1.1. GADRI Discussions – Social Dimension of Risk, Health and DRM

Welcome to the course disaster recovery and build back better. Today, we are going to discuss some of the summary of the discussions which happened in the GADRI, Global Alliance of Disaster Research Institutes, the fourth summit which just recently happened in Kyoto University in Japan.

In this introduction, the speaker sets the stage for discussing disaster recovery and the importance of understanding social dimensions of risks in health and disaster risk management (DRM). The GADRI summit is highlighted as a platform for researchers to share knowledge and influence policy, signifying the collaborative effort in addressing disaster and recovery.

Think of the GADRI summit like a large family reunion where different branches of the family come together to share their experiences and learn from each other about how to overcome challenges. Just like in a family, sharing knowledge can lead to stronger strategies for future resilience.

The purpose and objectives of this session were to identify how research on the social construction of risks can be used for effective DRR. To consider how the understanding of risk can be better circulated and discussed among stakeholders to reach a shared recognition of the social dimension of risk.

This section identifies the goals of the discussion group at the summit. It aims to explore how the social aspects of risks can inform disaster risk reduction (DRR) practices. The emphasis on communication among stakeholders underscores the need for collaborative understanding in managing disaster risks effectively.

Imagine a community preparing for a storm; they need to communicate clearly about potential risks and share their insights. If everyone understands both the nature and magnitude of the threat, they can collectively agree on the best preparations, just like a sports team strategizing before a game.

We also got key questions that are to be addressed. To what extent are hazards, risks, and disasters within society currently well known? How can the social construction of risks be effective for DRR?

This chunk presents the critical questions that guided the discussions at the summit. Questions revolve around the awareness of hazards within society and how social understanding of these risks can enhance disaster risk management strategies. This reflection is vital for improving response measures and community resilience.

Consider a classroom where students are taught about fire safety. The teacher asks what they know about fire risks. By understanding each student's prior knowledge, the teacher can shape the lesson to better address misconceptions and enhance safety protocols, much like assessing community knowledge to inform DRR.

Disaster is not just a natural context, but it is the social vulnerability, how it puts them into the risk, how hazard makes them into a disaster and that is where the H*V=R.

The speaker emphasizes that disasters arise not only from natural events but also from societal vulnerabilities. The formula presented (H*V=R, where H is hazard, V is vulnerability, and R is risk) indicates that without vulnerability, a hazard might not lead to disaster. Understanding this relationship is key in creating effective disaster management strategies.

Imagine two villages faced with the same flood; one is well-prepared with proper infrastructure and resources, while the other has limited capabilities. The flood might lead to challenges in the unprepared village, illustrating that the risk (R) of disaster is significantly influenced by their vulnerability (V).

When we talk about knowledge, how local knowledge understand risk because the scientific knowledge understands in a different way but how the local knowledge have perceived the risk.

This section highlights the distinction between scientific knowledge of risks and local knowledge gained through lived experience. Recognizing and integrating local knowledge can significantly reduce vulnerabilities and enhance the effectiveness of DRR strategies. Local knowledge can often provide insights that are overlooked by traditional scientific assessments.

Think of a local farmer who has experienced several droughts over the years. They might have developed unique irrigation practices that work best for their area, differing from general scientific recommendations. By valuing their knowledge, DRR practices can be refined to be more effective in specific contexts.

One has to really look into what is acceptable, to whom, by what, from what and what is an unacceptable risk, maybe different cultures perceive that in a different way.

This chunk discusses how perceptions of acceptable and unacceptable risks vary across cultures. Understanding these perceptions is crucial in tailoring disaster management strategies that resonate with local communities. This insight is particularly important for effectively engaging communities in DRR efforts.

Imagine a community living near a volcano. For them, living with the risk of an eruption may be seen as acceptable due to the fertile land it provides. Meanwhile, another culture might view such a risk as unacceptable, showing how deeply local beliefs shape perspectives on risk.

--