Abstract
Disaster risk and subsequent loss and damage in Asia are increasing at an alarming rate, threatening socioeconomic gains. Arresting this rapid increase in exposure requires risk-informed development and urban planning—a challenging proposition complicated by multiple economic and political incentives. To reduce these risks, action at the national and regional levels must be complemented by action at the community level. Measuring community disaster resilience can help lead to novel and systemic investments that build community resilience. Our analysis of community flood resilience data finds deficiencies and potential for substantial improvements in community flood resilience investment across the region, with different recommendations for urban, peri-urban, and rural locations. Our evidence from case studies shows that interventions prioritized by the measurement-informed process are more likely to succeed and be sustainable and have cobenefits for community development.
Highlights
In 2017 alone, disasters caused a reported $9.4 billion worth of damage across the Asian region (CRED 2018); a figure that is likely a gross underestimation (Wirtz et al 2014, Guha-Sapir and Below 2002, Ladds et al 2017)
By utilizing the FRMC, we can assess the strengths and weaknesses for flood resilience and how community development is interdependent with flood resilience for selected themes
It explored the potential for measuring community disaster resilience, reporting on findings from a largescale measurement endeavor of 88 communities in five Asian countries
Summary
In 2017 alone, disasters caused a reported $9.4 billion worth of damage across the Asian region (CRED 2018); a figure that is likely a gross underestimation (Wirtz et al 2014, Guha-Sapir and Below 2002, Ladds et al 2017). The use of the term resilience in relation to disasters has increased exponentially over the last decade (Meerow and Newell 2015, Gostelow et al 2016) It initially drew on the psychology field, where the ideal of individual resilience to shocks was applied to community resilience (Berkes and Ross 2013). The concept was soon broadened, supported by academic research, to incorporate the ecological perspective, espoused by Holling (1973, 1996, 2001), which drew on fundamental ideas about linked social-ecological systems. This complemented thinking on the human dimension of natural disasters. Theory and experience in sustainable community development have contributed to the debate to identify the attributes of communities that enhance their resilience, such as social networks, communications, social capital, leadership, and culture (Berkes and Ross 2013)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
