Abstract

Abstract This paper provides an example of how communities can adapt to extreme forms of environmental change and uncertainty over the longer term. We analyse the interactions between scientists, communities and risk managers and examine the interpretation and communication of uncertain scientific information during a long-lived volcanic eruption in Tungurahua, Ecuador. This is complemented with a detailed study of the eruptions of 2006 and 2014, which exemplifies the complexity of interactions during periods of heightened volcanic activity. Our study describes how a ‘shadow network’ has developed outside of, but in interaction with, the formal risk management institutions in Ecuador, improving decision-making in response to heightened volcanic activity. The findings suggest that the interactions have facilitated important adaptations in the scientific advisory response during eruptions (near-real-time interpretation of the volcanic hazards), in hazard communication, and in the evacuation processes. Improved communication between stakeholders and the establishment of thresholds for evacuations have created an effective voluntary evacuation system unique to Tungurahua, allowing people to continue to maintain their livelihoods during heightened volcanic activity and associated periods of uncertainty. Understanding how shadow networks act to minimise the negative consequences of volcanic activity provides valuable insights for increasing societal resilience to other types of hazards.

Highlights

  • Volcanic hazards such as pyroclastic density currents (PDC; rapid, hot avalanches of volcanic rocks, ash and gases), lava flows and lahars can cause total devastation in their immediate path, so managing volcanic risk often requires the temporary displacement of communities around volcanoes

  • A growing body of literature highlights the need to understand the long term implications of volcanic activity for people’s livelihoods and wellbeing (e.g. Kelman and Mather, 2008; Hicks and Few, 2015; Thorvaldsdóttir and Sigbjörnsson, 2015; Armijos and Few, 2015) yet little attention has been paid so far to the local disaster risk management (DRM) systems and how these can evolve to reduce the negative impacts of volcanic activity on the lives and livelihoods of people living in close proximity to volcanoes

  • Risk governance around Tungurahua volcano has undergone an important transformation since 1999, shaped by a restructuring and decentralisation of the formal DRM system, improved monitoring and the creation of an informal network that has strong similarities to networks identified in other settings developed for natural resource management (Folke et al, 2005; Olsson et al, 2006)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Volcanic hazards such as pyroclastic density currents (PDC; rapid, hot avalanches of volcanic rocks, ash and gases), lava flows and lahars (volcanic mudflows) can cause total devastation in their immediate path, so managing volcanic risk often requires the temporary displacement of communities around volcanoes. From 2000 to 2006 volcanic activity at Tungurahua was characterised by intermittent periods of intense seismic activity followed by small Strombolian eruptions (discrete explosions) and ash falls, with subsequent rainfall-triggered remobilisation of ash as lahars, interspersed with periods of quiescence (Arellano et al, 2008) During these years, intense ash falls and lahars impacted farmers on the slopes of the volcano, destroying crops, killing animals and damaging access roads and other infrastructure (Le Pennec et al, 2012; Sword-Daniels et al, 2011). Settlement patterns, access to services and infrastructure, and livelihood activities in urban and rural areas on the slopes of the volcano, have all been impacted by —and had to change in response to—volcanic hazards in Tungurahua (Few et al, 2017) It is in this changing environment that formal and informal institutions have interacted through a ‘shadow. Network’ for DRM, which has played an important role in managing risk

Formal and informal interactions in disaster risk management
Research methods
Adaptations and interactions in the risk management system
The geophysical monitoring system and interpretations of volcanic activity
Community-based monitoring and communications
The ‘official’ risk management system
System responses to eruptions in 2006 and 2014
Findings
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call