| 008 |
|
130626n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Decision making and risk management |h [electronic resource] |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a [S.l.] : |b La Red de Estudios Sociales en la Prevencion de Desastres en America Latina- Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (LA RED-FLACSO), |c 1998. |
| 500 |
|
|a Paper prepared for and presented at the Conference on “Furthering Cooperation in Science and Technology for Caribbean Development, Port of Spain, Trinidad, 23-25 September, 1998 |
| 506 |
|
|a Refer to main document/publisher for use rights. |
| 510 |
|
|a Lavell, A. (1998). Decision making and risk management. La Red de Estudios Sociales en la Prevencion de Desastres en America Latina- Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (LA RED-FLACSO). |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This document seeks to shift the orientation of the disaster community away from reacting to disasters when they occur towards the analysis of disaster risks and implementation of measures to reduce them where possible. Allan Lavell begins from the outset stating that risk management is comprised of four related dimensions: 1) compensatory management; 2) anticipatory management; 3) preparedness; and 4) disaster response. The paper argues that while preparedness and response activities have been predominant in disaster risk management (DRM) organizations, anticipatory and compensatory management have had little political salience. It is worth noting that the lack of attention to the latter forms of DRM is a function of many unfortunate distortions within the disaster field. These include the lack of proper conceptualization of disaster as a concept, an overemphasis on large disasters and catastrophes, a lack of resources for anticipatory management, and the near absence of risk managers within disaster and development institutions. Lavell begins from the outset suggesting that the very notion of “reducing disasters” is problematic because it evokes the idea of reducing the weight or burden of something that already exists rather than an understanding that disasters are as much a product of risk producing behaviors within society as they are of natural phenomena. Thus, two main viewpoints emerge when dealing with disasters: 1) a focus on “disaster reduction” aimed at alleviating secondary effects of disaster impact (post-disaster phases of response, rehabilitation, and reconstruction) or 2) focus on “risk reduction” or “risk management” aimed at reducing vulnerabilities that increase the likelihood of disaster (pre-disaster phases of prevention and mitigation). Disasters can be understood either as a product or as a process. The distinction in how disaster is understood impacts whether or not political will is generated to push for polices that reduce risk. It is much easier to understand disaster as a disruptive and destructive event that requires humanitarian response than to understand disaster as the “actualization of preexisting risk conditions in society,” which requires efforts to determine what these preexisting risks are and to reduce them. While disaster is real and visible, risk is latent, obscure and accumulative, hence, making it easy for policymakers to cast risk reduction measures as costly or unnecessary. |
| 520 |
0 |
|a General Risk Management |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Disaster response and recovery. |
| 700 |
1 |
|a Lavell, Allan |g Secretariate General |u Latin American Social Science Faculty (FLACSO) and La Red de Estudios Sociales en la Prevencion de Desastres en America Latina. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor. |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13042581/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/25/81/00001/FI13042581_thm.jpg |
