by the quality layer (QC_day/night). This represents if the algorithm results (LST value of a pixel) are nominal, abnormal or met other defined conditions (Wan, 2006). These are known as quality flags. The pixel values of QC_ day vary between 0 and 255 (8-bit unsigned integer), which needs to be converted to binary codes to deliver the quality of LST values. This study used the AρρEEARS website to obtain the variation of MODIS quality data on the study area for the above time frame (USGS and NASA., 2019). Finally, night-time LST is advantageous in that UHI is the strongest during the night and there is no direct solar interaction and thus no dependency on the solar zenith angle (Streutker, 2002). Hence, this study used night-time LST instead of diurnal LST.  Consequently, this study downloaded two MOD11A2 Version 6 images (19 December 2018 and 3 December 2005) from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) website.

2.2  Methods The research adopted a four-step process: (1) assessment of MODIS LST daytime and night-time quality assurance; (2) derivation of LST from MODIS images; (3) extracting of UHI intensity; and (4) assessment of the spatial variation of LST and UHI intensity by comparative analysis from 2005 and 2018. This can reveal to what extent strategic urban planning and infill development were effective in mitigating the UHI effect on the regional scale. Table 8.2 shows the percentage of quality flags in the daytime and night-time LST of 2005 and 2018. In addition, the spatial variation of the quality flags is presented in Fig. 8.5. As shown in Table 8.2, there is no significant error in the LST values. Despite the acceptable quality, this study examined the spatial variation of LST and UHI in a two-tier manner. This was conducted to increase the reliability and validity of the findings. In the first tier, all the pixels regardless of the related accuracy were considered, and in the subsequent tier, the study focused only on pixels with good quality (QC-value = 0 as shown in Table 8.2). It is also worth mentioning that removing particular pixels due to LST error depends on the aim of the study. For example, while Stroppiana et  al. (2014) removed the pixels with LST error < = 3 K from analysis when studying the seasonal variation of LST in southern Italy, Khandelwal et al. (2018) removed the pixels with LST error < = 2 K to assess the LST variation due to change in elevation in Jaipur, India. Subsequently, Eq. 8.1 was used to convert the MODIS digital numbers to LST values in Celsius for ease of interpretation.

8  Resilience and Adaptation Strategies for Urban Heat at Regional, City and Local…

189

Table 8.2  The frequency of quality flags as observed in the daytime and night-time LST in 2005 and 2018 over the study area QC_Value (0–255) 0 2 3 17

65

81

129

145



% pixel Description (day 2005) Good quality 90.9 LST not produced due to cloud NA effects LST not produced primarily 1.3 due to reasons other than cloud 0.9 Average emissivity error < = 0.02 and average LST error < = 1 K 2.9 Average emissivity error < = 0.01 and average LST error < = 2 K 4 Average emissivity error < = 0.02 and average LST error < = 2 K NA Average emissivity error < = 0.01 and average LST error < = 3 K NA Average emissivity error < = 0.02 and average LST error < = 3 K

% pixel (day 2018) 52.3 0.01

% pixel (night 2005) 93.2 NA

% pixel (night 2018) 76 0.02

1.3

1.3

0.3

0.23

1.5

0.2

41.4

0.66

18.6

3.7

3.4

4.6

NA

NA

0.004

1.19

NA

0.2

Land surface temperature  C    MODISDigital Number  0.02   273.15



(8.1)

The obtained LST images were then used to calculate the spatial distribution of UHI intensity in SEQ. Accordingly, the LST images were classified into UHI and non-UHI zones using Eq. 8.2, where μ and δ represent the mean and standard deviation of LST in SEQ (Guha et al., 2018; Ma et al., 2010). LST    0.5   referred to UHI area



(8.2)

0