Identifying and providing basic solutions using a collaborative approach in earthquake-stricken cities of Iran has not yet been addressed. This article focuses on an area of practice and views disaster risk management from the point of view of volunteer groups to illustrate how the main components of disaster risk management affect the strengthening of public participation. In this article, Buein Zahra, a small city in Iran, is considered as a high-risk earthquake zone. The basic components of risk management are identified, namely public awareness, knowledge, skills, enabling environment, organisational development and social participation. An assessment of these indicators was done, and multidimensional relationships were established between them to enable an increase in the capacity for public participation. Accordingly, the results indicate that a mere increase in public awareness and knowledge, as seen today, and an improvement in enabling environment, although affecting disaster risk reduction, cannot by themselves lead to real public participation. Organisational development and strengthening of crisis coping skills are two key components to improving participation during crises in the small cities of Iran. According to the results of this study, institutional capacity and unreal political commitment have caused inefficiency of public participation in earthquake preparedness.
Iran is exposed to a high level of seismic hazards throughout the country. It has become evident that a long-term vision is required to reduce the level of risk for the population (ISDR
Basic goals of the national earthquake risk reduction programme.
Existing experience has indicated that after a disaster, urban management does not have the necessary effectiveness. Disasters are growing in domain and impact as a result of the combination of increasing population density and asset stocks, inappropriate and exploitative land use, unplanned settlements and lack of public awareness on risk reduction by authorities and citizens at large (ISDR
This article consists of four parts. Firstly, the primary components of earthquake risk management are investigated. Secondly, the research methodology is explained. Thirdly, the primary components of disaster risk management (DRM) are assessed and their effects on strengthening community participation in Buein Zahra are analysed. Finally, a conceptual model and suggestions for improving participation are presented.
Risk is the probability of damaging events that is derived from the confrontation of risks, social vulnerability and nature (Smith
The Hyogo Framework provides comprehensive action-oriented policy guidance based on a comprehensive understanding of disaster risks that arise from human vulnerability to natural hazards. In the preparatory negotiations on the framework, states stressed the need for specific means, including indicators, to measure progress toward the reduction of disaster risks. In particular, it was requested in Paragraph 33c that the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) system, supported by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) secretariat, coordinate the development of ‘generic, realistic and measurable indicators’ for DRR. It encouraged states to develop and refine such indicators for national use. Indicators, benchmarks and targets are commonly accepted tools to focus and guide development investments, the Millennium Development Goals being an important example.
Finally, in the second and third principles, knowledge and awareness were emphasised and the skill component was considered as a subset of individual capacity building.
Participation and risk management cycle.
Knowledge is created by accumulating and organising information with respect to breadth, depth and amount. Information is ‘data with meaning’ that makes a difference and facts, data and information are necessary mediums for eliciting and constructing knowledge (Weichselgartner & Pigeon
Even when academic and practitioner content is freely accessible, it often remains empirical, unstructured and meaningless facts. As a result, although risk information is being generated and disseminated on a large scale, we do not know how far it reaches and whether it changes risk perceptions and public awareness levels (Weichselgartner & Pigeon
This level relates to the skills, experience and knowledge of people that allow them to perform (Prevention Web
Sometimes referred to as the ‘societal’ or ‘institutional’ level, capacities at the level of an enabling environment (EE) relate to the broader system within which individuals and organisations function (Wignaraja
Priorities for actions of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (2016).
Priorities | Actions |
---|---|
Necessary mechanisms and incentives promote disaster risk management | Land use and urban planning guideline including urban planning, land degradation and informal and non-permanent housing, access to basic healthcare services |
Building codes | Standardisation of building materials; retrofitting and rebuilding; rehabilitation and reconstruction practices |
The resilience of critical infrastructure | Water, transportation and telecommunications infrastructure, educational facilities, hospitals and other health facilities Development of early warning systems |
The organisational level of capacity comprises the internal policies, arrangements, procedures and frameworks that allow an organisation to operate and deliver on its mandate and that enable the coming together of individual capacities to work together and achieve goals. An EE pertains to the broader system within which individuals and organisations function and that facilitates or hampers their existence and performance. This system comprises institutions (CaDRI
For effective compliance as well as for sustainability characteristics such as justice or participation, the objective of DRR must be complemented by core organisational objectives (Spangenberg
Institutional development characteristics mainstream and integrate disaster risk reduction within and across all sectors.
Characteristics | Features |
---|---|
Organisations | To allocate the necessary resources, including finance and logistics, as appropriate, at all levels of administration for the development and implementation of disaster risk reduction strategies, policies, plans, laws and regulations in all relevant sectors |
To support the role of public service workers to establish or strengthen coordination and funding mechanisms and procedures for relief assistance and plan and prepare for post-disaster recovery and reconstruction | |
To strengthen the capacity of local authorities to evacuate persons living in disaster-prone areas | |
Mechanisms | To carry out an assessment of the technical, financial and administrative disaster risk management capacity |
To formulate public policies, where applicable, aimed at addressing the issues of prevention or relocation, where possible, of human settlements in disaster prone zones, subject to national law and legal systems | |
To ensure the continuity of operations and planning, including social and economic recovery and the provision of basic services in the post-disaster phase | |
To establish a mechanism of case registry and a database of mortality caused by disaster in order to improve the prevention of morbidity and mortality | |
Orientations | Promote local frameworks of laws, regulations and public policies that, by defining roles and responsibilities, guide the public and private sectors |
To promote public scrutiny and encourage institutional debates | |
To promote the integration of disaster risk reduction considerations and measures in financial and fiscal instruments | |
To enhance recovery schemes to provide psychosocial support and mental health services for all people in need |
‘Community’ is understood as:
a group of people that may or may not live within the same area, village or neighborhood, share a similar culture, habits and resources. Communities are groups of people also exposed to the same threats and risks such as disease, political and economic issues and natural disasters. (IFRC
Disaster risk reduction requires engagement and partnership by all of society. It also requires empowerment and inclusive, accessible and non-discriminatory participation, paying special attention to people disproportionately affected by disasters, especially the poorest. Gender, age, disability and cultural perspectives should be integrated into all policies and practices, and women and youth leadership should be promoted. In this context, special attention should be paid to the improvement of organised voluntary work of citizens (UNISDR
Among the measures to be considered for the achievement of this goal are the choice of the most appropriate participatory system depending on the context, an inclusive approach, the adoption of procedural guarantees and the promotion of DRR among the population including through training and education (Pietropaolo
These factors can be translated as the basic components of DRR. Neglect of the examined aspects has indeed undermined, in a plurality of contexts, legislative and policy efforts to provide for effective community engagement in such a way as to impair the ultimate goal of building resilience.
Important factors in the effectiveness of community participation.
Challenge | Good practices |
---|---|
Tokenistic participatory systems | Even though some advantages can be identified in establishing institutionalised mechanisms, depending on the context, autonomous systems of community consultation might offer a more solid basis for community involvement |
Incomplete assessments | All-inclusive approach Possibility to co-opt experts for specific sessions Entrusting each group with a specific field of analysis Separation of women and men during consultations when necessary Engaging community leaders as members and not chiefs of the DRR process |
Procedural exclusion | Ensuring participation throughout all the phases of the DRR process and not just the final stages Clearly shaping and communicating the community’s tasks and powers in the DRR process Informing community members of the reasons for not adopting their suggestions |
Community exclusion because of lack of interest or capacities | Engaging local media Organising events to sensitise on DRR Engaging community leaders Promoting volunteerism Organising trainings Promoting university courses on DRR Establishing knowledge management centres to facilitate community access to relevant information |
DRR, disaster risk reduction.
This study is part of a voluntary project entitled ‘Creating Community Emergency Response Volunteers and Improving DRM in Buein Zahra’; it concentrated on an area of practice and viewed DRM through the eye of volunteer groups.
Surveying based on the field collection method was used to determine the impact of the basic components of risk management on social participation. The data collection tool was a self-made questionnaire based on the framework ‘Guidance on Measuring the Reduction of Disaster Risks and the Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action’, and data collection took place in April and May 2017.
The survey was designed to evaluate how residents perceive their DRM at local level and what factors actually influence their community participation. This survey questionnaire, which contained 113 questions, asked about the sense of satisfaction and level of dedicated and adequate resources DRM. It was completed by approximately 480 participants from Buein Zahra.
The statistical population is all the citizens of the city of Buein Zahra, which is 18 310 according to the figures calculated in coordination with the Buein Zahra city council and municipality under a voluntary project entitled ‘Creating Community Emergency Response Volunteers and Improving DRM in Buein Zahra’.
Because the main objective of the project was to investigate how to improve public participation in DRM from the viewpoint of voluntary groups, non-probability sampling (voluntary sampling) was used (Vehovar, Toepoel & Steinmetz
On the day of the gathering, firstly the importance of creating community emergency response volunteers was described, and efforts were made to ensure that contributors answered the questions carefully. The volunteers also used the guidance of the research group in the hall to answer questions in case of ambiguity.
An interesting aspect of this survey was the presence of different classes and ages during the gathering. The volunteer sample distribution is shown in
Sample community information based on age, sex and education.
Variable | Sample (%) |
---|---|
1-1-1 | |
Female | 52.21 |
Male | 47.79 |
2-1-1 | |
<65 | 2.91 |
65–45 | 30.0 |
44–25 | 36.87 |
24–15 | 26.87 |
≤14 | 3.55 |
3-1-1 | |
Illiterate | 0.62 |
Primary | 4.38 |
High school | 7.08 |
Diploma | 32.29 |
Associate’s degree | 16.04 |
Bachelor’s degree | 22.3 |
Master’s degree | 17.29 |
Although the Hyogo Framework provides action guidance, based on a comprehensive understanding of disaster risks, there is still a need for specific tools to measure these indicators. For this purpose, governments are encouraged to develop indicators, benchmarks and targets to measure at national to local levels. The study Indicators of Progress: Guidance on Measuring the Reduction of Disaster Risks and the Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action was launched by UNISDR in 2008 for this purpose. However, while the indicators for the Strategic Goals of the Hyogo Framework focus solely on national-level actions, the indicators for the Priorities for Action can be formulated for local and regional levels as well.
Based on this, a set of suggested indicators were proposed to achieve the Hyogo Framework’s five priorities for action. National and local organisations are encouraged to actively use these indicators, in accordance with their mandated areas.
‘Indicators’ are defined here as an explicit measure of an important factor relevant to the subject of disaster risk and its reduction, where the indicator can be used to monitor changes in the status of that factor.
Many of the important factors for which indicators are required will be rather qualitative. Consider the potential indicator ‘Dedicated and adequate resources are available to implement disaster risk reduction plans at all administrative levels’. Its value can only be ‘yes’ or ‘no’, but either of these answers could be misleading, because for example a country with 95% compliance would still need to report ‘no’. One way to address this problem is to qualitatively assess the indicator using a graduated five-point scale from ‘no/minor progress’ through to ‘full/substantial achievement’.
Five-level assessment tool for use in grading achievement of qualitative factors in indicators.
Level | Generic description of achievement | Examples of an assessment of the indicator ‘A strategy for data provision for disaster risk reduction is in place’ |
---|---|---|
5 | Comprehensive achievement has been attained, with the commitment and capacity to sustain efforts at all levels. | Systematic, properly resourced processes for data collection and dissemination are in place, with evaluation, analysis and improvements being routinely undertaken. Plans and commitments are publicised and the work is well integrated into other programmers. |
4 | Substantial achievement has been attained, but with some recognised deficiencies in commitment, financial resources or operational capacities. | Processes for data collection and dissemination are in place for all hazards and most vulnerability factors, but there are shortcomings in dissemination and analysis that are being addressed. |
3 | There is some commitment and capacity to achieving DRR but progress is not substantial. | There is a systematic commitment to collecting and archiving hazard data, but little awareness of data needs for determining vulnerability factors, and a lack of systematic planning and operational skills. |
2 | Achievements have been made but are relatively small or incomplete, and while improvements are planned the commitment and capacities are limited. | Some data collection and analysis has been done in the past, but in an ad hoc way. There are plans to improve data activities, but resources and capacities are very limited. |
1 | Achievements are minor and there are few signs of planning or forward action to improve the situation. | There is little awareness of the need to systematically collect and analyse data related to disaster events and climatic risks. |
DRR, disaster risk reduction.
The indicators listed in
In the present study, the only added index to the proposed indicators was the skill index, which, according to the World Health Organization’s guide, became the operational definition and was added with a five-point Likert scale.
Criteria and basic indicators of earthquake risk reduction.
Indicators | Subindicators | N | í |
---|---|---|---|
Knowledge | Academia’s best contribution to problem resolution | 12 | 0.74 |
Informal knowledge | |||
Public awareness | Consistency and standard messaging | 14 | 0.78 |
Legitimacy and credibility | |||
Scalability | |||
Sustainability | |||
Skills | Decision-making and problem-solving | 22 | 0.83 |
Creative thinking and critical thinking | |||
Communication and interpersonal relationships | |||
Self-awareness and empathy | |||
Coping with emotions and stressors | |||
Enabling environment | Necessary mechanisms and incentives promote disaster risk management | 24 | 0.75 |
Building codes | |||
The resilience of critical infrastructure | |||
Organisational development | Organisations | 18 | 0.76 |
Mechanisms | |||
Orientations | |||
Community participation | Tokenistic participation systems | 25 | 0.81 |
Incomplete assessments | |||
Procedural exclusion | |||
Community exclusion because of a lack of interest or capacity |
, Cronbach’s
, 0.7 ≤
This article followed all ethical standards for research without direct contact with human or animal subjects.
A descriptive analysis of the primary components of the DRM items is shown in
Cluster classification of the basic components of disaster risk management.
Indicators | Cluster classification of component levels |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Low | Medium | High |
||
24.74 | 36.81 | 38.45 | ||
Formal knowledge | 26.30 | 35.54 | 38.16 | |
Informal knowledge | 23.17 | 38.09 | 38.74 | |
21.85 | 31.64 | 46.51 | ||
Consistency and standard messaging | 19.10 | 31.54 | 49.36 | |
Scalability | 12.13 | 35.99 | 51.88 | |
Legitimacy and credibility | 32.22 | 28.57 | 39.21 | |
Sustainability | 23.95 | 30.45 | 45.60 | |
40.66 | 33.64 | 25.70 | ||
Decision-making and problem-solving | 42.82 | 37.54 | 19.64 | |
Creative thinking and critical thinking | 41.39 | 33.76 | 24.85 | |
Interpersonal relationships | 27.59 | 32.97 | 39.44 | |
Self-awareness and empathy | 46.26 | 29.03 | 24.71 | |
Coping with emotions and stressors | 45.24 | 34.91 | 19.85 | |
44.99 | 26.99 | 28.02 | ||
Tokenistic participatory systems | 38.75 | 30.10 | 31.15 | |
Incomplete assessments | 41.05 | 28.97 | 29.98 | |
Procedural exclusion | 52.75 | 24.01 | 23.24 | |
Community exclusion | 47.42 | 24.87 | 27.71 | |
37.95 | 36.49 | 25.56 | ||
Necessary mechanisms and incentives | 37.35 | 37.51 | 25.14 | |
Building codes | 32.11 | 36.01 | 31.88 | |
The resilience of critical infrastructure | 44.39 | 35.96 | 19.65 | |
44.16 | 33.30 | 22.54 | ||
Organisations | 44.01 | 34.12 | 21.87 | |
Mechanisms | 48.93 | 32.54 | 18.53 | |
Orientations | 39.55 | 33.23 | 27.22 |
, distribution percentage of responses.
, sum total is equal to 100.
Respondents’ disaster risk management components.
Indicators | Mean | Item average | Mean difference | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge | 480 | 43.5 | 30.0 | + 7.90 | 14.70 | 0.00 |
Awareness | 480 | 54.8 | 35.0 | + 13.60 | 33.25 | 0.00 |
Skills | 480 | 41.3 | 55.0 | −8.10 | −15.03 | 0.00 |
Community participation | 480 | 47.3 | 62.5 | −9.60 | −22.69 | 0.00 |
Enabling environment | 480 | 49.3 | 60.0 | −5.68 | −10.69 | 0.01 |
Organisation development | 480 | 28.4 | 45.0 | −10.90 | −26.17 | 0.00 |
,
According to
Now, with the advancement of various media, it seems that a small city such as Buein Zahra is well covered, and improving the sustainability and legitimacy of the state-owned media can lead to more effective communication.
The knowledge component indicates that about 38% of the population samples stated that the related academic and non-academic knowledge was provided and researches and reports about earthquake and fault activity were available. The research reports present a detailed assessment of the current situation in different places. In this indicator, academic research is in a better position than non-academic research.
The 22 skill indicators showed a low level among the volunteer citizens, so that about 75% of society had moderately lower skills.
Among the subindicators, effective communication and interpersonal relationship skills were in a better situation, but the rest did not show an acceptable status.
The situation of social participation suggests that about 70% of the sample population believed that the necessary grounds for social participation were not provided. Among the subindicators, procedural exclusion, community exclusion, incomplete assessments and tokenistic participatory systems had the lowest averages.
The 24 indicators of EE showed a medium downward situation, where the subindicator ‘resilience of critical infrastructure’ had a less acceptable level and the building codes had an acceptable average status.
The results presented in
In addition, based on
By using multivariate linear regression analysis, the linear combination of the relationship between independent variables and dependent variable can be predicted. Although in this way the direct impact of each variable could be predicted, the indirect effects, the conceptual and theoretical model of research has not been formed.
Accordingly, the path analysis method was used. The path analysis, first developed by Wright (
Empirical model of factors affecting participation in disaster risk management.
Correlation coefficients of disaster risk management variables.
Variable | PP | Awareness | Skill | OD | Knowledge | EE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Awareness | 0.16 | - | - | - | - | - |
Skill | 0.19 | 0.05 | - | - | - | - |
OD | 0.23 | 0.14 | 0.17 | - | - | - |
Knowledge | 0.04 | 0.22 | 0.19 | 0.15 | - | - |
EE | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 0.14 | - |
OD, organisational development; EE, enabling environment; PP, public participation.
, Matrix of correlation coefficients of variables.
The effects of disaster risk management variables on public participation.
Variables | Direct effect | Indirect effect | Non-causal effect | Total causal effect | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Awareness | 0.00 | 0.026 | 0.130 | 0.026 | 0.16 |
Skill | 0.17 | 0.004 | 0.016 | 0.174 | 0.19 |
OD | 0.19 | 0.020 | 0.020 | 0.210 | 0.23 |
Knowledge | 0.00 | 0.005 | 0.035 | 0.005 | 0.04 |
EE | 0.00 | 0.026 | 0.154 | 0.026 | 0.18 |
OD, organisational development; EE, enabling environment.
,
The different types of impact on public participation were calculated as follows:
The direct impact of the OD is equal to 0.19, which indicates that for each unit of change in its value, the participation rate will change by 0.19 units. The skill variable also has a direct impact on participation of 0.17.
Awareness affected participation through three paths: firstly through OD (0.11); secondly through EE and then OD; thirdly through EE, OD and then skill. With regard to the direction of the path coefficient, these effects are incremental, that is, with the increase of awareness, the participation rate will also increase. Knowledge also affected participation through three paths: firstly through awareness, EE and OD; secondly through awareness, EE, OD and skill; thirdly through awareness and OD. In an EE, two paths are recognisable: one through OD and the other through OD and skill.
The skill variable has both direct and indirect effects. For indirect effects, two directions (A and B) can be considered. In Direction A, the skill variable has an impact on participation through knowledge, awareness, EE and OD. In Direction B, through knowledge, awareness and OD, a path is recognisable. Organisational development has an impact on public participation, both directly with the coefficient 0.19 and indirectly through the skill variable with path coefficient 0.14. In sum, based on the results of the total impact coefficient, we can say that OD, skill, awareness, EE and knowledge have the most impact on public participation in Buein Zahra. Also according to the empirical model, the variables OD and skill were found to be middle variables and the variables awareness, EE and knowledge were detected as external variables.
Today, the DRM strategies in Iran are growing. As part of this change, centralised planning is being replaced with community-based planning. The reason is that with a state-oriented view and centralised planning, the elaboration and implementation of strategies occurs in a top-down manner; it imposes many costs on the state and is not sufficiently effective. However, in the community-based orientation, people have a significant role and influence at different stages of disaster management. Moreover, building resilient communities involves ensuring that communities and community members have there sources, capacities and capabilities necessary to bounce back and recover in a manner that minimises disruption and facilitates growth (Paton & Johnston
For organisational development, in line with Pietropaolo (
Secondly, some functional mechanisms and social participation procedures in risk management have been predicted, such as environmental NGOs or earthquake and safety manoeuvres, but they only show levels of apparent features of participation, representing symbolic participation, which does not have an impact on real public participation during the disaster. Strengthening organisational development, as a platform for local collaborative activities, requires the political will to delegate some responsibilities to civil institutions and policies to facilitate the activities of volunteer groups in various social areas. The adoption of participatory policies and its related political will and reinforcement of skills, with regards to suitable knowledge and awareness, can help to ensure public participation during a disaster.
The authors declare no competing interests with regard to the writing of this article.
M.V. conceived of the presented idea and verified the analytical methods. M.F. developed the theory and performed the computations. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript.
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
Strategies linked to ISDR for moving ahead on this goal were outlined in the ‘Road Map towards the Implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration’ (UN