Search results

Globally, over 95% of fire related deaths and injuries occur in low- and middle-income countries. Within informal settlements, the risk of fire resulting in injury or death is particularly high. This paper examines fire risks in informal settlements in New Delhi and Cape Town, and tented informal settlements in Lebanon.

Our analysis draws on primary sources, secondary literature, statistical data and qualitative interviews.

The distribution of fire risk across urban societies is a fundamentally political issue. Residential fire risk can be tackled by accessible, affordable, safety-compliant housing. That said, important interim measures can be taken to mitigate fire risk. Some of the risks requiring attention are similar across our case studies, driven by high population densities; flammable housing materials; unreliable or inaccessible access to safe power sources; and – in the case of Cape Town and New Delhi particularly – the inability of fire services to reach sites of fire. However, these common risks are embedded in distinct social, economic and political contexts that must be placed at the center of any intervention. Interventions must also be aware that the risk of fire is not spread evenly within informal settlements, intersecting as it does with factors like gender, age, health and disability.

Informal settlement fires have been under-studied to date. The studies that do exist tend to operate within disciplinary silos. This paper represents an important interdisciplinary approach to fire within informal settlements, which grounds technical data, modeling and experiments in political, social and economic realities.

Effective leadership at the grassroots level can make a crucial difference to disaster risk reduction (DRR) at the local level. Guidance, however, is often not provided through the visible structures of local government but through alternative means of articulating power that is no less real and frequently more effective than more formal agencies. The purpose of this paper is to present a biography of one such community leader and his influence in the Philippines and how he is able to foster resilience and reduce risk. These “small men” stand in direct contrast to the more authoritarian, materialistic and reputedly corrupt nature of governance in general.

This paper adopts an historical-sociological approach, utilising archival sources as well as fieldwork to explore the relationship between consensual leadership, social capital and DRR in the Philippines.

Social capital and consensual forms of local leadership have their origin in the challenges posed by daily living in the Philippines. At the grassroots level, Filipino civil society can exhibit a vibrancy, self-reliance and innovation that has not been given proper recognition. In fact, local leadership, social capital and DRR are not unrelated aspects of culture but part of the “mutuality” that exists between people and environment in the archipelago.

This paper employs an innovative historical-sociological approach to explore the much maligned and often neglected nature of local unofficial leadership in the Philippines in the context of DRR.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether it is useful to tease apart the intimately related propositions of social production and social construction to guide thinking in the multidisciplinary study of disasters.

The authors address our question by reviewing literature on disasters in the social sciences to disambiguate the concepts of social production and social construction.

The authors have found that entertaining the distinction between social production and social construct can inform both thinking and action on disasters by facilitating critical exercises in reframing that facilitate dialog across difference. The authors present a series of arguments on the social production and construction of disaster and advocate putting these constructs in dialog with vulnerability frameworks of the social production of disasters.

This commentary contributes to disambiguating important theoretical and practical concepts in disaster studies. The reframing approach can inform both research and more inclusive disaster management and risk reduction efforts.

The transcript takes you on a journey of the book mapping vulnerability and the developments thereafter.

The transcript and video was developed in the context of a United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) project on the History of DRR.

This interview highlights how DRR is central to conflict settings as well.

The interview provides reflections on DRR in conflict settings.

In his March 1986 article in Newsweek, Russell Watson exposed “Queen Imelda” Marcos's life of indulgence as the Philippines' First Lady in the opening paragraph:Three thousand pairs of shoes, size eight and a half. Five shelves of unused Gucci handbags, still stuffed with paper, price tags still attached. Five hundred bras, mostly black, and a trunk full of girdles, 40 and 42 inches around the hips. Huge bottles of perfume, vats of Christian Dior wrinkle cream, a walk-in-safe littered with dozens of empty jewelry cases. When the palace of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos was opened to the public as a museum last week, foreigners and Filipinos alike gawked at what the former First Lady had left behind. “It was the worst case of conspicuous consumption I have ever seen,” said an American visitor, Rep. Stephen Solarz. “Compared to her, Marie Antoinette was a bag lady.” (Watson, 1986, p. 14)

Using Anthropological methodology to achieve an understanding from a “local point of view” the purpose of this paper is to explore how safety is established in what clearly is, at least from the outside, a risky everyday. Floods are a recurring problem for people in Jakarta. However, for poor families living on river banks in the city center the floods also constitute a necessary condition to create a viable livelihood. The floods keep land grabbers and urban developers at bay and keep costs for living low. For the families living in these areas there is a constant “trade off” between safety and risk taking with the purpose to create a living.

The methodology applied in the paper is conventional Anthropological field work. The material is collected through participant observation and formal interviews. The data produced are of an experience near quality which is analyzed in terms of how it addresses and relate to the infrastructural policies of Jakarta and the specific project of normalizing the river Ciliwung.

The fact that people perceive floods as normal part of everyday life does not mean that they are unproblematic. Furthermore, the flood mitigation programs that authorities claim are “normalizing” the river system actually increase riverbank settler’s problems.

Additional long-term field work on conditions for political mobilization inside and outside the formal political system in urban Jakarta is needed to better understand why organized resistance seldom materializes and how to strengthen the bargaining capacity of local communities in urban planning processes.

As flood mitigation programs demand relocation of people, the argument forwarded in the paper is that general social and economic security systems have to be strengthened, enhancing capacity for mobility, before instigating flood mitigation programs.

Studies of disasters and risk often portray local subjects as either victims or losers. In this paper a more nuanced picture is presented. Vulnerability as well as livelihood is related to floods. The paradoxical situation is that people’s vulnerability as well as safety is related to their embeddedness in local socio-economic networks. People are dependent on specific networks and a specific space to produce a livelihood. However, the same embeddedness makes their livelihood vulnerable to the demands of being relocated. If relocated their networks are scattered. Just offering alternative living space and economical remuneration for lost property is not sufficient to replace a lost livelihood. Relocation without a new form for subsistence economy creates new forms of vulnerability. Hence, relocation rather than flood is perceived as the main danger by people living on river banks in Jakarta.

The transcript is of one from a number of interviews with disaster risk reduction (DRR) “pioneers” carried out in 2022 as a part of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) project to record the history of the field. It aims to enable one of the “pioneers” to explain his role in the emergence of disaster studies and provide critical commentary on what he considers is wrong with current DRR approaches.

Terry Cannon was interviewed to explain the beginnings of his involvement in disasters research and to comment on his views on progress in the field of disaster risk reduction since his early work in the 1980s. The transcript and video were developed in the context of the UNDRR project on the history of DRR.

The interview provides an account of the origins of the book “At Risk” and why it was considered necessary. This is put into the context of how the field of DRR has emerged since the 1980s. It elicits opinions on what he considers the gaps in both his early work (especially in the book “At Risk” of which he was a co-author) and in the field of DRR recently.

It provides historical context on how early disaster research developed the alternative framework of “social construction” of disasters, in opposition to the idea that they are “natural”. It challenges some of the approaches that have emerged as DRR and has been institutionalised, including its increasing difficulty in supporting the ideas of social construction.