Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework

The paper deals with the development of a general as well as integrative and holistic framework to systematize and assess vulnerability, risk and adaptation. The framework is a thinking tool meant as a heuristic that outlines key factors and different dimensions that need to be addressed when assessing vulnerability in the context of natural hazards and climate change. The approach underlines that the key factors of such a common framework are related to the exposure of a society or system to a hazard or stressor, the susceptibility of the system or community exposed, and its resilience and adaptive capacity. Additionally, it underlines the necessity to consider key factors and multiple thematic dimensions when assessing vulnerability in the context of natural and socio-natural hazards. In this regard, it shows key linkages between the different concepts used within the disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation (CCA) research. Further, it helps to illustrate the strong relationships between different concepts used in DRM and CCA. The framework is also a tool for communicating complexity and stresses the need for societal change in order to reduce risk and to promote adaptation. With regard to this, the policy relevance of the framework and first results of its application are outlined. Overall, the framework presented enhances the discussion on how to frame and link vulnerability, disaster risk, risk management and adaptation concepts.

Pre-Disaster Risk Management in Post-Earthquake (1999) Turkey

This paper assesses the status of pre-disaster risk management in the case of Turkey. By focusing on the period following the catastrophic August 17, 1999 earthquake, the study benefits from USAID’s Disaster Risk Management Benchmarking Tool (DRMBT). In line with the benchmarking tool, the paper covers key developments in the four components of pre-disaster risk management, namely: risk identification, risk mitigation, risk transfer and disaster preparedness. In the end, it will present three major conclusions: (i) Although post-1999 Turkey has made some important progress in the pre-disaster phase of DRM, particularly with the enactment of obligatory earthquake insurance and tightened standards for building construction, the country is far away from substantial levels of success in DRM. (ii) In recent years, local governments have had been given more authority in the realm of DRM, however, Turkey’s approach to DRM is still predominantly centralized at the expense of successful DRM practices at the local level. (iii) While the devastating 1999 earthquake has resulted in advances in the pre-disaster components of DRM; progress has been mostly in the realm of earthquakes. Turkey’s other major disasters (landslides, floods, wild fires i.e.) also require similar attention by local and central authorities.

Disater Risk Management Disparity in the Caribbean: Evidence from Barbados, Dominican Republic, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago

This study on risk and disaster management capacities of four Caribbean countries: Barbados, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago, examines three main dimensions: 1) the impact of natural disasters from 1900 to 2010 (number of events, number of people killed, total number affected, and damage in US$); 2) institutional assessments of disaster risk management disparity; and 3) the 2010 Inter-American Bank for Development (IADB) Disaster Risk and Risk Management indicators for the countries under study. The results show high consistency among the different sources examined, pointing out the need to extend the IADB measurements to the rest of the Caribbean countries. Indexes and indicators constitute a comparison measure vis-à-vis existing benchmarks in order to anticipate a capacity to deal with adverse events and their consequences; however, the indexes and indicators could only be tested against the occurrence of a real event. Therefore, the need exists to establish a sustainable and comprehensive evaluation system after important disasters to assess a country’s performance, verify the indicators, and gain feedback on measurement systems and methodologies. There is diversity in emergency and preparedness for disasters in the four countries under study. The nature of the event (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, and seismic activity), especially its frequency and the intensity of the damage experienced, is related to how each has designed its risk and disaster management policies and programs to face natural disasters. Vulnerabilities to disaster risks have been increasing, among other factors, because of uncontrolled urbanization, demographic density and poverty increase, social and economic marginalization, and lack of building code enforcement. The four countries under study have shown improvements in risk management capabilities, yet they are far from being completed prepared. Barbados’ risk management performance is superior, in comparison, to the majority of the countries of the region. However, is still far in achieving high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, primarily when it has the highest gap between potential macroeconomic and financial losses and the ability to face them. The Dominican Republic has shown steady risk performance up to 2008, but two remaining areas for improvement are hazard monitoring and early warning systems. Jamaica has made uneven advances between 1990 and 2008, requiring significant improvements to achieve high performance levels and sustainability in risk management, as well as macroeconomic mitigation infrastructure. Trinidad and Tobago has the lowest risk management score of the 15 countries in the Latin American and Caribbean region as assessed by the IADB study in 2010, yet it has experienced an important vulnerability reduction. In sum, the results confirmed the high disaster risk management disparity in the Caribbean region.

Syndemic health disparities and resilience processes related to HIV transmission risk among African American/Black men in south Florida

Rates of HIV infection continue to climb among minority populations and men who have sex with men (MSM), with African American/Black MSM being especially impacted. Numerous studies have found HIV transmission risk to be associated with many health and social disparities resulting from larger environmental and structural forces. Using anthropological and social environment-based theories of resilience that focus on individual agency and larger social and environmental structures, this dissertation employed a mixed methods design to investigate resilience processes among African American/Black MSM.^ Quantitative analyses compared African American/Black (N=108) and Caucasian/White (N=250) MSM who participated in a previously conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) of sexual and substance use risk reduction interventions. At RCT study entry, using past 90 day recall periods, there were no differences in unprotected sex frequency, however African American/Black MSM reported higher frequencies of days high (P<0.000), and drugs and sex used in combination (P<0.000), and substance dependence (P<0.000) and lower levels of social support (P<0.024) compared to Caucasian/White MSM. At 12- month follow-up, multi-level statistical models found that African American/Black MSM reduced their frequencies of days high and unprotected sex at greater rates than Caucasian/White MSM (P<0.001).^ Qualitative data collected among a sub-sample of African American/Black MSM from the RCT (N=21) described the men's experiences of living with multiple health and social disparities and the importance of RCT study assessments in facilitating reductions in risk behaviors. A cross-case analysis showed different resilience processes undertaken by men who experienced low socioeconomic status, little family support, and homophobia (N=16) compared to those who did not (N=5).^ The dissertation concludes that resilience processes to HIV transmission risk and related health and social disparities among African American/Black MSM varies and are dependent on specific social environmental factors, including social relationships, structural homophobia, and access to social, economic, and cultural capital. Men define for themselves what it means to be resilient within their social environment. These conclusions suggest that both individual and structural-level resilience-based HIV prevention interventions are needed.^

Syndemic Health Disparities and Resilience Processes Related to HIV Transmission Risk among African American/Black Men in South Florida

Rates of HIV infection continue to climb among minority populations and men who have sex with men (MSM), with African American/Black MSM being especially impacted. Numerous studies have found HIV transmission risk to be associated with many health and social disparities resulting from larger environmental and structural forces. Using anthropological and social environment-based theories of resilience that focus on individual agency and larger social and environmental structures, this dissertation employed a mixed methods design to investigate resilience processes among African American/Black MSM. Quantitative analyses compared African American/Black (N=108) and Caucasian/White (N=250) MSM who participated in a previously conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) of sexual and substance use risk reduction interventions. At RCT study entry, using past 90 day recall periods, there were no differences in unprotected sex frequency, however African American/Black MSM reported higher frequencies of days high (P Qualitative data collected among a sub-sample of African American/Black MSM from the RCT (N=21) described the men’s experiences of living with multiple health and social disparities and the importance of RCT study assessments in facilitating reductions in risk behaviors. A cross-case analysis showed different resilience processes undertaken by men who experienced low socioeconomic status, little family support, and homophobia (N=16) compared to those who did not (N=5). The dissertation concludes that resilience processes to HIV transmission risk and related health and social disparities among African American/Black MSM varies and are dependent on specific social environmental factors, including social relationships, structural homophobia, and access to social, economic, and cultural capital. Men define for themselves what it means to be resilient within their social environment. These conclusions suggest that both individual and structural-level resilience-based HIV prevention interventions are needed.