Geoff O'Brien

Disaster resilience: bouncing back or bouncing forward?

The debate on disaster resilience has continued to grow, albeit at a slow pace, since the 2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction held in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. One of the most important and striking aspects is that despite the conceptual differences, the resilience and vulnerability paradigms are still locked together and are increasingly being treated as if they are one and the same. The reason for this is not a difficult one. Resilience and vulnerability are viewed as opposite sides of the same coin (Twigg 2007). However, the notion of “bounce back” differentiates resilience from vulnerability. The “bounce back” notion is important to the extent that it liberates resilience from the vulnerability conundrum. Yet, the “bounce back” notion does not seem to acknowledge that disasters are accompanied by change. This paper posits that resilience should be viewed as the ability to “bounce forward” and “move on” following a disaster (Manyena 2009). Three arguments are presented in this paper. First, the “bounce forward” ability conceptualisation of resilience has implications on disaster research and scholarship. It helps us to re-think about the underlying philosophical arguments, particularly those around structure and agency. Secondly, resilience has temporal and continuity elements, which have implications for preand post-disaster planning, including community continuity recovery planning. Lastly, the “bounce forward” conception has psychological implications. It is optimistic, with a potential of assisting disaster victims and service providers to adopt positive behaviour changes prior to and after the disaster.

Climate adaptation from a poverty perspective

Adaptation to already discernible climate changes, particularly an increase in extreme events, is an urgent task for all nations. This article argues that adaptation is an urgent priority, especially for the developing world, to build a resilient society. For poor nations, poverty alleviation is the main policy driver, although changes in livelihood strategies are driven by a range of factors. Using a case study, direct and indirect adaptation is examined with reference to the specific livelihoods of the Chagga people on Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Evidence suggests that coping strategies to maintain livelihood systems can work against long-term adaptation to climate change, unless there is linkage to poverty alleviation. Linking climate change adaptation to project development through notions of additionality does not carry sufficient leverage to simultaneously address poverty alleviation and climate change. It is suggested that, rather than micro-economic project management, a broader macro-economic frame be established. A rights-based approach is argued as a vital driver for informing financial, institutional, political and technological policies and instruments.

Future UK emergency management: new wine, old skin?

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review the changes made to civil protection in the UK, both legislative and capacity building, that aim to make the UK more resilient.Design/methodology/approach – Reviews the background to changes in UK civil protection and compares these with the work being done by the broader disaster management community on the meaning and development of resilience to a range of threats.Findings – Finds that the UK approach has been deflected by the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 and is clearly focused on organisational resilience. This top‐down approach does not augur well in terms of promoting a more resilient society. The paper also questions if it is time to take a broader view of what constitutes an emergency.Originality/value – The recent changes in UK civil protection are in many ways welcome. But the promotion of more resilient communities requires a bottom‐up as opposed to a top‐down approach. Government funding is aimed mainly at institutional resilience. This...

Approaching disaster management through social learning

Purpose – Coping with and adjusting to disruptive challenges has always been a characteristic of human development. Formalisation of this has led to the emergence of a number approaches addressing disruptive challenges. Often formalised practice has a narrow focus. Increasingly complex challenges require a refocus of formalised approaches. Drawing from these approaches, the purpose of this paper is to posit that a greater focus on preparedness through pre‐disaster planning is needed for a more holistic approach to disaster management.Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews the evolution of disaster management thinking and practice and proposes that changes are needed to the dominant disaster management model. These changes are drawn from a number of alternative perspectives. Based on the uncertainties surrounding complex or “wicked” problems, for example, climate change and variability, this paper develops a more holistic approach.Findings – Responding to “wicked problems” requires a greater focus...

Energy, poverty and governance

To make any progress towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), a new approach to energy systems for the poorer nations is needed. Equally, a new approach to energy should shape thinking in the developed and industrializing world about energy futures. All countries need to have access to clean, affordable and reliable energy services that do not exacerbate the climate change risks. A global energy policy will emerge, but by the backdoor of environment policy. This article is in three parts. First, it examines the problem in the developing world. Second, it ‐establishes a framework for evaluating the approach to energy systems. Third, it argues that technology transfer as commonly practised is not an appropriate vector. In concluding, this article sets out an approach at international level.

UK emergency preparedness: a holistic response?

Purpose – This paper aims to argue that to address the consequences of climate change and variability a greater focus on pre‐emergency planning that engages a wider stakeholder group must be adopted.Design/methodology/approach – The paper discusses UK emergency management and approaches to climate change and climate variability risk.Findings – The internal focus of UK emergency management inhibits the contribution that it can make to societal resilience and public preparedness. Effective risk reduction requires that all actors, including the public, are engaged in the social learning process. From a UK emergency management perspective this requires a culture shift to an outward proactive focus.Originality/value – This paper offers insights into emergency preparedness in the UK.

Developing a model for building resilience to climate risks for cultural heritage

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a model for developing climate adaptation strategies to reduce climate risk for cultural heritage. Cultural heritage has an important role in human well-being. This paper posits that cultural heritage requires an approach that recognises the uniqueness of cultural heritage. The paper draws from the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) Making My City Resilient campaign and the Heart of the City Partnership in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, and proposes a Cultural Heritage Adaptation Forum. The role of the forum is to develop adaptation strategies in a sustainable development context. This is an original attempt to link cultural heritage to climate risk. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws from two initiatives and uses good practice established from the disaster management and climate communities and proposes a Cultural Heritage Adaptation Forum that can be used to formulate adaptation interventions for cultural heritage....

Resilient responses to climate change and variability: a challenge for public policy

Climate change produces future risks and increasing climate variability produces current risks. Reducing disaster risk is addressed at the national level using approaches usually developed by the United Nations. These approaches, particularly in the developed world, address resilience building but practice is top-down and reactive. Effective resilience building requires a bottom-up participatory approach aimed at enhancing adaptive capacity. Using climate change and variability as a vehicle, this article posits that, without a shift in public policy, effective resilience could be jeopardised. Key to successful adaptation has been the willingness to learn how to develop a coherent set of principles that can inform a new approach to public policy for disaster management.

The future of nuclear power in Europe: a response

Two interlinked and complex problems face energy policy‐makers: future energy supplies and climate change. The choices made on energy mix will lock development pathways for some considerable time ahead. Climate change is a challenging problem. Decarbonising the energy system requires sustainable and environmentally friendly technologies that work within the context of the planetary environment and do not cause “collateral damage”. Several approaches are available. But nuclear power is an unsustainable technology that has already caused “collateral damage” and will leave a toxic legacy of waste, for which there appears to be no solution. Including nuclear in a future energy system is a step in the wrong direction.

The challenge of humanitarian aid: an overview

This article outlines current issues in the delivery of humanitarian assistance. It explores the postulates of humanitarian interventions. The increasing level of aid is mapped against changing patterns of natural disaster and complex emergency. The humanitarian system itself is explored by sectors, and levels of global funding are analysed. Over the last 15 years, there has been a rising demand for accountability by humanitarian actors, this is especially true in chronic, long-term complex emergencies where the criteria of humanitarian assistance delivery are expanded beyond the need for immediate relief. A series of continuing tensions, particularly the dominance of a western-based model of intervention largely delivered to non-western beneficiaries are explored for an unanswered conclusion.