Sargeant and Lindquist_IDRC2014_8.25.14_final

464 views
425 views

Published on

5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice 24-28 August 2014 in Davos, Switzerland

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
464
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sargeant and Lindquist_IDRC2014_8.25.14_final

  1. 1. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org The use of DRR science in an international comparative context: an interdisciplinary framework Susanne Sargeant, British Geological Survey, UK Eric Lindquist, Boise State University, US
  2. 2. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Overview • The anticipated role of science in the HFA and after 2015 • Developing an interdisciplinary collaborative approach • The use of science in practice: • Research approach • Earthquake risk reduction in South Asia • Flooding and wildfires in the semi-arid Western US • Reflecting on policy recommendations regarding the use of science in the post-2015 framework for DRR • Added value and summary • Supporting the implementation of the HFA • Gaps, needs and further steps post 2015
  3. 3. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org The role of science in HFA and post-2015 • HFA and the priorities for action • Post-2015: Southgate et al. (2013), pre-zero draft of the post- 2015 framework, International Science Advisory Mechanism Recommendations of the UN ISDR Science and Technology Advisory Group (Global Platform, 2013) The recommendations of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Group (STAG), presented at the 2013 Global Platform (and point of reference for our collaboration)
  4. 4. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Developing an interdisciplinary, collaborative approach • A serendipitous meeting, informal discussion about how science is used in decision making, developing an appreciation for each other’s language and worldview • At scientific meetings like EGU there is a lot of discussion about how best to work with different decision-makers but these meetings are not accessible to many potential stakeholders • ‘Sharing Stories’ EGU workshop – an attempt to bring people together to share experiences and lessons learned YOU CAN GIVE US THE SCIENCE BUT WHAT DO YOU EXPECT US TO DO WITH IT? Quote from a senior member of staff at an international emergency and development NGO General Assembly of the European Geoscientists Union in Vienna Photo credit: GrassNet
  5. 5. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Research Approach • “How is science used to make decisions from the international to local scale, and what can be learned from a comparison between hazards, disciplines, and contexts?” • First step: Evaluate the applicability of our respective research activities for a comparison and identify a suitable framework (Southgate et al. 2013) • Second step: Use our experiences to reflect on the Southgate recommendations. • Third step: Integrate and compare findings for commonalities and differences. • Fourth step: Address the value-added perspective of the IDRC • Fifth step: Where do we go from here?
  6. 6. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Case study 1: Earthquake risk reduction in South Asia • Location – Bangladesh and Nepal. Both densely populated and highly seismically active with histories of devastating earthquakes • Case studies are projects that aim to increase the impact of earthquake science on DRR and resilience building through knowledge exchange (Bangladesh) and transdisciplinary research (Nepal) • Bangladesh: increasing the use of earthquake science in an INGO using a training course approach • Nepal: Earthquakes without Frontiers – a transdisciplinary research project that brings physical and social scientists from the UK together with local scientists and decision makers
  7. 7. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Dhaka The distribution of large earthquakes in the Alpine- Himalaya Belt Some of the outputs from the earthquake risk management training workshop in Bangladesh Focus groups with stakeholders to find out how scientific information is used in disaster risk reduction in Nepal (Photo credit: Katie Oven)
  8. 8. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org • R1: While it is possible to demonstrate what science informed the design and implementation of the training, how this informs organisational decision making in the longer term is less easy to demonstrate • R2: Navigating the local context, working across disciplines and building the necessary relationships with stakeholders to define the problem and work towards a solution requires sustained engagement and can take a long time • R3: Sharing and disseminating scientific information and translating it into action should be done with a good understanding of what information currently exists and the barriers that prevent that information from being used or shared • R4: The complexity of the decision-making process and the context in which it occurs can make it difficult to provide evidence of what impact science had on decision making Reflections on the Southgate Recommendations
  9. 9. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org City of Boise, Idaho
  10. 10. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Boise River Basin, Boise Idaho
  11. 11. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Eastern Idaho Wildfire
  12. 12. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Case study 2: Flooding and wildfires in Boise • Location – Southwest Idaho, semi-arid region of the northern Great Basin. • Policy network approach to multiple natural hazards: urban flooding and wildfires at the wildland-urban interface. • Stakeholder engagement with both networks. • 4 comparative factors of the policy networks: – Type and frequency of hazard – Size and type of network – Network member interactions – Role of uncertainty and impact of climate change
  13. 13. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Reflections on the Southgate Recommendations • R1: Both cases involve the use of science and science and policy interaction; engagement in the case of wildfires is more frequent and interactive; both cases rely heavily on predictions and probability of risk and disaster. • R2: Wildfire policy network is inclusive across disciplines (planning, policy sciences, and hydrology); most flood risk problems are solved by “hard” or infrastructure solutions, rather than policy or behavioral solutions. • R3: Significant effort expended on wildfire education and knowledge transfer; the urban flooding problem is rarely mentioned or considered outside the domain of the few major stakeholders. • R4: Science is but one factor in larger information and advocacy efforts, understanding this reality is critical.
  14. 14. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Integration and Comparing Cases • R1: There is significant decision making activity that science has no impact on; need a better understanding of the decision context and the competition among information types. • R2: Science is critical to DRR problem solving but defining the problem is often a political process; organizational culture and capacity also contribute. • R3: Transition of knowledge to action is non-linear; need to understand where, when and how science engages with decision making. • R4: Are we expecting too much of “science” and scientists within this larger more dynamic process?
  15. 15. 5th International Disaster and Risk Conference IDRC 2014 ‘Integrative Risk Management - The role of science, technology & practice‘ • 24-28 August 2014 • Davos • Switzerland www.grforum.org Added value for the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction • How did your work support the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action: – Sub-national perspective on the use of science in DRR – Contributes to our understanding of DRR implementation – Context for decision making requires an interdisciplinary approach – Recognition by HFA and others (ICLEI) that understanding the context is critical to success • From your perspective what are the main gaps, needs and further steps to be addressed in the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction in – Research: Coordination across research projects – Education & Training: Create an enabling environment to implement training outcomes – Implementation & Practice: Incentivise full participation by the scientific community in the long tem – Policy: Responsibility on all stakeholders (including scientists) to participate fully in the policy process

×