The barriers to uptake of disaster risk management science in urban planning: A political economy analysis.

There is increasing effort in science to support disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation in urban environments. It is now common for research calls and projects to reference coproduction methods and science uptake goals. This paper identifies lessons for researchers, research funders, and research users wishing to enable useful, useable, and used science based on the perspectives of research users in urban planning from low- and middle-income countries. DRM-supporting science is viewed by policy actors as: complicated and poorly communicated; presenting inadequate, partial, and outdated information; misaligned with policy cycles; and costly to access and inadequately positioned to overcome the policy barriers that hinder integration of DRM into urban planning. Addressing these specific concerns points to more systematic collection and organisation of data and enhancement of supporting administrative structures to facilitate better sight of human vulnerability and its link to development decision-making and wider processes of urban risk creation.

Transformative adaptation through nature-based solutions: a comparative case study analysis in China, Italy, and Germany.

This paper explores how claims for transformative adaptation toward more equitable and sustainable societies can be assessed. We build on a theoretical framework describing transformative adaptation as it manifests across four core elements of the public-sector adaptation lifecycle: vision, planning, institutional frameworks, and interventions. For each element, we identify characteristics that can help track adaptation as transformative. Our purpose is to identify how governance systems can constrain or support transformative choices and thus enable targeted interventions. We demonstrate and test the usefulness of the framework with reference to three government-led adaptation projects of nature-based solutions (NBS): river restoration (Germany), forest conservation (China), and landslide risk reduction (Italy). Building on a desktop study and open-ended interviews, our analysis adds evidence to the view that transformation is not an abrupt system change, but a dynamic complex process that evolves over time. While each of the NBS cases fails to fulfill all the transformation characteristics, there are important transformative elements in their visions, planning, and interventions. There is a deficit, however, in the transformation of institutional frameworks. The cases show institutional commonalities in multi-scale and cross-sectoral (polycentric) collaboration as well as innovative processes for inclusive stakeholder engagement; yet, these arrangements are ad hoc, short-term, dependent on local champions, and lacking the permanency needed for upscaling. For the public sector, this result highlights the potential for establishing cross-competing priorities among agencies, cross-sectoral formal mechanisms, new dedicated institutions, and programmatic and regulatory mainstreaming. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10113-023-02066-7.

How do you build back better so no one is left behind? Lessons from Sint Maarten, Dutch Caribbean, following Hurricane Irma.

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals call for action to build back better in ways that leave no one behind. At the same time, ensuring a local voice is increasingly central to humanitarian engagement. These aims contrast with limited analysis of how local actors might be supported in these respects during response and recovery, and how far recommendations are specific or generalisable across richer and poorer national contexts. The paper begins by comparing lessons learnt by survivors and community organisations in Sint Maarten, Dutch Caribbean, following a high-income state-led response to Hurricane Irma in 2017 with the priorities of lower income, humanitarian-led endeavours. The differences reveal the importance of economic resources as the basis for individual self-reliance and a fragmented civil society with limited leadership ambitions in Sint Maarten. Strong cross-cultural alignment nevertheless allows for a globally-relevant and yet contextually-sensitive framework for survivor-led action and reconstruction.

A spectrum of methods for a spectrum of risk: Generating evidence to understand and reduce urban risk in sub-Saharan Africa.

Many African towns and cities face a range of hazards, which can best be described as representing a "spectrum of risk" of events that can cause death, illness or injury, and impoverishment. Yet despite the growing numbers of people living in African urban centres, the extent and relative severity of these different risks is poorly understood. This paper provides a rationale for using a spectrum of methods to address this spectrum of risk, and demonstrates the utility of mixed-methods approaches in planning for resilience. It describes activities undertaken in a wide-ranging multi-country programme of research, which use multiple approaches to gather empirical data on risk, in order to build a stronger evidence base and provide a more solid base for planning and investment. It concludes that methods need to be chosen in regard to social, political economic, biophysical and hydrogeological context, while also recognising the different levels of complexity and institutional capacity in different urban centres. The paper concludes that as well as the importance of taking individual contexts into account, there are underlying methodological principles - based on multidisciplinary expertise and multi-faceted and collaborative research endeavours - that can inform a range of related approaches to understanding urban risk in sub-Saharan Africa and break the cycle of risk accumulation.

Positioning resilience for 2015: the role of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation in disaster risk management policy.

Resilience is a ubiquitous term in disaster risk management and is an increasingly prominent concept in early discussions focused on elaborating the post-2015 international policy landscape. Riddled with competing meanings and diverse policy implications, however, it is a concept caught between the abstract and operational. This paper provides a review of the rise to prominence of the concept of resilience and advances an elaboration of the related concepts of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation. We argue that these concepts can contribute to decision-making by offering three distinct options for risk management policy. In order to deliberately and effectively choose among these options, we suggest that critical reflexivity is a prerequisite, necessitating improved decision-making capacity if varied perspectives (including those of the most vulnerable) are to be involved in the selection of the best approach to risk management.

Building back better from COVID-19: Knowledge, emergence and social contracts.

COVID-19 recovery is an opportunity to enhance life chances by Building Back Better, an objective promoted by the UN and deployed politically at national level. To help understand emergent and intentional opportunities to Build Back Better, we propose a research agenda drawing from geographical thinking on social contracts, assemblage theory and the politics of knowledge. This points research towards the ways in which everyday and professional knowledge cocreation constrains vision and action. Whose knowledge is legitimate, how legitimacy is ascribed and the place of science, the media and government in these processes become sites for progressive Building Back Better.

Understanding human vulnerability to climate change: A global perspective on index validation for adaptation planning.

Climate change is a severe global threat. Research on climate change and vulnerability to natural hazards has made significant progress over the last decades. Most of the research has been devoted to improving the quality of climate information and hazard data, including exposure to specific phenomena, such as flooding or sea-level rise. Less attention has been given to the assessment of vulnerability and embedded social, economic and historical conditions that foster vulnerability of societies. A number of global vulnerability assessments based on indicators have been developed over the past years. Yet an essential question remains how to validate those assessments at the global scale. This paper examines different options to validate global vulnerability assessments in terms of their internal and external validity, focusing on two global vulnerability indicator systems used in the WorldRiskIndex and the INFORM index. The paper reviews these global index systems as best practices and at the same time presents new analysis and global results that show linkages between the level of vulnerability and disaster outcomes. Both the review and new analysis support each other and help to communicate the validity and the uncertainty of vulnerability assessments. Next to statistical validation methods, we discuss the importance of the appropriate link between indicators, data and the indicandum. We found that mortality per hazard event from floods, drought and storms is 15 times higher for countries ranked as highly vulnerable compared to those classified as low vulnerable. These findings highlight the different starting points of countries in their move towards climate resilient development. Priority should be given not just to those regions that are likely to face more severe climate hazards in the future but also to those confronted with high vulnerability already.