Household disaster management capacities in disaster prone II area of Mt. Slamet.

Diah S Dewanti,Dusadee Ayuwat,Sekson Yongvanit

doi:10.4102/jamba.v11i1.649

Abstract

Disaster prone II in Mt. Slamet, Indonesia presents the highest risk for human settlement. To live in this natural disaster-prone area, specific household characteristics are essential. Household capitals and transformation in process and structure were supported by the disaster management framework. However, households in disaster prone II area had limited assets and were required to identify factors influencing disaster management. To study the factors influencing household disaster management capacities, this research, using the sample measurement of Becker and Hursh-Cesar, collected data of 538 households spread across five villages in the disaster prone II area of Mt. Slamet. Sequential mixed methodology combining both qualitative and quantitative research methods were used: samples in the Rukun-Warga-level area were collected by a two-stage stratified random sampling, and to choose the sample of households systematic random sampling was employed. Path analysis through Stata was carried out to analyse the direct and indirect factors supporting disaster management capacity, and multicollinearity was tested before path analysis. This research found direct and indirect effects of household characteristics and household capitals on disaster management. This could be influenced by the transformation in process and the structure of the local government. The quantitative result has been confirmed by the result of the qualitative methodology. Social capital owned by households in disaster-prone area supports disaster management practices. The household relationship and networking access has been strongly supported by disaster management capacities. Disaster management capacities of households in disaster prone II areas could be improved by both internal and external factors. Internal factors include supporting the household members’ health and increasing the size of land and vehicle owning. Meanwhile, external factors has been applied by the policy published by government as to improve the social and cultural belief of households.

Highlights

It is essential for households in disaster-prone areas to have disaster management capacities to ensure their safety and survival when faced with hazardous events (Sutton & Tierney 2006)
Sustainable livelihoods approach by Department for International Development (DFID) explores with a pentagon of human capital, social capital, natural capital, physical capital and financial capital, which is influenced by outside policies, institutions and processes of living in a disaster area
As the study area was in the disaster prone II area, the population was spread across five subdistricts of 4268 households

Summary

Introduction

It is essential for households in disaster-prone areas to have disaster management capacities to ensure their safety and survival when faced with hazardous events (Sutton & Tierney 2006). The fourth framework element, ‘Live with hazard and risk’, is appropriate for households that lived in the area with the highest risk of hazard. This framework is integrated into the ‘environmental threats and opportunities’and accepts disasters as a part of life and protects their livelihoods. Household is the proper unit analysis applied in each of the sustainability livelihood approaches. Based on the literature review, the concept could be applied to support vulnerable households in areas prone to high risk of disasters

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion