Directions in disaster resilience policy
Permanent Link:

Material Information

Title:
Directions in disaster resilience policy
Series Title:
The Australian Journal of Emergency Management (AusAID)
Creator:
Prosser, Brenton
Peters, Colin
Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU) ( summary contributor )
Publisher:
Attorney Generals Department Australia
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
2010
Language:
English
Physical Description:
Journal article

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Risk management ( lcshac )
Emergency management ( lcshac )
Resilience ( local )
Genre:
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Summary:
The document “Directions in Disaster Resilience Policy” deals with establishing clarity around the concept of resilience. The numerous actors that develop DRR and Disaster management strategies come from diverse backgrounds that often have competing notions of what resiliency means or entails. Differences in how one conceptualizes resilience can lead to important variations in policy positions and objectives. A number of understandings of the concept are highlighted throughout the paper. In today’s usage, resiliency refers to the capacity to weather through and rebound from adversity. In the academic arena, there are a number of different applications of the term. In Physics and Engineering, it refers to the ability of materials to endure impact. In Chemistry, it points to the capacity of metals to return to their original forms. In the Health sector, it is immunity to sickness. In Psychology and Social Work, it deals with stress management. In Sociology, the focus is on groups’ abilities to adapt to changing environments. In Business, it is the capacity of organizations to recover from disruptive circumstances. It is also viewed as the ability of people to build social capital and become advocates for themselves and their communities. In disaster management, resilience can mean returning damaged infrastructure to its original form by rebuilding as things were. Or it can mean building back better, reducing the risk that existed prior to disaster. It can also mean building back with social sustainability in mind, factoring in how infrastructures fit into current and future needs of communities that will utilize them. Differing visions of resiliency can mean major differences in cost and policy outcomes. Discussing resiliency is important, not so we reduce these various understandings, but to have a robust understanding of the concept as it applies to a variety of contexts. Formulation of disaster resilience policy cannot be a linear and reductionist process, but must be interactive and holistic, taking into account a range of factors. It must be a bottom-up and top-down development. It must recognize that the growing complexity of disasters goes beyond those directly involved in disaster emergency management. It requires cross-jurisdictional and cross-departmental policy collaboration and coordination. This means understanding how the various understandings of resilience can complement one another. ( English,English )
Subject:
Disaster Risk Management
Citation/Reference:
Prosser, B., Peters, C. (2010). Directions in disaster resilience policy. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management Volume 25, No.3.

Record Information

Source Institution:
Florida International University
Rights Management:
The Australian Journal of Emergency Management by AIDR is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at www.aidr.org.au/
Resource Identifier:
FI13042461
13241540 ( issn )

dpSobek Membership

Aggregations:
Disaster Risk Reduction