Advancing policy coherence for disaster resilience in the SADC

Post-2015 global agendas; namely the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, the Paris Agreement, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (including Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)), pose a challenge to the coherence among Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Climate Change Adaptation, and Sustainable Development to achieve the common goal; disaster resilience. These agendas are more outcome-oriented with monitoring mechanisms than previous ones and require a coherent multi-stakeholder, cross-sectoral approach across government levels. Above all, the global indicators for monitoring the Sendai Framework have been adopted as SDG indicators in Goals 1, 11, and 13. Interlinkages between DRR, climate change, and sustainable development are observed from the integrated monitoring of agendas, which enhances coordination and coherence. Disaggregated data have revealed that major disaster mortality and economic losses in recent years have been triggered by weather-, climate-, and water-related disasters. More detailed data support evidence-based policymaking and promote coherence. To achieve Target E of the Sendai Framework, countries are developing DRR strategies to promote policy coherence with sustainable development and climate change. Both the number of national DRR strategies and alignment scores have increased over the years. DRR strategies and national adaptation plans (NAPs) should adopt a risk-informed, integrated approach to sustainable development through comprehensive planning and implementation. To achieve disaster resilience, national plans in these domains should be better integrated to maximize the effectiveness of actions toward disaster resilience and passed on to the sub-national level for implementation as place-based policies. Japanese experiences toward disaster resilience highlight interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary approaches by various stakeholders with technological innovation, which presents promising progress.

PurposePolicy coherence is a complex and tough task for many developing nations because their capacity to examine and deliver evidence-based inputs to policymaking is limited, and policy dialogue platforms need to be effectively used. Resolving these difficulties is a critical requirement for policy consistency. As a result, the study focuses on the level of policy coherence for climate change adaptation (CCA), disaster risk reduction (DRR) and sustainable development goals (SDG) in Sri Lanka and suggests routes for policy coherence for Resilience. This study aims to investigate the coherent approach of CCA, DRR and SDG; to identify concerns in policy documents addressing the coherence of CCA, DRR and SDG in local context; and to propose policy coherence suggestions for resilience in Sri Lanka.Design/methodology/approachMethodology comprises a review and content analysis of 17 policy and legal documents in Sri Lanka and a qualitative study. The qualitative approach consists of semistructured interviews that obtained deep and broad expertise knowledge with ten government representatives and stakeholders. Both content analysis and interview data were analyzed by using NVivo.FindingsIt was discovered that there are several issues with the coherence of policies in Sri Lanka, including the fragmented approach, lack of integration, inadequate coordination, limited resources and lack of monitoring and evaluation. The policies are inspired by international frameworks, and local implementations are not focused, leading to inadequate implementation of policies. The lack of development cooperation for the use of innovative approaches, such as climate-resilient infrastructure and environmentally friendly solutions for CCA and DRR, further aggravates the situation. Another concern is the lack of land use management and responsibility for the development of physical infrastructure for DRR integration with CCA. It is found that there is a limited community involvement which is vital for the implementation of policies. Local implementations are encouraged to fill the gaps in existing policies/acts. The analytical framework of the study is based on a preliminary examination of policy documents, a review of the literature and discussions with practitioners. The framework reflects the current situation of policy integration which addresses strategic, conceptual, institutional, operational and financial coherence. The research suggests pathways for achieving policy coherence in CCA, DRR and SDG in Sri Lanka, such as enhancing the strategic coherence by improving goals to increase the coherence within CCA, DRR and SDG; improving the credibility of the unified approach for developing DRR and CCA risk assessments; intensifying institutional cooperation and stakeholder management; improving the common monitoring and evaluation; establishing implementation strategies; and increasing the community involvement.Research limitations/implicationsThe study on policy coherence in Sri Lanka recommends increasing community and professional involvement, conducting more research, developing a national strategy, increasing capacity building, strengthening international collaboration and fostering multisectoral collaboration. These recommendations can help improve policy coherence between CCA, DRR and SDGs, align policies with national goals and priorities and improve implementation effectiveness. By implementing these recommendations, Sri Lanka can address the challenges of climate change and natural disasters and achieve SDGs.Practical implicationsThe study on policy coherence for resilience in Sri Lanka has practical implications, including improved coordination and resource allocation, increased capacity building, improved reputation and sustainability. By integrating CCA, DRR and SDGs, this study can help Sri Lanka become more resilient to climate change and natural disasters, achieve SDGs and become a responsible actor in the international community. These implications can contribute to a more sustainable future and ensure that development goals are achieved in a way that is resilient to climate change and natural disasters.Social implicationsIncreased community participation: the study emphasizes the importance of community involvement in the policy development process. This can help build trust between communities and government agencies, improve transparency and ensure that policies are developed in a way that is responsive to local needs and priorities.Originality/valueBased on the identified existing loopholes in the policies and pathways to policy coherence, the issues in policymaking could be overcome. It could be used to establish strong linkages between policies based on CCA, DRR and SDGs to achieve long-term resilience.

This article considers the concepts of sustainability and sustainable development in relation to disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. We conceptualize sustainability from a social systemic perspective, that is, from a perspective that encompasses the multiple functionalities of a social system and their interrelationships in particular environmental contexts. The systems perspective is applied in our consideration and analysis of disaster risk reduction (DRR), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development (SD). Section “Sustainability and Sustainable Development” introduces briefly sustainability and sustainable development, followed by a brief presentation of the theory of complex social systems (Section “Social System Model”). The theory conceptualizes interdependent subsystems, their multiple functionalities, and the agential and systemic responses to internal and external stressors on a social system. Section “Case Studies of Response to Stressors” considers disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA), emerging in response to one or more systemic stressors. It illustrates these with disaster risk reduction in the cases of food and chemical security regulation in the EU. CCA is illustrated by initiatives and developments on the island of Gotland, Sweden and in the Gothenburg Metropolitan area, which go beyond a limited CCA perspective, taking into account long-term sustainability issues. Section “Sustainable Development as a Societal Development System” discusses the limitations of DRR and CCA, not only their technical limitations but economic, socio-cultural, and political limitations, as informed from a sustainability perspective. It is argued that DRRs are only partial subsystems and must be considered and assessed in the context of a more encompassing systemic perspective. Part of the discussion is focused on the distinction between sustainable and non-sustainable DRRs and CCAs. Section “Concluding Remarks” presents a few concluding remarks about the importance of a systemic perspective in analyzing DRR and CCA as well as other similar subsystems in terms of sustainable development.

Disaster and climate change resilience: A bibliometric analysis

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

The Rockefeller Foundation launched 100 Resilient Cities (100RC) in 2013 to build worldwide urban resilience. The 100RC program aims to implement urban resilience under the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. These frameworks link disaster resilience and disaster risk reduction to issues of vulnerability, climate change, livelihoods, rebuilding, and equity. Achieving disaster resilience and risk reduction requires more than building back better, or bouncing back from disaster: social equity, participation and livelihoods must also be advanced. Using a pathways approach related to narratives of disaster vulnerability and risk, this paper analyzes the resilience policies developed to support disaster risk reduction under the program. Evaluating member city Resilient Strategies plans using directed and summative content analysis, this research assesses whether the 100RC program emphasized vulnerability and risk narratives in its disaster risk reduction approaches. These results reveal the differences produced among member cities – and from expectations of advancing social equity, livelihoods and participation – due to the role of actors and power expressed in the policy design and implementation. The paper concludes with recommendations to support urban disaster resilience using the Sendai Framework.

Effective Community Engagement Approaches for Climate Change Adaptation in the Philippines

The earthquake that struck the Japanese port city of Kobe on January 17, 1995, was the most severe quake ever to strike a modern urban area. It has become the most studied, analyzed, and discussed natural disaster in history. What I propose to add to this dialogue is an economist's overview of what he saw in Kobe 19 months after the event and what he learned during the ensuing 6 months.

Natural disasters are increasingly being integrated into development processes. Disasters are often the result of inadequate development to mitigate the effects of extreme natural events. The connection between disaster and development is clear in Tanzania, where disasters often derail development initiatives, jeopardize successes, and reverse progress. This article examines the interplay between development and disasters in Tanzania, focusing on how economic inequalities, inadequate infrastructure, and social inequalities increase vulnerability to natural hazards. Using a comprehensive documentary analysis approach, this study examines existing literature, reports and data to identify key factors that influence vulnerability to disasters. The theoretical framework includes vulnerability theory, disaster risk reduction (DRR) frameworks, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), resilience theory, social constructivist theory, and the political economy of disasters. The results show that socioeconomic status, gender, and geographical location have a significant impact on the impact of disasters. Furthermore, the study highlights the urgent need to integrate disaster risk reduction into development planning to increase resilience and reduce vulnerability. Integrating DRR strategies into development efforts can mitigate the negative impacts of disasters and contribute to long-term sustainable development. The research also highlights the importance of addressing social and economic inequalities, as these factors increase vulnerability and hinder recovery efforts. The article’s conclusion argues for holistic approaches that combine economic development, infrastructure improvement and social justice to reduce disaster risks and promote sustainable development in Tanzania. By adopting comprehensive and inclusive strategies, Tanzania can build resilient communities capable of withstanding and recovering from natural disasters. This study provides valuable insights for policymakers, development practitioners and researchers, highlighting the interactions between development and disaster and the need for integrated approaches to achieve sustainable development and disaster resilience.

“Disaster resilience” has been conceptualized in different context of social, ecological, and environmental interactions. The term came into light after 2005 when 168 nations agreed to adopt Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 to build the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 was endorsed in 2015 to strengthen resilience by implementing integrated and inclusive measures for disaster risk reduction as a successor instrument to the Hyogo Framework. The same year almost all nations agreed on the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Nepal, one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries, is also committed to implement both post-2015 agendas. With many themes overlapping between the two global agendas, there are many opportunities to integrate sustainable development with disaster risk reduction. For a country like Nepal which has limited financial and technological capacities to work separately on the two global agendas, “resilience” would be an intersection and thus disaster risk reduction can be integrated with the sustainable development goals of nations. This chapter explores the initiatives of disaster resilience in Nepal and discusses its linkage with sustainable development goals. The chapter also assesses opportunity and challenges for integrating disaster resilience in planning for sustainable development and concludes that if all the 753 local governments of Nepal work with honesty and transparency for the next 13 years by integrating the risk of natural and nonnatural disasters in the development planning and implementation, Nepal’s dream of generating, sharing, and sustaining prosperity will come true.

The concept of resilience has been widely used in the disaster risk reduction perspective. Disaster resilience is the capacity to prepare, respond and recover from the impacts of disasters. Building disaster resilience dealt with proofing, adaptation and mitigation. It improves one’s ability to minimise the effects of adverse events. Disaster risk management ensure the risk reduction, enhance resilience, in addition to building effective response and recovery mechanism. The United Nations Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA): Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disaster is the agreed framework for making the world safer from the impacts of disasters and building resilience.In Pakistan, the earthquake of 2005 was an eye opening natural event, which particularly highlighted the country vulnerability to various risks. This has shifted the Government approach towards more proactive and as a consequence national disaster management ordinance, national disaster management authority was established as a focus body to chalk out national DRR agenda. In the country, there are certain key challenges in building disaster resilience including exposure to hazard events, low level of risk awareness, low level of development risk conscious, absence of multi-hazard risk assessment, lack of mainstreaming DRR in policies and plans and poor DRR capacity in the context of prevention, preparedness, response and recovery. This chapter discusses the concept and evolution of disaster resilience, various dimensions, indicators, linkages of disaster resilience and environmental system, disaster resilience and sustainability, disaster resilience and climate risk. The chapter also highlighted the disaster risk reduction legislations and resilience issues in Pakistan. Finally, the chapter focuses on how to build disaster resilience at various levels and promote adaptive strategies.KeywordsResilienceCapacityVulnerabilityBuilding resilienceAdaptive capacity

Climate change and climate-sensitive disasters pose significant risks to human health. As climate change continues to intensify, the frequency and severity of various climatesensitive hazards is expected to increase. Increasing climate-sensitive hazards such as floods, typhoons and outbreaks of climate-sensitive diseases, present pertinent and growing risks that impact health. These rising health risks from climate change and climate-sensitive disasters are fast becoming a critical concern for global health. To address these risks, there is increasing need for health actors to engage in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA). DRR and CCA work towards common aims of reducing health impacts of climate change and climate-sensitive disasters. A large body of research recommends linking DRR and CCA to ensure coherent, effective, and efficient responses to current and future risks. Much remains to be gained from strengthening joint DRR and CCA action, and effectively linking the two approaches. Linking these approaches in health is particularly pertinent as health is a vital end-point of disasters and climate change, and important cross cutting issue in DRR and CCA. Currently there is a significant knowledge gap surrounding how DRR and CCA can be linked in health. There is limited published research empirically examining how these approaches can be linked in real-world contexts. Furthermore, linking DRR and CCA in health has been identified as a key challenge in managing health risks in resource-constrained countries, such as the Philippines. Therefore, this research empirically investigated how DRR and CCA can be linked in health in the Philippines. This research applied qualitative methods through a Case Study of the Philippines. Data collection methods used include: observations; policy analysis; 33 national, 13 regional and 10 local key informant interviews; and a national expert workshop. To supplement the Case Study seven global informant interviews were conducted. To understand how DRR and CCA could be linked in health, the research first investigated the overarching priorities and gaps for these approaches in the Philippines. Strengthening community implementation was the priority for DRR in health. Comparatively, strengthening the national programme was the priority for CCA in health. Identified gaps in DRR in health included inter- and intra-sectoral collaboration, and little involvement of the whole health sector in reducing disaster risk. Key gaps within CCA in health included limited governance and national leadership, and limited research to advocate for and inform CCA in health. These differing priorities present potential challenges for linking DRR and CCA in health. Additional challenges for linking these approaches highlighted in the Case Study included: the differing different status of implementation, and limited collaboration and coordination between DRR and CCA in health. Resilience was explored as a conceptual synergy for strengthening joint DRR and CCA action in health. The concept represents a possible uniting goal for the two approaches. However, stakeholders noted significant challenges in using resilience as the basis for a shared framework. To strengthen DRR and CCA links in health, resilience needs greater clarity, a shared operational definition among stakeholders and measurable indicators. Technical and operational synergies were identified as areas for linking DRR and CCA in health. These were categorised into no-regrets and climate-sensitive links. No-regrets links referred to those with net benefits for improving health, and reducing both disaster and climate change risks. These were particularly recognised as linked DRR and CCA by stakeholders at the local level. Climate-sensitive links represent specific activities which would require engagement of both DRR and CCA stakeholders; and explicit inclusion of both climate change and disaster risk data, as well as both DRR and CCA expertise. Finally, to enhance DRR and CCA links in health key recommendations from this research include: (1) strengthen no-regrets options as a starting point for linked DRR and CCA in health; (2) develop guidelines and a formal mechanism for linking; (3) prioritise local-level linkages; and (4) strengthen the empirical evidence base of how DRR and CCA in health can be linked. This research has contributed to the understanding of how DRR and CCA in health can be linked through examination of a country-level example. It provides concrete examples of application of, and challenges with, DRR and CCA links in health. Further, it lays the groundwork for future research and action towards linking these approaches.

Climate change, through extreme weather events, is increasing the risk and impacts of disasters. An increase in extreme weather events underscores the importance of bringing coherence in efforts to reduce the risk of disasters and to adapt to the impacts of the changing climate. The linkages between disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) and the need to integrate the two policy areas are well documented in the literature. However, the implementation of DRR and CCA measures continues in isolation. This article seeks to contribute to the ongoing efforts to bring coherence between DRR and CCA by identifying factors that would make it easy to integrate the two policy areas. An exploratory‐sequential mixed methods design was used to collect data from 41 participants from 10 of the 16 SADC Member States and two international cooperating partners. Participants identified political will and commitment, policy and legislative frameworks, provision of resources and capacities, addressing institutional barriers, and an improvement in communication and coordination as the main factors that could enhance the integration of government organizations for DRR and CCA. This paper submits that successful integration of institutions responsible for DRR and CCA, particularly government institutions, can be achieved when these factors are addressed.

Science to policy of ecosystem based adaptation to manage disaster risk reduction in the context of IWRM is very important in sustainability science concept. It will explain how the science and evidence-base of ecosystem based disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA) could more effectively inform and influence development decisions. Sustainability Science can be defined as understanding the fundamental character of interactions between nature and society. In brief definition, a sustainable development as the ’ability to make development sustainable—to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. Understanding core concept related to ecosystems, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, resilience and sustainable development is very important, because: it linkages between ecosystems, disaster risk reduction, and resilience; (2) it linkages between climate change, disasters and ecosystem-based adaptation; (3) ecosystem management approaches/tools in reducing disaster risk and adapting to climate change impact; and (4) mainstreaming Eco-DRR/CCA into development policy, plans and strategies. The paper was also to remind us that ecosystem-based DRR/CCA is often under valued and under-appreciated as part of a comprehensive approach to risk reduction.

A policy coherence framework for food security, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction in South Africa