Eco Drrsourcebookfinalsep2019

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/335883945
Disasters and Ecosystems, Resilience in a Changing Climate - Source Book
Book · October 2019

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3493377
CITATIONS READS
8 663
4 authors, including:
Udo Michael Nehren Simone Sandholz

Technische Hochschule Köln United Nations University (UNU)
99 PUBLICATIONS 664 CITATIONS 62 PUBLICATIONS 200 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Construction of Intensity Duration Frequency curves (IDF) at data inadequate situation-a case of central-Western hills of Nepal View project
CIRMin – Critical Infrastructures Resilience as a Minimum Supply Concept (Kritische Infrastrukturen-Resilienz als Mindestversorgungskonzept) View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Udo Michael Nehren on 11 October 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Disasters and Ecosystems:
Resilience in a Changing Climate
SOURCE BOOK
Co-funded by the
European Union
List of acronyms
CBD NOAA
First published in October 2019 by the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Environment Programme
© 2019, United Nations Environment Programme CCA OECD
Climate Change Adaptation Organisation for Economic Co-operation
United Nations Environment Programme
and Development
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, KENYA COP
Tel: +254 (0)20 762 1234 Conference of the Parties PAM
Fax: +254 (0)20 762 3927 Protected Area Management
CI
E-mail: uneppub@unep.org Conservation International PEDRR
Web: www.unenvironment.org Partnership for Environment and Disaster
DRR
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for Risk Reduction
Disaster Risk Reduction
educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright
SDGs
holder provided acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this publication EbA
Sustainable Development Goals
may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without Ecosystem-based Adaptation
prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. The SFDRR
Eco-DRR
contents of this volume do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
Ecosystem-based Disaster Risk Reduction
Environment Programme, or contributory organizations. The designations employed SPREP
and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever GWP
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment
on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme or contributory Global Water Partnership
Programme
organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its ICZM
authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. SREX
Integrated Coastal Zone Management
Special Report on Extreme Events (IPCC)
The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not IFM
constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the UNCCD
Integrated Fire Management
authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
made of the information contained therein. IFRC
UNECE
International Federation of Red Cross
Citation: Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Nehren, U., Sandholz, S. and Doswald, N. (2019) United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
and Red Crescent Societies
Disasters and Ecosystems, Resilience in a Changing Climate - Source Book.
UNDP
Geneva: UNEP and Cologne: TH Köln - University of Applied Sciences. IPCC
United Nations Development Programme
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Cover Image: © Philippa Terblanchè.
UNFCCC
Photos: Unless otherwise credited, images in this report were taken by IUCN
United Nations Framework Convention on
United Nations Environment Programme staff. International Union for the Conservation
Climate Change
of Nature
Design and layout: Lynda Monk/Red Kite Creative Ltd. UNDRR
IWRM
UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
Integrated Water Resource Management
activities. This publication is printed on recycled paper using eco-friendly practices. (formerly UNISDR)
Our distribution policy aims to reduce UN Environment’s carbon footprint. MDGs
UNEP
Millennium Development Goals
United Nations Environment Programme
NbS
WBCSD
Nature-based Solutions
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
NGO
WMO
Non-Governmental Organization
World Meteorological Organization
UNEP promotes
environmentally sound practices
globally and in its own activities. This
publication is printed on recycled paper
using eco-friendly practices. Our distribution
policy aims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint.
1
Contents
List of acronyms 1 Chapter 6 Chapter 11 Chapter 15
Principles of ecosystem-disaster risk Planning tools for ecoystem-based disaster Economic tools for ecosystem-based
reduction and adaptation 72 risk reduction and adaptation 124 disaster risk reduction and adaptation 170
Executive summary 4
6.1 Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 11.1 Spatial planning to reduce risks 15.1 Main economic tools used for decision-
and adaptation 73 from disasters 125 making on disaster risk reduction 171
Acknowledgements 5
6.2 Core elements of ecosystem-based 11.2 Participatory rural appraisals for 15.2 Post-disaster needs assessments 173
disaster risk reduction and adaptation 73 ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 15.3 Cost benefit analysis in the context
Chapter 1 6.3 Conclusions 81 and adaptation 127 of ecosystem-based disaster risk
The context and content of this source book 6 11.3 Geographic information systems and reduction and adaptation 174
1.1 Introduction 7 remote sensing for ecosystem-based 15.4 Ecosystem valuation 176
Chapter 7 disaster risk reduction and adaptation 127
1.2 Structure of the book 11 Principles of systems thinking and using 15.5 Payments for ecosystem services 179
natural systems for disaster risk reduction 11.4 Environmental impact assessments 132
15.6 Conclusions 181
and climate change adaptation 84 11.5 Conclusions 136
Chapter 2
Introduction to disasters, risk reduction 7.1 Principles of systems thinking 85
Chapter 16
and climate change 14 7.2 Landscape systems, ecosystems Chapter 12 Principles of mainstreaming ecosystem-based
2.1 Hazard events and disasters 15 and disasters 89 Gender, disaster risk reduction and disaster risk reduction and adaptation into
7.3 Conclusions 90 community-based tools for ecoystem-based national policies, strategies, plans and projects 184
2.2 Disaster risk reduction 26
disaster risk reduction and adaptation 138
2.3 Conclusions 29 16.1 Key entry points for integrating
12.1 Disaster risk reduction and gender 139 ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
Chapter 8
Managing resilience and transformation 92 12.2 Communities and natural resource and adaptation in policies, programmes
Chapter 3 and risk management 144 and projects 185
Disaster risk reduction, climate change 8.1 Resilience a key concept 93
adaptation and key international actors 32 12.3 Conclusions 146 16.2 Financial resources available for
8.2 Resilience, disaster risk and climate mainstreaming ecosystem-based disaster
3.1 Disaster risk reduction, climate change change adaptation 95 risk reduction and adaptation 188
adaptation and international policy 33 8.3 Conclusions 98 Chapter 13
Sustainable land and water management 16.3 The challenges of mainstreaming
3.2 The main international actors and ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
tools and approaches for ecosystem-based
agreements relevant for disaster risk Chapter 9 and adaptation 189
disaster risk reduction and adaptation 150
reduction and climate change adaptation 36 Ecosystems management contributions
13.1 Management tools and approaches for 16.4 Conclusions 190
3.3 Conclusions 43 pre- and post-disasters 100
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
9.1 Ecosystem management and the and adaptation 151 Chapter 17
Chapter 4 disaster management phases 101 13.2 An example of integrated water resource Approaches for operationalising resilience
Linking ecosystems and humans to disasters 46 9.2 Ecosystem management and post- management for disaster risk reduction for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
4.1 The interlinkages between ecosystems, disaster recovery 102 and adaptation 156 and adaptation 192
natural hazards and disasters 47 9.3 Ecosystem management and 13.3 Conclusions 158 17.1 Project development 193
4.2 Socio-ecological systems 50 disaster prevention 107 17.2 The five factors of success of an
4.3 Ecosystems can mitigate disaster risk 53 9.4 Conclusions 111 Chapter 14 ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
4.4 Conclusions 55 Ecological engineering for disaster risk and adaptation resilience-building project 201
Chapter 10 reduction and climate change adaptation 160 17.3 Conclusions 202
Incorporating ecosystems in risk assessments 112 14.1 Ecological engineering 161
Chapter 5
Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 10.1 Vulnerability, hazard and risk assessments 113 14.2 The potentials and limitations of Chapter 18
and ecosystem-based adaptation 58 10.2 Common approaches to assessing ecological engineering 163 Conclusions – challenges and opportunties
vulnerability and risk 115 14.3 Conclusions 167 for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
5.1 Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 59
and adaptation 204
5.2 Ecosystem-based adaptation 61 10.3 Integrating ecosystems in risk assessment
and mapping 118
5.3 Similarities and differences between
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 10.4 Conclusions 122
and ecosystem-based adaptation 63
5.4 The benefits of integrating ecosystem-
based disaster risk reduction and
ecosystem-based adaptation 68
5.5 Conclusions 70
2 3
Executive summary Acknowledgements
Disasters kill people, destroy infrastructure, damage ecosystems and This Source Book stems from a collaborative project between the TH Köln –
undermine development, and could increase in frequency due to climate University of Applied Sciences, Cologne, Germany, the Centers for Natural
change. There is a need for increased awareness on the latest advances Resources and Development (CNRD), an international university network
in disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation (CCA). based at TH Köln, and the United Nations Environment Programme
A significant advancement is a better understanding of ecosystem-based (UNEP), Crisis Management Branch, Global University Partnership for
approaches for reducing disaster risks and adapting to climate change. Environmental Sustainability (GUPES), with technical support from the
This book explains the importance of ecosystems and their management Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (PEDRR).
for DRR and CCA and provides guidance to plan and implement Financial contributions were provided by TH Köln, UNEP, Eye on Earth
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation Programme, the European Union and the German Federal Ministry for
(Eco-DRR/EbA). Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), the EXCEED programme
DRR aims to work on reducing risk factors, by reducing exposure, and the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) to develop a
vulnerability and hazards. A number of things can contribute to increasing Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on Ecosystem-based Disaster
risk in each of the risk factors, many of which are related either directly Risk Reduction.
or indirectly to poor environmental management. The international policy For further information on our organisations and our MOOC, visit our
field acknowledges the need to improve resilience through improving, websites.
maintaining and managing ecosystem function with a number of Authors:
mentions and mandates in several important agreements, such as the Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Nehren, U., Sandholz, S. and Doswald, N.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR), the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and Acknowledgement:
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We would like to extend special thanks to a number of people who
contributed in various capacities to this manuscript, by alphabetical order:
Ecosystems provide important services that can address all risk factors. Aya Aboulhosn, Teresa Arce Mojica, Niloufar Bayani, Brock Blevins, Rita
They reduce exposure to hazards by buffering their impact, such as Cozma, Prim Devakula, Gesa Dickhoff, Marisol Estrella, Michelle Ford,
mangroves attenuating waves or forests protecting against avalanches. Sruthi Herbert, Ishrat Jahan, Harrhy James, Mike Jones, Molly Frances
Well managed, they reduce hazards; indeed degraded ecosystems are Kellogg, Marwa Khalifa, Wolfram Lange, Toshihisa Nakamura, Sabine Plog,
more prone to creating hazards such as landslides or desertification. Fabrice Renaud, Leila Rharade, Lars Ribbe, Nicole Rokicki, Meenakshi
Finally, they can reduce vulnerability by providing food, water and Sajeev, Harald Sander and Guenther Straub.
livelihoods to communities.
Eco-DRR is the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of
ecosystems to reduce disaster risk, with the aim to achieve sustainable
and resilient development (Estrella and Saalismaa 2013). EbA is the use
of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adaptation
strategy to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change
(CBD 2009). While these two approaches have some differences due to
REFERENCES being developed in silos, separately in the DRR and CCA communities,
CBD (2009). Connecting there is much overlap in practice.
Biodiversity and Climate Change
We hope that readers of this source book will retain a few key messages
Mitigation and Adaptation: Report With special thanks to our donors
of the Second Ad Hoc Technical
about Eco-DRR/EbA and its core principles. These include: providing multiple With financial support from the
Expert Group on Biodiversity benefits and offering a no-regrets strategy. Furthermore, ecosystem-based
and Climate Change. Technical approaches to DRR/CCA are often more cost-effective over time than grey
Series No. 41. Secretariat of the infrastructure alone, although in some cases, grey-green infrastructure
Convention of Biological Diversity: combinations are the most optimal. And finally, gender-sensitive Eco-DRR/
Montreal. https://www.cbd.int/ EbA is fundamental to transformational resilience, or resilience which leads Co-funded by the
doc/publications/cbd-ts-41-en.pdf European Union
to sustainable reduction of disaster risks. Our book concludes that there are
Accessed: 24 July 2019.
still knowledge gaps and challenges to mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA, not
Estrella, M. and Saalismaa, N. the least being how to scale-up investments in ecosystems for DRR/CCA
(2013). Ecosystem-based disaster from a locally specific project to generalisable guidelines. This is indeed
risk reduction (Eco-DRR): An
one of the main challenges of Eco-DRR/EbA: for example, vegetation that
overview. In The role of ecosystems
in disaster risk reduction. Renaud.
reduces erosion in one locality may not work in another. Nevertheless,
F.G., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, this book aims to provide answers to overcome some of these gaps and
M. (eds.). UNU Press, Tokyo, 25-54. challenges. It also challenges readers to engage in new research, find ways
http://collections.unu.edu/view/ to incorporate Eco-DRR/EbA in development planning and join the growing
UNU:1995 Accessed: 24 July 2019. community of practice working to advance this emerging field.
4 5
The context and content of this source book
01
1.1 Introduction
Disasters kill people, destroy infrastructure, damage ecosystems and
undermine development. Climate change is expected to aggravate existing Partnership for environment
Chapter 1 disaster risks in many regions of the world. There is a need for increased
awareness amongst practitioners, policymakers and researchers on
and disaster risk reduction
PEDRR is a global alliance
the latest advances in disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change
The context and content adaptation (CCA). There is now a better understanding of ecosystem
of UN agencies, NGOs and
specialist institutes. PEDRR
of this source book based approaches for reducing disaster risks and adapting to climate
change. Natural solutions are now more commonplace to providing
seeks to promote and
scale-up implementation of
protective buffers and supporting food and water for increased resilience Eco-DRR/EbA and ensure
against disaster impacts. Ecosystem-based approaches for disaster risk it is mainstreamed in
reduction and climate change adaptation (or Eco-DRR/EbA) are considered development planning at
by the IPCC (2012) as a “no-regrets” strategy, providing multiple socio- global, national and local
economic benefits regardless of disasters, including carbon storage and levels, in line with the SFDRR.
sequestration, biodiversity conservation, and poverty alleviation.
For more information:
The promotion and uptake of so called ‘Nature-based Solutions’ (NbS) www.pedrr.org
for DRR and CCA has grown and gained attention internationally since
2007, after the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP). Conservation organisations,
such as the International Union for Nature Conservation (IUCN) and The
Nature Conservancy (TNC), supported by some Member States, brought
forth in their submissions to the 14th UNFCCC CoP in 2008 the concept of
ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) as an important element of the future
adaptation framework under the UNFCCC (Vignola et al. 2009).
In the field of DRR, the importance of ecosystems has been recognised
and discussed for some time prior to the push for EbA, and this recognition
is found in the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015, mainly
through HFA Priority 4, to “reduce the underlying risk factors”. Contributing
to this evolution, the Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk
Reduction (PEDRR) has been advocating for Eco-DRR to be mainstreamed
in disaster and development planning globally since 2008.
Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR)
Global target D
Global target C Damage to critical infrastructure
Economic loss/Global GDP and disruption
of basic services
Technical guidelines
Indicators relevant to green
infrastructure and ecosystems Provide support to define relevant
Indicator C5 Indicator D4
Direct economic loss resulting Number of other destroyed or Critical infrastructure
from damaged or destroyed damaged critical infrastructure • Protective infrastructure
critical infrastructure attributed units and facilities attributed • Green infrastructure
to disasters to disasters
and respective accounting methodology

used for indicator assessment in metadata
Figure 1.1
Indicators on green infrastructure and ecosystems in the SFDRR.
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UN Environment Source: Sebesvari et al. 2019. Redrawn by L. Monk
6 7
01
Thanks to its advocacy, the post-2015 agenda of the SFDRR provides a
DEFINITIONS more explicit recognition of the role of sustainable ecosystem management
EbA: The use of biodiversity for reducing disaster risk and building resilience. Furthermore, the Sendai
and ecosystem services as Framework Monitor (SFM), which includes 38 indicators to monitor
part of an overall adaptation progress towards seven targets, has provision to report upon green
strategy to help people adapt infrastructure, under two indicators (Figure 1.1). However, to date no
to the adverse effects of government has reported on green infrastructure.
climate change (CBD 2009). The different terminology used to denote NbS, within different agreements
or documents, such as the ecosystem-based approaches mentioned
Eco-DRR: The sustainable
in the SFDRR and green infrastructure in the SFM, or used by different
management, conservation
organisations such as EbA in climate change discussions and Eco-DRR
and restoration of ecosystems
in DRR discussions, can create confusion and murkiness, which may
to reduce disaster risk, with
also impede uptake and reporting by governments. Ensuring clarity and
the aim to achieve sustainable communication is therefore important.
and resilient development
(Estrella and Saalismaa 2013). While the importance of environmental management is not new, and
one of the pillars of sustainable development, there is still a dominance
EbM: The use of ecosystems of technical and structural solutions to problems such as disasters and
for their carbon storage and climate change. Part of this reason is perhaps the lack of evidence,
sequestration service to aid understanding and guidance for the implementation for NbS. However,
climate change mitigation. thanks to policy developments and advocacy, as well as increased funding
for such projects, implementation of natural solutions, or ecosystem-
based approaches is increasing.
This is important because population and economic growth, particularly
in many developing and newly industrialised countries will put increasing
pressures on ecosystems and reduce their protective function against
hazard events. Landscape and ecosystem degradation, for instance of
mangroves, coastal dune systems, and mountain forests, can be observed
in many parts of the world, and will likely continue or even accelerate if no
suitable countermeasures are taken. Figure 1.2
Border between Haiti on left, Dominican Republic on right. © UNEP
Figure 1.2 is a striking illustration of the different levels of vegetation cover

between Haiti (left of road) and the Dominican Republic (right of road).
In Haiti, severe environmental degradation is one of the main underlying
TERMINOLOGY risk factors – leading to increased vulnerability and risk to hazard events.
Several terms are used to denote the use of natural areas with other environmental features For example, the 2004 Tropical Storm Jeanne caused numerous mudslides
ecosystems or natural elements in a landscape. designed and managed to deliver a wide range of and over 1,600 causalities in Haiti especially in the city of Gonaïves. In
These terms are: ecosystem services such as water purification, air contrast, in the neighbouring Dominican Republic, the same storm caused
quality, space for recreation, climate mitigation much less damage and only 18 casualties were reported (NOAA, 2014).
Natural Solutions (NS) or Nature-based Solutions
(NbS) are defined by IUCN as “actions to protect, and adaptation, and management of wet weather Another example of natural coastal protection is from Sri Lanka,
sustainably manage, and restore natural or modified impacts that provides many community benefits” where human activities aggravated the impact from the Indian Ocean
ecosystems that address societal challenges (UNISDR, 2017: 96) tsunami in 2004. Figure 1.3 shows Yala National Park in Southern
effectively and adaptively, simultaneously providing Natural buffers: similar to green infrastructure. Sri Lanka, which was hit hard by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004.
human well-being and biodiversity benefits” (Cohen- In the photo on the top, we barely distinguish a few green rooftops
Ecosystem-based approaches: includes Ecosystem-
Shacham et al. 2016). This is an umbrella term for of an ecotourism resort that was protected by sand dunes. There
based adaptation (EbA), Ecosystem-based disaster
all natural mangement approaches, including those the wave height was only 5 cm and there were no casualties. The
risk reduction (Eco-DRR), and Ecosystem-based
undertaken for disaster-risk reduction or climate photo on the bottom shows the Yala Safari Resort which lies right by
mitigation (EbM).
change adaptation. the beach not far from the ecotourism resort, where the dunes had
Green and blue space: these terms are often used been removed for better ocean views. Here the wave height reached
Green-blue (or natural) Infrastructure (GI or NI): in urban climate change adaptation, and denote 7 meters and 27 people died. This is a good example of how ecosystems,
This term is often used to oppose what is called the provision of “green” areas, such as green roofs, such as sand dunes, can protect people and infrastructure against
“grey (or hard) infrastructure”, which refers to any parks, green corridors, and “blue” areas, such as coastal hazards. It also illustrates how a hazard, such as a tsunami, can
hard structure such as a sea wall or dyke and is ponds and water features, for urban cooling and become a disaster when people are living in exposed places or degrade
“a strategically planned network of natural and semi- water management. their environments.
8 9
01
Figure 1.3 This book was written for disaster managers and practitioners, CCA
Yala National Park, Sri Lanka professionals, development planners, project implementers and policy
and nested ecotourism resort. makers, students and leaders in the fields of DRR, CCA, development,
© B. McAdoo
and natural resources management, including environmental engineering,
regional, urban and environmental planning, geography, ecology,
landscape ecology, agricultural sciences, and anybody else interested
in learning about new solutions to addressing increasing disasters and
climate risks.
1.2 Structure of the book

This book aims to provide readers with an understanding of the concepts
of DRR and CCA, explain the importance of ecosystems and their
management for DRR and CCA, and provide guidance and tools to plan
and implement Eco-DRR/EbA. However, this book can only give general
principles and overview of the issues. It cannot provide specific guidance
for specific conditions because each situation is unique and requires in
depth inquiry, and will depend on resources available for each context.
Yala Safari resort, Sri Lanka. Nevertheless, it is hoped that this book and the resources that are given
© B. McAdoo at the end of some chapters can help towards mainstreaming Eco-DRR/
EbA and be a reference source for this emerging field.
Chapters 2-5 introduce the subject of disasters and risk reduction,
climate change and adaptation and the role of ecosystems and their
management for DRR and CCA. Chapter 2 provides an overview of
disasters and what is DRR, as well as how climate change impacts
disaster risk. This chapter also introduces gender issues in DRR, which
will be further elaborated upon in subsequent chapters. Being sensitive
to gender when planning DRR and CCA is extremely important, not only
due to the policy requirements for equity and equality, but also because
of the inherent vulnerability of more marginalised groups as well as the
contribution for long-term resilience that women and other minorities
can provide. Chapter 3 discusses the differences and convergence
between DRR and CCA as well as the main international agreements
and actors relevant for Eco-DRR/EbA. Chapter 4 introduces the link
between ecosystems and DRR, while Chapter 5 clarifies the differences
and commonalities between Eco-DRR and EbA and argues for integration
Most disasters or at least some of their severe impacts are preventable of both.
and are often caused or aggravated by degraded environmental
Chapters 6-8 develop on the principles of ecosystem-based approaches
conditions. Eco-DRR/EbA is an approach where ecosystems (for e.g.
for DRR and adaptation, system thinking and resilience. Chapter 6 provides
mountain forests, wetlands and mangroves) are systematically harnessed
the core principles of Eco-DRR/EbA that can help to understand the
to prevent, mitigate or buffer against natural hazards and the impacts
underlying paradigm and briefly discusses some of the implementation
of climate change, such as sea level rise. Eco-DRR/EbA recognizes that
challenges. Chapter 7 explains system thinking, and how it is important in
ecosystems can provide DRR services as well as offer other ecosystem
developing Eco-DRR/EbA measures. Chapter 8 looks at what is resilience,
services of productive, regulating and cultural value, which also contribute
which is a concept that is found in many of the international policy
to building local resilience to disasters and climate change. Investments
agreements and project development aims in CCA and DRR. It provides
in Eco-DRR/EbA approaches thus provide multiple benefits – not only
several ways at looking at resilience from short-term coping to longer-
for increasing resilience to DRR and CCA – but especially for supporting
term transformation.
livelihoods, human well-being and ecosystem health. However, just as
there are limitations to engineered structures, there are also limitations Chapter 9 looks more concretely at DRR and the different disaster phases,
to how much ecosystems, such as coastal sand dunes or mangroves, which can be categorised in four parts following an event: relief, recovery,
can protect from a hazard event such as a tropical cyclone or tsunami. reconstruction, and prevention. The chapter provides some ideas as to
This protection function depends on the health of the ecosystem and how to incorporate ecosystem and gender consideration into each phase.
the magnitude of the hazard event. There is however a growing body of Chapters 10-15 detail different tools for Eco-DRR/EbA: looking at risk
scientific evidence about the protective functions of ecosystems, upon assessments, planning, gender and community-based tools, management
which this source book is based. tools, ecological engineering, and finally economic tools. Risk assessments
10 11
01
are introduced in Chapter 10 with some examples of projects that have
TERMINOLOGY included ecosystems in them. Chapter 11 gives a general overview of
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
USED IN THIS BOOK some planning tools from participatory rural appraisal, spatial planning Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C. and Maginnis, NOAA Website https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/ Accessed:
This book will be using using geographical information systems and environmental impact S. (2016). Nature-based Solutions to address global societal 24 July 2019
challenges. Gland: IUCN. https://portals.iucn.org/library/
terminology given by the assessments. Risk assessment and planning are integral parts of DRR Sebesvari, Z., Woelki, J., Walz, Y., Sudmeier-Rieux, K.,
sites/library/files/documents/2016-036.pdf Accessed:
United Nations Office for and CCA implementation. Chapter 12 delves a bit more into gender Sandholz, S., Tol, S., Ruíz García, V. and Renaud, F. (2019).
24 July 2019.
Disaster Risk Reduction – aspects of DRR and highlights how successful integration of gender into Opportunities for Green Infrastructure and Ecosystems
UNDRR [formerly the United DRR can improve resilience. Moreover, involving the whole community IPCC (2012). Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and in the Sendai Framework Monitor. Progress in Disaster
Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Science, 2, 100021 DOI: 10.1016/j.pdisas.2019.100021.
Nations International Strategy in planning and implementation of Eco-DRR/EbA is important for
Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental
for Disaster Reduction] sustainability and to address any conflict and find ways to cooperate for Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker,
Vignola R., Locatelli B., Martinez C., and Imbach P. (2009).
(UNISDR) (2017)]. UNDRR a better future. Chapter 13 explains the main management tools, which Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: what role
D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach,
is the main UN agency are: Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), Integrated Coastal for policy-makers, society and scientists? Mitigation and
G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
Adaptation of Strategies for Global Change, 14, 691-696. DOI:
that advocates for disaster Zone Management (ICZM), Sustainable Land Management, Integrated Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.1007/s11027-009-9193-6.
reduction policies and Fire Management (IFM) and Protected Area Management (PAM). Chapter IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation,
practices. It should be noted 14 goes into more detail on using green infrastructure or hybrid green- UNISDR (2017). Technical Guidance for Monitoring and
and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects.
grey approaches that are collectively called ecological engineering. It Reporting on Progress in Achieving the Global Targets of the
that there are however Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.
several different definitions gives examples as well as the potentials and limitations of the approach. Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
unisdr.org/files/54970_techguidancefdigitalhr.pdf Accessed
for many of these terms. Chapter 15 highlights the importance of finance and tools that can be used [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D.
24 July 2019.
The Intergovernmental Panel to inform decision-making, such as cost-benefit analysis and ecosystem Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada,
R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken,
on Climate Change (IPCC) valuation. It also briefly introduces the concept of payment for ecosystem
P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge and
definitions, for instance, are services, a mechanism which has originally been used in the climate New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.
substantially different from mitigation/emissions reduction schemes but can also be important for
those used by the “disaster other ecosystem services tied to DRR/CCA.
risk reduction community”, The last three chapters aim to bring everything together. Chapter 16 looks
creating some confusions at key entry points for mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA. The chapter once
regarding terms. However, again highlights the importance of finance and financing Eco-DRR/EbA
significant efforts have been and provides examples of some national and international policy entry
made to consolidate the two points. Chapter 17 provides a general operational framework for Eco-DRR.
sets of terms: It gives a structure of five points/questions that need to be considered
http://www.preventionweb. when creating a project plan that aims for resilience. Finally, Chapter 18
net/english/professional/ wraps things up with the opportunities and challenges for Eco-DRR/EbA
terminology going forward.
12 13
Introduction to disasters, risk reduction and climate change
02
2.1 Hazard events and disasters Natural hazards
Chapter 2 For a disaster to be entered into the official database on disasters, EM-DAT,
the International Disaster Database, it must meet at least one of four criteria:
GEOPHYSICAL
Earthquakes
Introduction to disasters, Ten (10) or more people reported killed. Volcanic eruptions
Tsunamis
Hundred (100) or more people reported affected.
risk reduction and Declaration of a state of emergency.
Landslides
climate change Call for international assistance.

HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL
Avalanches
In other words, natural hazard events, such as landslides, tropical cyclones, Floods
floods, avalanches, etc., become disasters if they exceed the capacity of
Key questions a community or society to cope using its own resources. Even a severe
Storm surges
Cyclonic storms
What is a disaster and how does a hazard hazard event would not be declared disaster if no one is affected (directly Droughts
event become a disaster? or indirectly). For example, an avalanche happening in some remote and
Heat waves
uninhabited area would not be considered a disaster. Thus, whether a
How does climate change contribute Wind storms
hazard event becomes a disaster depends largely on the magnitude of
to disasters? Wild fires
the event but also on how well a society is prepared to cope with it. For
What is disaster risk reduction? example, a flood of the same magnitude may not be considered a disaster
in a country such as Bangladesh which often experiences severe flooding
What are the main actions undertaken as compared to a country such as Sweden where large-scale flooding
to reduce disaster risks? is less common. Disasters can be classified in different ways although DEFINITION: DISASTER
the first distinction is between man-made1 disasters (chemical accidents, “A serious disruption of the
oil spills, industrial pollution) as caused by technological hazards versus functioning of a community or
disasters associated with natural hazards. a society involving widespread
human, material, economic
Natural hazards can be classified in several ways but are usually
or environmental losses
broken down into the two broad categories: geophysical and biological
and impacts, which exceeds
hazards (Burton et al. 1993). Figure 2.1 shows the classification used
the ability of the affected
in EM-DAT (2015). Landslides can be triggered either by earthquakes
community or society to cope
or most commonly by rainfall. Floods and wildfires can be related to a
using its own resources.”
combination of geological, hydrological and meteorological phenomena.
According to UNISDR (2009) a biological hazard can be defined as a UNISDR 2009
“process or phenomenon of organic origin or conveyed by biological
vectors, including exposure to pathogenic micro-organisms, toxins and
bioactive substances that may cause loss of life, injury, illness or other
health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social
and economic disruption, or environmental damage.” In the 2015 Global
Assessment Report by UNISDR, natural hazards were referred to as
“physical hazards” although this definition has not yet replaced natural
hazards in the official terminology. This book addresses geophysical,
hydro-meteorological and climatological hazards as these are the hazards
that are the most common and can be attenuated to various degrees
through ecosystem management and restoration.
Figure 2.1
Disaster types.
EM-DAT 2015
1. In some instances the term “environmental disasters” is used to describe man-made or technological disasters
14 15
02
Another important distinction is between sudden or slow onset
disasters, also referred to as intensive or extensive hazards
(UNISDR 2011). UNDRR (formerly UNISDR) defines the threshold
variables between intensive and extensive disaster losses in terms
of mortality and housing destruction. The thresholds are fixed at:
Mortality: less than 30 people killed (extensive); 30 or more killed (intensive);
Housing destruction: less than 600 houses destroyed (extensive); 600 or
more houses destroyed (intensive) (UNISDR 2015).
Earthquakes, tsunamis or sudden landslides are examples of intensive
hazards while, droughts and slow-moving landslides are examples of
extensive hazards (although a very sudden and intense drought could be
considered intensive). Extensive hazards also affect the vulnerability and
resilience of communities and will likely increase in some regions due to
climate change impacts (IPCC 2012).
DISASTER TRENDS AND STATISTICS

Disasters have become more frequent during the past 20 years
(Figure 2.2). While the number of people affected has decreased, only
partly explained by population growth, death rates on the other hand, have
increased over the same period, reaching an average of more than 99,700
deaths per year between 2004 and 2017.
This partly reflects the huge loss of life several mega disasters during
that time period: for example, the Asian tsunami in 2004, cyclone Nargis
Natural
in 2008catastrophes
and the earthquake1980–2017
in Haiti in 2010 (Figure 2.3).
Figure 2.3
Number
Althoughof relevant
countries have events
made quite some progress in reducing mortality
Mortality from disasters concentrated
from intensive disasters through improved disaster management (early warning systems, preparedness programs and evacuation plans), the
in a few intensive events.
increase in extensive risk demonstrates that countries have not adequately UNISDR 2015
Figure 2.2 Climatological Hydrological Overall number addressed underlying risk drivers that are anchored in poverty and poor
Number of disasters 1980-2015
Geophysical Meteorological of events governance (UNISDR 2015). Figure 2.4 shows how global processes
Munich Re NatCatSERVICE 2017 and underlying risk drivers affect the risk-poverty nexus. Decreasing the
underlying drivers of risk, which impact the vulnerability of people, would
800 Number of relevant help to decrease the magnitude of disasters.
loss events increasing
This fact is further mirrored by the UNDRR statistic: almost 90% of the
Figure 2.4
mortality recorded since 1990 in internationally reported disasters has
The risk-poverty nexus.
600 UNISDR 2015. Redrawn by L. Monk
Underlying THE RISK-POVERTY NEXUS

risk drivers
Increasing hazard Extensive and intensive risks
Disaster loss
400 exposure of Exposure of vulnerable people
Mortality, damage to housing,
population and and assets to frequent
Global local infrastructure, morbidity,
economic assets low-severity and infrequent
livestock and crops
processes high-severity hazards
Lack of
Uneven economic accountability and
200 and territorial limited social
development cohesion
Rising social and
Everyday risks Poverty outcomes
Badly planned
economic inequality managed urban Food insecurity, crime, disease, Short and long-run impacts on
development pollution, accidents, lack of income, consumption, welfare
Collapsing sanitation and clean water and equality
0 planetary systems
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Vulnerable rural
and climate change livelihoods
Declining
ecosystems Multidimensional poverty
Weak social Economic poverty, powerlessness, Limited opportunities
protection exclusion, illiteracy, discrimination to access and mobilize assets
16 17
02
occurred in low and middle-income countries (UNISDR/UNDRR 2015, The type of disaster caused by natural hazards that affects most people Figure 2.7
2019). According to EM-DAT, during the period 2004 and 2013, on average, worldwide is weather-related, with drought, floods and storms being the Share of occurrence of disasters
more than three times as many people died per disaster in low-income leading cause of disasters (Figure 2.7). by type (2000-2018).
countries (332 deaths) than in high-income nations (105 deaths). When EM-DAT 2019
combining higher-income with upper-middle-income countries, 56% All types Earthquake Flood Storm Drought Epidemic
of the countries experienced disasters but accounted for ‘only’ 32% of
deaths, while low- and lower-middle-income countries experienced 44%
of disasters but suffered 68% of deaths (EM-DAT 2015) (Figure 2.5).
Figure 2.5 Number of Deaths (thousand) Number of Deaths per event
Total number of deaths compared

500 350
to the average number of deaths per
disaster by income group 450
300
(1994-2013). 400
EM-DAT 2015. Redrawn by L. Monk
350 250
300
200
250
150
200
150 100
100
50
50
According to UNDRR (UNISDR 2015), absolute economic losses due to

High income Upper middle Lower middle Low income
income income disasters are rising, but in relative terms, the global increase in economic
loss from disasters is statistically not significant. However, whereas
absolute economic loss is concentrated in higher-income countries, in
As critical infrastructure, such as roads and hospitals, is constructed, the relative terms, it remains a far greater problem for low income countries.
expectation is that disaster-affected people will be provided with better During the period 1994-2013, high income countries recorded losses of
chances of avoiding and recovering from hazard events. Improved levels an estimated US$ 1,660 billion dollars due to disasters, while low income
of economic development should lead to advances in early warning countries recorded only US$ 71 billion. In relation to GDP, this corresponds
systems, ranging from more accurate monitoring of weather events to to 0.3% losses for high income countries compared to 5.1% in low
vastly increased mobile phone access and real improvements in disaster income countries (Figure 2.8). As underreporting of economic losses is
preparedness and response. especially common in low income countries the above statistics reflect a
Figure 2.6 illustrates that Asia continues to be the continent with the greatest disproportionate impact from disasters on low income countries.
Figure 2.6
number of disasters. According to EM-DAT, in 2018, 53% of disasters
Disasters worldwide by
occurred in Asia and 85% of those affected by disasters were also in Asia. Economic losses Economic losses as % of GDP Figure 2.8
continent 2000-2018.
Economic losses in absolute value
EM-Dat 2019 (billion US$) %
and compared to GDP 1994-2013.
1800 6
1659 EM-DAT 2015. Redrawn by L. Monk
1600 5.1
5
1400
1200 4
1000
3
800 678
0.2
600 2
400
0.6 173 1
200 0.3 71
0
High income Upper middle Lower middle Low income
income income
18 19
02
DISASTERS AND GENDER Fukushima prefectures were the worst affected, with 8,363 female and
7,360 male casualties recorded in total (the gender of 63 further casualties
It is well understood that natural hazards do not discriminate, but people
was not identified). Female casualties outnumbered male by around
do. When a natural hazard turns into a disaster affecting people, it can
1,000. The majority of these additional 1,000 female casualties were aged
affect people even within the same community differently. Various axes
70 years or older (Government of Japan 2014). Of course, an aspect not
of inequality – class, race, gender, caste, ethnicity, religion – all can affect
necessarily revealed by some of these statistics is the proportion of men
how disasters impact individuals and communities (Figure 2.9). This hints
to women within the community to begin with.
at a gendered impact of disasters, whether due to the impact during or
in the aftermath of a disaster where social inequalities can be exposed Field-work based observations and anecdotal accounts of practitioners
in terms of burden of impact, the help received or even in post disaster and experts reinforce this analysis of differential impact across genders
violence that can ensue. exacerbated by vulnerability. Some of the reasons that contribute to this
are well known: dress codes can restrict women’s ability to move quickly;
Figure 2.9 girls and women are not taught to swim or climb trees, which can affect
Flooding in Haiti 2007. their chances of surviving floods; insufficient access to early warnings
© UNEP affect women’s chances to leave disaster areas; domestic and caring jobs
that women do often make them less inclined to immediately leave a
disaster area.
Through her work in regions in Tamil Nadu, India affected by the 2004
Indian Ocean Tsunami, Pincha (2008) describes the impact of gender
norms. She writes,
“During the Tsunami in Tamil Nadu, strong internalized values of nudity and
shame prevented women from running to safety as their saris had been
removed by the sheer force of the waves. The women preferred to drown
rather than come out of waters without their clothes. Since the incident
many of them have started using inner wear as it will provide minimal cover
in case they have to discard or raise their sari and run.” (Pincha 2008:24)
There are circumstances where gendered social expectations can affect
men more. Gender roles within the prevailing social relations may also
lead to more men losing their lives in certain situations. For example,
it is estimated that more men than women were killed when Hurricane
The gendered impact of disasters was investigated by Neumayer and Mitch struck Central America in 1998 (Bradshaw and UNECLAC 2004).
Plümper (2007). They analysed data relating to 4,605 disasters caused More recently in the floods of 2018 in Kerala, South India, it is reported
by natural hazards between 1981 and 2002. Examining disaster mortality, that of the 433 lives lost in the floods and landslides, 268 were men, 98
they show that the gender gap between life expectancy (generally more women, and 67 children , as men were expected to assist others during
for women than men) decreases during and in the aftermath of a disaster. the emergency (Government of Kerala 2018).
The stronger the disaster, the more severe its impact on female life
Gender aspects also play a crucial role in disaster recovery and
expectancy. From this study, they argue that it is the “socially constructed
reconstruction. The Post Disaster Needs Assessment (see also Chapter
gender-specific vulnerability of females built into everyday socioeconomic
15) carried out after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake in Nepal showed that
patterns that lead to the relatively higher female disaster mortality rates
disaster impacts on infrastructure, social and production sector put a
compared to men” (Neumayer and Plümper 2007:551). Their argument
huge strain on the ability of poor households to sustain their livelihoods,
about gender specific vulnerability due to pre-existing discriminations in
thus promoting negative coping strategies, such as child labor, early
the social structure is bolstered by their finding that “the adverse impact of
marriage, and sexual and gender-based violence. It increased the time
disasters on females relative to men vanishes with rising socioeconomic
women and girls had to spend collecting water and firewood by another
status of women” (Neumayer and Plümper 2007:562). However, the data
three hours in some remote settlements. Social norms expecting females
available preclude coming to any general conclusions applicable across
to be responsible for these basic household supplies can thus result in
the board about the gendered impact of disasters.
long-term negative impacts on girl education (Government of Nepal 2015).
Subsequent studies have shown that in several disasters women These experiences with disasters show that our gendered social lives
frequently outnumber men in terms of casualties or being affected. increase women’s vulnerability in general, whereas social expectations of
In Indonesia, in the four villages in the Aceh Besar district surveyed by bravery or risk-taking may cost men their lives.
Oxfam in the aftermath of the 2004 Tsunami, only 189 of 676 survivors
Beyond the binary nature of men and women, other gender minorities can
were female. Male survivors outnumbered female survivors by a ratio of
find themselves more vulnerable during and after disasters especially if they
almost 3:1. In four villages in North Aceh district, out of 366 deaths, 284
are already marginalised in society (Gorman-Murray et al. 2014). Studies
were females: females accounted for 77% of deaths in these villages. In
in various countries reveal that discrimination and access to assistance
the worst affected village, Kuala Cangkoy, for every male who died, four
can increase the impact of disasters on LGBTI (lesbian, gay, transgender
females died — or in other words, 80% of deaths were female (Oxfam
and intersex) communities, or other gender minorities, such as the bakla
2005). In the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2012, Iwate, Miyagi and
20 21
02
Figure 2.8 Exposure increase (1970=100%)
in the Philippines (Gorman--Murray et al. 2014; Gaillard et al. 2016). Other
Trend in
disadvantages such as disability, being a religious minority or belonging 250%
Population exposed per year Figure 2.11:
flood exposure (in millions)
to any oppressed group – race/caste/class/religion – etc. could also per income region
Increase of exposure of populations
exacerbate the gendered impact of disasters. UN Department of Economic as modelled 225%
to hazard events from 1980 to 2010.
37
Source: UNISDR 2011
and Social Affairs (2019) states that “Individuals with disabilities are
disproportionately affected in disaster, emergency, and conflict situations 200%
10
due to inaccessible evacuation, response (including shelters, camps, and 1

food distribution), and recovery efforts.” Enarson and Fordham (2000
(200:50)) researching flood recovery in the US and UK found that “flooding 175%
reflected and exacerbated economic, racial/ethnic and gender inequalities”. Low-in come countries
150%
EXPOSURE AS A MAIN DRIVER OF DISASTER RISK Lower- middle-income countries
Uppe r- middle-income countries

Following the section on disasters and gender, this section explores 125%
the importance of exposure as a driver of disaster risk. One of the OECD countries
main messages of this source book is that most disasters are actually
preventable and mainly result from people living in hazard exposed places, 100%
1980 1990 2000 2010
such as along coastlines, rivers and steep slopes (UNISDR 2011). It is
thus crucial to know how disasters of various types may be preventable
and what actions we need to undertake to reduce the occurrence of
preventable disasters. Figure 2.10 illustrates urban growth in a city in
eastern Nepal, where over 200 households settled by the banks of the river
over a time period of five years (2004-2009), mostly in shanty houses. A
large flood from the river in 2013 created massive damage to this section
of the city (in red).
What this example demonstrates is how exposure is a main driving factor
for disaster risk, not only in Nepal but worldwide.
Figure 2.10
Redrawn maps by Sabine Plog.
Left: Seuti Khola River, Dharan
Nepal in 2004;
Right: Seuti Khola River, Dharan
Nepal in 2009.
© Sudmeier-Rieux 2009
N N N N
POTENTIAL
POTENTIAL
FLOOD
FLOOD
AREA AREA
Figure 2.11 compares the exposure of the population in different

categories of countries from 1980 to 2010. It differentiates between low-
income, lower-middle-income, upper-middle-income and OECD countries
worldwide. We clearly observe that people in low-income countries are Figure 2.12
World risk index 2018.
the most exposed with an almost linear increase from 1980 to 2010 and
Credit: 2019 Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft, NatCatSERVICE
a total increase of 250% since the baseline year 1970. In contrast, people
in OECD countries are the less exposed with a flattening growth.
The most at risk to disasters due to exposure and vulnerability are the
tropics and subtropics (Figure 2.12).
22 23
02
CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RISK The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) 2013-2014 compiles the current
Climate change state of scientific knowledge relevant to climate change. It is comprised
The Special Report on Extreme Events (SREX) of the IPCC (IPCC 2012)
“Warming of the climate of Working Group (WG) reports and a Synthesis Report (SYR). The AR5
was quite nuanced in its findings linking climate change with extreme
system is unequivocal, and is divided into:
weather events and disaster occurrence. It presented its findings in
since the 1950s, many of WG I: The Physical Science Basis
terms of various degrees of agreement and evidence among scientists
the observed changes are
as confidence levels (Table 2.1). WG II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
unprecedented over decades
to millennia. The atmosphere There is evidence from observations gathered since 1950 of change WG III: Mitigation of Climate Change
and ocean have warmed, the in some extreme hazard events. Confidence in observed changes in
The WG I report highlights in great detail the various impacts that climate
amounts of snow and ice extremes depends on the quality and quantity of data and the availability
change is having on the natural spheres (atmosphere, hydrosphere,
have diminished, sea level has of studies analyzing these data, which vary across regions and for
cryosphere, lithosphere, biosphere), discusses the climate models and
risen, and the concentrations different extremes. Assigning «low» confidence in observed changes in a
the extent to which observed changes are due to human activity.
of greenhouse gases specific extreme on regional or global scales neither implies nor excludes
have increased”. the possibility of changes in extremes. Extreme events are rare/infrequent, The WG II report evaluates how patterns of risks and potential benefits
which means there are few data available to make assessments regarding are shifting due to climate change. “It considers how impacts and risks
IPCC 2013, SPM-3
changes in their frequency and intensity (IPCC 2012). Climate change related to climate change can be reduced and managed through adaptation
impacts in terms of extreme events vary according to the type of hazard and mitigation. The report assesses needs, options, opportunities,
and across geographical locations. constraints, resilience, limits, and other aspects associated with adaptation”
(IPCC 2014: 3).
The main findings of WG II are summarised below:
PHENOMENA CONFIDENCE LEVELS
In recent decades, changes in climate have caused impacts on
Models project substantial warming Virtually certain that increases in the frequency and magnitude
natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans.
in temperature extremes by the end of of warm daily temperature extremes and decreases in cold
the 21st century extremes will occur in the 21st century. In many regions, changing precipitation or melting snow and ice are
Very likely that the length, frequency, and/or intensity of warm altering hydrological systems, affecting water resources in terms of
spells or heat waves will increase over most land areas. quantity and quality (medium confidence).
Many terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species have shifted
Frequency of heavy precipitation or Likely to increase in many areas of the globe. Particularly the
proportion of total rainfall from heavy falls case in the high latitudes and tropical regions, and in winter in
their geographic ranges, seasonal activities, migration patterns,
the northern mid-latitudes. abundances, and species interactions in response to ongoing climate
change (high confidence).
Average tropical cyclone maximum Speed likely to increase, although increases may not occur
Based on many studies covering a wide range of regions and crops,
wind speed and global frequency in all ocean basins. Global frequency likely to decrease or be
of tropical cyclones essentially unchanged. negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more
common than positive impacts (high confidence).
Number of average extra tropical cyclones Medium confidence of them being reduced as averaged over
At present the world-wide burden of human ill-health from climate
each hemisphere.
change is relatively small compared with effects of other stressors
Intensification of droughts in the Medium confidence of them being intensified in some seasons and is not well quantified.
21st century due to reduced precipitation and areas
Differences in vulnerability and exposure arise from non-climatic
and/or increased evapotranspiration
factors and from multidimensional inequalities often produced
Occurrence of floods Low confidence of changes (limited evidence, complexity of by uneven development processes (very high confidence). These
regional changes) differences shape differential risks from climate change.
Coastal high water levels Likely to increase (mean sea level rise) Impacts from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat
waves, droughts, floods, cyclones, and wildfires, reveal significant
High mountain phenomena such as High confidence to increase due to changes in heat waves, vulnerability and exposure of some ecosystems and many human
slope instabilities, movements of mass, glacial retreat, and/or permafrost degradation systems to current climate variability (very high confidence).
and glacial lake outburst floods
Climate-related hazards exacerbate other stressors, often with
Impact on large-scale patterns of natural climate Low confidence of changes negative outcomes for livelihoods, especially for people living in
variability (monsoons, ENSO) poverty (high confidence).
Table 2.1 Violent conflict increases vulnerability to climate change (medium
Hazards caused by climate change impacts and the confidence levels attributed to each. evidence, high agreement).
(Modified from IPCC 2012) (IPCC 2014)
The IPCC 6th Assessment Report is currently underway and is due in 2021.
24 25
02
DEFINITION: 2.2 Disaster risk reduction WOMEN AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
DISASTER RISK As seen earlier, women may be affected differently by disasters. Clearly,
Disaster risk has become shorthand for the risk of a disaster occurring.
when women’s vulnerability is reduced, it can have a great impact on DRR.
“The potential disaster losses It refers to the potential disaster losses – in lives, assets, livelihoods,
This can be done by addressing the following:
– in lives, assets, livelihoods, etc. – which could occur to a particular community or society over some
etc. – which could occur to specified future time period. The term disaster risk is used to distinguish Hazards – In some places, women’s roles as stewards of natural
a particular community or from other types of risk, such as financial risk. Risk refers to the probability resources means they have the potential to reduce environmental
society over some specified of future losses. degradation and the likelihood of hazards. UN WOMEN (2016) notes
future time period” that women are “change agents, leaders and innovators. In devising
Risk is often expressed in terms of three factors (Hazard, Vulnerability and
climate responses, including those relating to adaptation and
UNISDR 2009 Exposure), which are sometimes represented as an equation:
capacity-building, women should not be passive recipients but play
Risk = Hazard * Vulnerability * Exposure an active role in identifying solutions.” (UN WOMEN 2016:3)
It is important to distinguish between these three factors as they require Exposure – Women can be more exposed than men to certain
different sets of actions and policies in order to reduce disaster risk. This natural hazards due to their gender specific roles and responsibilities;
DEFINITIONS although sometimes the opposite can be true. Women may be
RISK COMPONENTS risk formula (and its numerous variations) is used differently depending
on the context, whether political or for measuring risk, i.e., developing risk involved and affected differently at each phase of the DRR cycle
Hazard (Figure 2.14) – both in the pre-disaster phase starting from the
maps for determining dangerous areas for human settlement.
“A dangerous phenomenon, risk and vulnerability assessment to risk reduction, to disaster
substance, human activity or Vulnerability is composed of several components, including physical, preparedness, as well as in the post-disaster phase including relief,
condition that may cause loss social, economic and environmental. Vulnerability is often considered the early recovery/transition, reconstruction, and development and
of life, injury or other health most difficult component of risk to assess and evaluate because there ongoing risk reduction. Women need to be kept informed about
impacts, property damage, are many different ways to interpret vulnerability. For example, a geologist evacuation procedures, early warning systems in order to reduce their
loss of livelihoods and may measure vulnerability as the degree of loss of infrastructure due to a and their family’s exposure. When empowered, women may also have
services, social and economic landslide, while an economist may measure vulnerability in terms of per different influence at each phase of the cycle. This view is echoed
disruption, or environmental capita GDP or household income, and a social scientist may use literacy by UNDRR in their 2008 report on how gender perspectives can be
damage.” rates or social status. integrated into DRR (UNISDR 2008). The report notes that “when
Exposure A number of things can contribute to increasing risk in each of the risk women are supported to be active participants in preparedness and
“People, property, systems, factors, many of which are related either directly or indirectly to poor response efforts, their role within families and communities has been
or other elements present in environmental management (Figure 2.13). Indeed, environmental issues, used to great advantage. Women’s responsibilities in households,
hazard zones that are thereby governance, social factors and lack of awareness or preparedness communities, and as stewards of natural resources, position them
subject to potential losses.” contribute to creating hazards and increasing exposure and vulnerability. well to develop strategies for adapting to changing environmental
Addressing these factors is therefore important to reduce disaster risk. realities.” (UNISDR 2008: v)
Vulnerability
“The characteristics As stated earlier, working on exposure gives the most immediate potential Vulnerability – As discussed above, gender cuts across poverty
and circumstances of a to reduce the risk from disasters. Working on hazard and vulnerability and other forms of inequalities and more women than men are
community, system or asset reduction are longer term processes that can be more challenging considered to be vulnerable. This is due to a host of factors,
that make it susceptible to the because they span multiple sectors and the organisation of societies. including socio-cultural norms, economic factors and gender-biased
damaging effects of a hazard.“ perspectives of policy makers and practitioners. Since there is a
demonstrable link between vulnerability and the likelihood of being
UNISDR 2009
affected by disasters, it is imperative that DRR measures specifically
HAZARD VULNERABILITY EXPOSURE
address gender considerations. Therefore, it is necessary to address
gender-based inequalities with a focus on how they intersect with
Reduced natural Poverty, Lack of urban
one’s class, sexual orientation, ethnicity, minority, disability, and
protection from environmental planning
ecosystems due to degradation and processes displacement, marital status, among other factors.
degradation hazardous living
conditions Inappropriate
Climate change settlement
impacts on certain Poor governance locations, e.g. on
hazards and and lack of steep slopes and
regions preparedness to along rivers or
hazard events coasts
Figure 2.13 Social inequalities, Lack of evacuation

Some examples of the factors marginalization plans or early
leading to increased disaster risk and low coping warning systems
for each component of risk. capacities
Source: authors
26 27
02
EXAMPLES:
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION MEASURES 2.3 Conclusions
NON-STRUCTURAL There are several phases to DRR (Figure 2.14), and actions are usually
Disasters affect a large number of women and men with an unequal
divided into two main categories of measures:
AND STRUCTURAL distribution worldwide of hazard events and impact and therefore disaster
HYBRID MEASURES 1) Structural measures, which relate to any physical construction to risk. There are different types of disasters and some are more devastating
reduce or avoid possible impacts of hazards; than others, either due to their sudden and wide impact (e.g. earthquakes,
Non-structural measures:
2) Non-structural measures, which relate to knowledge, policies, storms and tsunamis) or due to their length and difficulty to cope with
Emergency drills, early
laws, public awareness raising, training and education for disaster (e.g. drought) because they impact so many vital systems over time.
warning and monitoring,
prevention and preparedness. Exposure and vulnerability are two key factors that need to be understood.
training search and rescue
teams, stocking up on These measures are implemented at different times of the disaster In some cases, disaster risk could more easily be mitigated if people did not
emergency supplies... management cycle. The actors involved in these types of measures range settle in exposed areas such as in proximity to flood-prone rivers. Reducing
from government agencies to local communities. exposure also involves measures such as seawalls or early warning
Land use planning/zoning to
systems and evacuation plans, which reduce exposure at least temporarily.
reduce exposure, developing
Vulnerability is tied to underlying drivers such as poverty, environmental
guidelines on what to do
degradation, governance and preparedness amongst others and requires
during an emergency... ding Pre
-
ui l im multidisciplinary interventions to reduce vulnerability. Sustainable
t yB pa
c
Structural/hybrid measures: ci t development and its goals, such as reducing poverty and increasing
Pre
ion
pa
pa and coping capacities, is an important avenue to tackle vulnerability

Building seawalls, dykes,
at
Ca
dams, and raising houses to (UNISDR 2015a).
ra
ig
t
Mi t
avoid flooding... DRR involves working through different phases following and prior to
ion
Ecological engineering by Disaster a disaster event to reduce risk and increase preparedness. It includes
restoring wetlands, forests Management Event a wide range of structural and non-structural measures. The phases of
Recons
on slopes... Cycle disaster risk and the types of measures undertaken will be addressed in
further chapters.
se
Re
tru
on
ve p Climate change increases disaster risk and is an additional component
co
s
ry cy
cti
Re that needs to be taken into account when working through DRR measures,
en
on
Figure 2.14
rg
e not only because climate change may increase the frequency of hazards,
Disaster management cycle Em
Redrawn by L. Monk
but also because climate change can potentially impact the sustainability
Res
to ra t i o n of measures implemented. For example, if temperature conditions change
and the current building materials or green infrastructure do not cope with
different temperature ranges, these could undermine the DRR measures.
The disaster management cycle comprises of four categories (see
DRR and CCA are undertaken within a policy landscape both at the
Chapter 9 for a more in-depth discussion). It typically starts at the event,
international and national levels that are important to understand.
i.e. as soon as a disaster hits. This is the state of emergency and response
The next chapter will discuss the policy landscape for both DRR and CCA.
needs to be immediate focusing on saving lives. The second phase
starts the process of recovery where restoration and reconstruction take
place. The third phase is mitigation, decreasing vulnerability and building
capacity. Finally, preparation is important so that if there is another
disaster, plans are in place to reduce the impact of the disaster. These
phases will be revisited in later chapters with an emphasis on prevention
by reducing vulnerability.
28 29
02
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING DATABASE RESOURCES Disaster/climate data
Burton, I., Kates, R.W., and White, G.F. (1993). The the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel EM-DAT website: www.emdat.be NOAA, USA uses space technology for hurricane and
environment as hazard. New York: Guilford Press. on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. tropical storm predictions: www.noaa.gov
DesInventar database website: www.desinventar.net
Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi,
Bradshaw, S., and UNEP and Human Settlements Division PREVIEW Global data on disasters and risk:
Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, NatCatService – Munich Re: www.munichre.com/en/
(ECLAC) (2004). Socio-economic impacts of natural www.preview.grid.UNEP.ch
S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. reinsurance/business/non-life/georisks/natcatservice/
disasters: a gender analysis. Santiago: UN, ECLAC,
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1-32. default.aspx USGS, USA monitors earthquake activity around the work
Sustainable Development and Human Settlements Division,
and other geological phenomenon: www.usgs.gov
Women and Development Unit. https://repositorio.cepal. Neumayer, E., and Plümper, T. (2007). The Gendered Nature
org/bitstream/handle/11362/5596/1/S045330_en.pdf of Natural Disasters: The Impact of Catastrophic Events on World Meteorological Organisation: www.wmo.int
Accessed 24 July 2019. the Gender Gap in Life Expectancy, 1981–2002. Annals of
IPCC: www.ipcc.ch
the Association of American Geographers, 97(3), 551–566.
EM-DAT: The Emergency Events Database – Université
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8306.2007.00563.x.
Catholique de Louvain – CRED, D. Guha-Sapir – Brussels –
Belgium. www.emdat.be. Accessed 26 April 2019. Oxfam (2005). The tsunami’s impact on women. Oxfam
Briefing Note. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.
EM-DAT (2015). The Human Cost of Natural Disasters 2015:
org/files/women.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
A global perspective. International Centre for Research on
the Epidemiology of Disasters. Louvaine: CRED. Pincha, C. (2008). Gender sensitive disaster management:
a toolkit for practitioners. Mumbai: Oxfam America.
Enarson, E., and Fordham, M. (2000). Lines That Divide,
https://www.fsnnetwork.org/gender-sensitive-disaster-
Ties That Bind: Race, Class, and Gender in Women’s Flood
management-toolkit-practitioners Accessed 24 July 2019.
Recovery in the US and UK. The Australian Journal of
Emergency Management, 15(4), 43–52. UN Women (2016). Gender-responsive climate policy with a
focus on adaptation and capacity-building, and training for
Gaillard, J. C., Sanz, K., Balgos, B. C., Dalisay, S. N. M.,
delegates on gender issues. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/
Gorman-Murray, A., Smith, F., and Toelupe, V. (2016).
files/582.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Beyond men and women: a critical perspective on gender
and disaster. Disasters, 41(3), 429–447. DOI: 10.1111/ UNISDR (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015:
disa.12209. Building Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters.
http://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-
Gorman-Murray, A., Morris, S., Keppel, J., McKinnon, S.
docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf Accessed
and Dominey-Howes, D. (2014). The LGBTI community in
24 July 2019.
the 2011 Queensland floods: marginality, vulnerability and
resilience. LES Online, 6 (1), 4-20. UNISDR (2008). Gender perspectives: integrating
disaster risk reduction into climate change adaptation.
Government of Kerala (2018). Kerala Post Disaster Needs
Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/
Assessment Floods and Landslides - August 2018. https://
publications/3391 Accessed 24 July 2019.
www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/publication/PDNA/
CountryPDNAs/Kerala_India_floods%20and%20landslides_ UNISDR (2011). Global Assessment Report, Revealing Risk,
PDNA_2018_Executive_Summary.pdf Accessed Redefining Development. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.
24 July 2019. unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/19846 Accessed
24 July 2019.
Government of Japan, G.E.B. (2014). Natural Disasters
and Gender Statistics: Lessons from the Great East Japan UNISDR (2013). Disaster Statistics. https://www.unisdr.org/
Earthquake and Tsunami: from the “White Paper on Gender we/inform/disaster-statistics Accessed 24 July 2019.
Equality 2012”. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/Mexico_
UNISDR (2015). Global Assessment Report, Development
Nov2014/Session%207%20Japan%20paper.pdf Accessed
Sustainable: The Future of Disaster Risk Management.
24 July 2019.
Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/
Government of Nepal National Planning Commission publications/42809 Accessed 24 July 2019.
(2015). Nepal Earthquake, Post-Disaster Needs Assessment.
UNISDR (2015a). Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience
Vol A: Key Findings. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal.
in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
http://www.nra.gov.np/uploads/docs/PDNA%20Volume%20
Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.unisdr.org/files/46052_
A%20Final.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
disasterriskreductioninthe2030agend.pdf Accessed 18
IPCC (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events and March 2019.
disasters to advance climate change adaptation. Special
UNDRR (2019). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction. Geneva: UNDRR. https://gar.unisdr.org/sites/
Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker,
default/files/reports/2019-05/full_gar_report.pdf Accessed
D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach,
24 July 2019.
G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. World Bank (2010). Natural Hazards, Unnatural Disasters,
The Economics of Effective Prevention. Washington,
IPCC (2014). Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change
D.C.: World Bank. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/
2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global
publications/15136. Accessed 24 July 2019.
and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to
30 31
Disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and key international actors
03
3.1 Disaster risk reduction, climate change
adaptation and international policy
As seen in Chapter 2, the number of disasters and people affected are
increasing, largely driven by more people living in exposed areas. However,
climate change is accelerating the number of disasters. DRR and CCA are
two approaches, with some similar goals and activities but that operate in
different policy landscapes. Internationally DRR is the province of UNDRR,
while CCA is the province of UNFCCC.
These two spheres, DRR and CCA are separate largely because of
the policies and institutions involved in each. However, international
agreements relating to both CCA and DRR reference each other, although
it is clear that the mandates of each are separate. Despite this, there is
some cross-over between CCA and DRR (as well as some differences)
which has resulted in calls for and signs of convergence between these
two spheres.
In this chapter we will define CCA, look at the similarities and differences
between the CCA and DRR, and then provide an overview of the
international agreements and actors related to CCA and DRR.
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION

CCA is defined as “the process of adjustment to actual or expected
climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate
or avoid harm or exploit beneficial opportunities” (IPCC 2014:118). CCA
is based on the notion of vulnerability, which includes the factors of
exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity, stemming from the 4th IPCC
Assessment Report (AR4). As can be seen this representation is different
to the DRR configuration of risk. However, the 5th IPCC Assessment
Report (AR5), which had input from SREX (IPCC 2012) uses the DRR
equation, although it includes within the vulnerability factor, sensitivity and
adaptive capacity (Figure 3.1). The assessment methodology undertaken
for DRR and CCA are therefore sometimes quite different depending on
the factors used. We will come back to assessments in a later chapter.
Chapter 3 Figure 3.1

Climate signal Comparison of the components
Disaster risk reduction, Exposure
Hazard of climate change vulnerability
(AR4) and climate risk (AR5).
climate change adaptation Environment
Direct physical impact
Source: Adaptationcommunity.net.
Redrawn by L. Monk
and key international actors Sensitivity Environment
Key questions Sensitivity

What are the links between CCA and DRR? Potential Vulnerability
impact Exposure Capacity
Who are the main international actors and (coping,
what are the main policy agreements for DRR adaptive)
and CCA?
Adaptive
capacity
Society
Society
Vulnerability Risk
© UNEP
32 33
03
Aside from terminology and understanding of factors creating risk or DIFFERENCES SIGNS OF
vulnerability in DRR and CCA, there are other differences and similarities.
DRR CCA CONVERGENCE
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CLIMATE CHANGE
Relevant to all hazard types: Addresses climate related Both focus on increased climate-related
ADAPTATION AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION geological, hydro-meteorological, hazards, but also looks at hazards, and climate extremes
1. The type of hazard in focus. CCA generally focuses on hydro- climatic, biological, as well as additional gradual effects of (e.g. floods, storms, landslides,
meteorological hazards; while DRR encompasses different types technological/industrial climate change (e.g. sea level droughts), although DRR is also
of hazards. hazards rise, air temperature increase, increasingly addressing gradual climate
snowmelt, biodiversity loss) change impacts e.g. sea level rise
2. Timeframes. CCA generally takes a longer term approach (projecting
into the future), incorporating notions of uncertainty, while DRR Timeframe: immediate Timeframe: long-term. DRR is increasingly forward-looking.
generally focuses on preventing hazards in the short-to-medium time to medium-term. Most concerned with the future, Existing climate variability is an entry
frame. Most concerned with the i.e. addressing uncertainty/ point for CCA
present, i.e. addressing new risks
3. The range of activities. DRR encompasses a wider range of risk existing risks
management from early warning to response and reconstruction,
rehabilitation and recovery. CCA usually covers prevention and Origin and culture Origin and culture N/A
mitigation and sometimes also preparedness, while it has less to offer in humanitarian assistance in scientific theory
for emergencies, disaster response, recovery and reconstruction. CCA following a disaster event
has certainly gone further in modeling and predicting future events,
with data that can assist in disaster prevention. Actors: traditionally coming Actors: traditionally from the Both DRR and CCA are increasingly
from humanitarian sectors scientific and environmental multi-disciplinary and reliant on multiple
4. Types of actors and institutions involved. Although the two domains and civil protection community stakeholders across sectors
are very much overlapping, two parallel sets of actors, institutions and (e.g. engineering, water, agriculture,
agreements have evolved. This will be discussed in more detail later. health, environment, etc.)
5. Vulnerability definitions. CCA and DRR have used quite different types
Activities generally more Activities generally more DRR and CCA typically overlap in
of terminology, with vulnerability being one of the terms with most
wide-ranging, from disaster restricted to prevention, the area of disaster preparedness
differences. However, there is growing convergence towards DRR preparedness (early warning, mitigation, preparedness and and prevention/mitigation, although
terminology. contingency planning, etc.), building adaptive capacities, there is growing attention towards
Table 3.1 provides an overview of the main differences and signs of prevention, mitigation to typically excluding post-disaster mainstreaming climate change
post-disaster including activities considerations in post-disaster recovery
convergence. According to Mitchell and van Aalst (2008), DRR originates
disaster response, recovery, and reconstruction
in humanitarian assistance and experience following a disaster event,
rehabilitation and reconstruction
while CCA originates in scientific theory. The authors enumerate a number
of points of differences as well as signs of convergence. Full range of established and Limited range of tools Increasing recognition that more
The IPCC AR5 WG II report on Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability developed tools under development adaptation tools are needed and
(2014) highlights the adaptation experiences, adaptation choices, future must learn from DRR
risks and opportunities for adaptation. The report stresses a number
Often low to moderate New, emerging agenda, Climate-related disasters events
of ecosystem-based approaches, which are already part of CCA, such
political interest high political interest are now more likely to be analysed and
as coastal zone and water management, environmental protection and debated with reference to
land-use planning, integrated water resource management, agro-forestry, climate change
community management of natural areas, protected areas management
and coastal reforestation of mangroves. Table 3.1
Recommendations for adaptation to future climate change include: Comparison between Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA)
Source: Doswald and Estrella 2015. Modified from Mitchell and van Aalst 2008
Reducing vulnerability and exposure to present climate variability by
protecting vulnerable groups, by supporting economic diversification,
and by providing information, policy and legal frameworks, and Supporting the co-benefits and synergies between mitigation and
financial support. adaptation, such as:
Supporting actions with co-benefits for other objectives and providing i) improved energy efficiency and cleaner energy sources, leading to
incentives such as public-private finance partnerships, loans, reduced emissions of health-damaging climate-altering air pollutants;
payments for environmental services, improved resource pricing,
ii) reduced energy and water consumption in urban areas through
charges and subsidies, norms and regulations, and risk sharing and
greening cities and recycling water;
transfer mechanisms.
iii) sustainable agriculture and forestry; and
iv) protection of ecosystems for carbon storage and other
ecosystem services.
34 35
03
The above suggested CCA solutions seem very similar to solutions put CCA DRR
forward for DRR (see previous chapter). So what are the main differences?
Organisations United Nations Framework Convention United Nations Office for Disaster
As discussed above, CCA may refer to longer term impacts, or chronic,
and institutions on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Risk Reduction (UNDRR)
slow on-set change requiring human systems to adapt to new contexts
over the long term, at the global scale and with considerable uncertainty. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Partnership for Environment and
DRR impacts are often acute but can result from either extreme events Change (IPCC) Disaster Rsk Reduction (PEDRR)
or smaller, cumulative events, which are often underestimated although The two other Rio Conventions: International Federation of Red Cross
equally devastating to livelihoods. Although disaster impacts may take Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)
years for full recovery, they are often considered short-term as compared and the United Nations Convention to
to climate change impacts and are usually locally specific because Combat Desertification (UNCCD)
societies will have differing capacities to cope and recover from a Academic research institutions International, national and local
hazard event. However, in reality and at the local level there are actually civil society organisations
very few differences in addressing CCA versus DRR. Communities are National environment and National civil defense authorities (and
more often not likely to make any distinction, although governments and energy authorities environment authorities for Eco-DRR)
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have more often unfortunately
divided their mandates and activities related to CCA and DRR. Figure 3.2. Conservation non-governmental Conservation NGOs for Eco-DRR
organisations (NGOs)
summarises the main differences and similarities between CCA and DRR.
International Conference of the Parties World Conference on Disaster
Figure 3.2 conferences (CoP) Risk Reduction
A comparison between CCA and DRR
Strategies National communications UN International Strategy for Disaster
in terms of time frames, types of
to the UNFCCC Risk Reduction (ISDR)
hazards, focus, goals and measures.
Credit: W. Lange and S.Sandholz. National Adaptation Plans for Action for Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
CCA DRR
Design: S.Plog Least Developed Countries (NAPAs) Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR)
GOALS
VULNERABILITY REDUCTION National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) and Sendai Framework Monitor
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
LONG TIME FRAME SHORT TIME FRAME Nationally Determined Contributions
POVERTY REDUCTION
RELEVANT FOR ALL RELEVANT FOR ALL (NDCs)
KINDS OF CC IMPACTS MEASURES TYPES OF DISASTERS
(ON AGRICULTURE, WATER, ETC.)
ECOSYSTEM-BASED
Funding Special Climate Fund National civil defense/
ENGINEERED emergency response
FOCUS ON SLOW ON-SET SOCIAL FOCUS ON EXISTING
AND FUTURE RISKS INSTITUTIONAL AND MORE SUDDEN RISKS Least Developed Countries Fund International humanitarian funding
COMMON
Adaptation Fund Multi-lateral banks
Green Climate Fund Bi-lateral aid
In the following chapters, we will be exploring in more detail how ecosystem-
based management approaches (i.e., IWRM, ICZM) address both CCA Multi-lateral and Bi-lateral funding Multi-lateral and Bi-lateral funding
and DRR, acting as a de facto bridge between CCA and DRR; Doswald
Table 3.2
et al. 2017.
Main actors, agreements, strategies and funding of CCA and DRR.
Source: Doswald and Estrella 2015 SENDAI FRAMEWORK
3.2 The main international actors and PRIORITIES FOR ACTION
agreements relevant for disaster risk reduction THE SENDAI FRAMEWORK FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
Priority Action 1:
Understanding disaster risk;
and climate change adaptation 2015-2030 (SFDRR)
Priority Action 2:
One of the main issues is that the actors coordinating DRR and CCA issues The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) was the key international Strengthening disaster risk
reside within separate agencies with different mandates from different agreement to reduce disaster risk during the period 2005-2015. It was governance to manage
international agreements and are often using different terminology adopted by 168 governments in 2005 at the United Nations’ World disaster risk;
related to DRR and CCA. Fortunately, there has been significant effort to Conference on Disaster Reduction, held in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. Preceded
by the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, the United Priority Action 3:
streamline the terminology and improve coordination between agencies
Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) was adopted by Investing in disaster risk
(Table 3.2).
the UN General Assembly in 1999, to ensure implementation of the HFA reduction and resilience;
In the following sections, we list the most important international
and its renewal. Various UN agencies, the World Bank as well as many Priority Action 4:
organisations and agreements that address DRR and CCA. We also list
international NGOs and inter-governmental groups are involved in DRR Enhancing disaster
environmental conventions and initiatives that have included CCA and
and support governments in the implementation of DRR strategies. preparedness for effective
DRR elements, highlighting the importance placed on ecosystems and
Currently, the SFDRR is the major agreement for 2015-2030. It is the responses and to “Build
their management. Although there is still a long road ahead toward
follow-up to the HFA and aims to reach targets which the HFA did not Back Better” in recovery,
mainstreaming environment and ecosystem-based approaches in CCA
accomplish. SFDRR was adopted by 187 UN member states at the rehabilitation and
and DRR, in recent years there has certainly been progress in this direction.
Third UN Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction which took place 15 to reconstruction.
36 37
03
18 March 2015 in Sendai, Japan. It was the product of three years of The seven targets are:
stakeholder consultations and inter-governmental negotiations. UNDRR The Sendai Framework
a) Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to
is the main agency which will support the implementation, follow-up, Monitor and Green
lower the average per 100,000 global mortality rate in the decade
and review of this new framework. The agreement spans until 2030, 2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
Infrastructure
is voluntary and non-binding, and recognizes states as having the In the Technical Guidance
b) Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030,
main responsibility in reducing disaster risk. This framework makes for Monitoring and Reporting
aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 in the decade
the link between environment and DRR clear, and includes ecosystem- on Progress in Achieving
2020–2030 compared to the period 2005–2015;
based approaches to DRR policy, actions and activities. This focus on the Global Targets of the
environment in the SFDRR is, in part, thanks to the advocacy of the c) Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross SFDRR (UNISDR 2017),
Partnership on Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction (PEDRR). domestic product (GDP) by 2030; green infrastructure is
The SFDRR is guided by the desired outcome of reducing risk as well as d) Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and referred to as a category
economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental losses caused by disruption of basic services, among them health and educational of possibly damaged or
disasters – from the local to the national level. It has outlined seven global facilities, including through developing their resilience by 2030; destroyed infrastructure.
targets and four priorities which guide the framework: e) Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local Green infrastructure is thus
Priority Action 1: Understanding disaster risk; disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020; relevant to targets C and D.
Indeed, the indicators under
Priority Action 2: Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage f) Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing
Target C5 focus on “direct
disaster risk; countries through adequate and sustainable support to complement
economic loss resulting from
Priority Action 3: Investing in disaster risk reduction and resilience; their national actions for implementation of the present Framework
damaged or destroyed critical
by 2030;
Priority Action 4: Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective infrastructure attributed to
responses and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation g) Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi- disasters” and Target D4
and reconstruction. hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and on “the number of other
assessments to people by 2030. destroyed or damaged
The SFDRR identifies poor land management, unsustainable use of critical infrastructure units
natural resources and degrading ecosystems as underlying risk drivers Each target has between three and eight indicators for monitoring
progress towards the target. At the national level, custom indicators can and facilities attributed to
that need to be tackled. Furthermore, reference is made to the inclusion disasters”, have a footnote,
of ecosystems in risk assessments (Priority 1), risk governance and be created to measure progress towards the four priority areas of the
SFDRR. They are based on the priorities of respective countries and will which denotes that “green
planning (Priority 2) and investing in resilience (Priority 3). Environment infrastructure should be
will thus underpin achievement of outcomes across the SFDRR seven be reflected in the national DRR reports of the countries.
included where relevant”.
global targets. Ecosystems and green infrastructure can be considered in indicators D-4
and C-5 of the SFM (see box). That opportunity is however not a very Despite this reporting
The SFDRR mentions climate change and adaptation within the option, countries have
agreement. However, it amends its involvement by stating “The climate practical or straightforward one. Custom targets and custom indicators
according to countries’ needs within the SFM might open up a more not yet considered green
change issues mentioned in this Framework remain within the mandate infrastructure in their
of the UNFCCC under the competences of the Parties to the Convention”. intuitive opportunity to report on both ecosystem losses and progress
made on Eco-DRR (Sebesvari et al. 2019). reporting efforts to date.
The Sendai Framework Monitor (SFM) comprises of a set of 38 Understanding of green
indicators over seven targets, which were recommended by an Open- UN FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE infrastructure and guidance
ended Intergovernmental Expert Working Group and will track progress on how to monitor it would
In 1992, the world’s governments adopted the UN Framework Convention
in implementing the seven targets of the SFDRR as well as its related be of help to change this
on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Five years later, in December 1997,
dimensions reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 1, 11 situation as well as providing
the Kyoto Protocol was adopted. This protocol legally binds developed
and 13. platforms for information
countries to emission reduction targets. The first commitment period of
the Kyoto Protocol was from 2008 to 2012. The second commitment sharing and capacity building.
What is PEDRR? period began in 2013 and will end in 2020. Key international actors in
“Formally established in 2008, risk reduction and ensure it is management for disaster risk CCA include the IPCC, which is the leading international body for the
the Partnership for Environment mainstreamed in development reduction (DRR) and climate scientific assessment of climate change. The IPCC was established by
and Disaster Risk Reduction planning at global, national change adaptation (CCA)”. United Nations Environment and the World Meteorological Organization
(PEDRR) is a global alliance and local levels in line with the Its objective is to pool expertise (WMO) in 1988 to provide a clear and up-to-date view on the current state
of UN agencies, NGOs and SFDRR. It provides technical and advocate for policy change of knowledge relevant to climate change and its potential socio-economic
specialist institutes. As a and science-based expertise and best practice in ecosystem and environmental impacts. Adaptation to climate change first appeared
global thematic platform of and applies best practices management for DRR and in the 2007 report (AR4). The AR5 is an important landmark report for
the International Strategy for in ecosystems-based DRR CCA, based on science and providing scientific evidence and guidance to governments on CCA. The
Disaster Risk Reduction (ISDR), approaches. PEDRR is guided practitioners’ experiences.” AR6 is due in 2021.
PEDRR seeks to promote and by its vision of “Resilient See: http://pedrr.org/
scale-up implementation of communities as a result
ecosystem-based disaster of improved ecosystem
38 39
03
With the Kyoto Protocol’s commitment period coming to a close, the The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands Protection adopted the
Paris Agreement was drafted at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP “Resolution on wetlands and disaster risk reduction” at its 12th RIO+20
21) of the UNFCCC which took place 30 November to 12 December 2015 Meeting of the Conference of the Parties in Punta del Este, Uruguay “Rio+20” is the short name
in Paris, France. The agreement was adopted on December 12th 2015, (from 1 to 9 of June 2015). This resolution clearly relates the way in for the United Nations
and was opened for signature in New York on the 22nd of April 2016 which we use and manage water resources and wetlands is central Conference on Sustainable
(which, symbolically, is also Earth Day). This agreement is a consensus to sustainable DRR. It recognises the role of healthy wetlands as Development which took
between 195 countries on the need to reduce global greenhouse gas natural buffers to hazards such as storm surges – making protection, place in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
emissions. The Paris Agreement entered into force on 4 November 2016. management, and restoration of wetlands a key ecosystem-based in June 2012 – twenty years
solution to disaster risk. after the landmark 1992
The Paris Agreement requires all Parties to put forward their best efforts
through nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and to strengthen DRR and CCA have also been mentioned as part of the United Earth Summit in Rio.
these efforts in the years ahead. NDCs embody efforts by each country Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention The primary result of the
to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and conference was the document
This includes requirements that all Parties report regularly on their International Lakes. This convention is related to DRR and CCA “The Future We Want”. One
emissions and on their implementation efforts. because it aims to protect and sustainably manage cross-border of the main outcomes of
water ecosystems, and in doing so, reduce risk of disasters (such the Conference was the
Some of the key elements of the agreement include: a goal to keep global
as drought) and facilitate CCA. The convention entered into force in agreement by member
warming “well below 2 degrees Celsius” and to strengthen the ability to
1996, but an amendment (which went into effect 2013), made this States to launch a process to
deal with the impacts of climate change, which includes provisions for
convention a legally-binding framework for transboundary develop a set of Sustainable
developed nations to support developing nations in adapting to climate
water cooperation. Development Goals.
change through climate financing; and a focus on loss and damages
(UNFCCC 2015). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an important www.un.org/futurewewant
initiative in the global DRR and CCA policy agenda. In the outcome
The Paris Agreement has implications for DRR and the environment,
declaration of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
but it does not directly mention DRR or the SFDRR. Article 8 of the
with the SDGs at its core, the Rio+20 conference called for explicit
Paris Agreement asks parties to “recognize the importance of averting,
linkages between DRR, CCA and sustainable development. Of all
minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse
the above international agreements, it is one of the most influential
effects of climate change, including extreme weather events and slow
because it can be considered an umbrella agreement into which
onset events, and the role of sustainable development in reducing
many of the above agreements are linked. The SDGs replaced the
the risk of loss and damage” and appoints the Warsaw International
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015 and cover a set of
Mechanism to promote implementation of approaches to address loss
17 international sustainable development goals, including aspects
and damage, including giving guidance on early warning, preparedness
of DRR and CCA. The SDGs which especially relate to DRR and CCA
and risk assessment and management (UNFCCC 2015). The Warsaw
include: Goal 1: No Poverty; Goal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation; Goal
International Mechanism was established at the 19th COP in Warsaw in
7: Affordable and Clean Energy; Goal 9: Industry, Innovation and
November 2013.
Infrastructure; Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities; Goal 13:
OTHER RELATED AGREEMENTS AND INITIATIVES Climate Action; Goal 14: Life Bellow Water; and Goal 15: Life on Land.
Also related to DRR and CCA is the UN Convention to Combat Finally, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature
Desertification (UNCCD), which entered into force in 1996 with (IUCN) provides information and implements various projects on
the goal to mitigate desertification and the effects of drought and DRR and CCA. In 2014, its World Parks Congress featured a number
drought risk through long-term strategies. of high-level events on the importance of protected areas for DRR
and CCA. It generated the “Promise of Sydney, to scale up protection,
The new UNCCD 2018-2030 Strategic Framework is the most
especially in the oceans, and involve all of those who govern and
comprehensive global commitment to achieve Land Degradation
manage the world’s protected and conserved areas; to inspire all
CBD, Conference of the Neutrality (LDN) in order to restore the productivity of vast expanses
people to experience the wonder of nature through protected areas;
Parties, 2016 of degraded land, improve the livelihoods of more than 1.3 billion
and to invest in nature’s solutions to halt biodiversity loss, mitigate
people, and reduce the impacts of drought on vulnerable populations.
“Encourages Parties, other and respond to climate change, reduce the risk and impact of
Governments and relevant The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) entered in to force in disasters, improve food and water security, and promote human
organizations to integrate 1993 and has three main objectives: 1) the conservation of biological health and dignity”.
ecosystem-based approaches diversity, 2) the sustainable use of the components of biological
to climate change adaptation diversity, and 3) the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising
and mitigation, and disaster out of the utilization of genetic resources.
risk reduction, into their In 2010, at the 10th COP to the CBD, Parties adopted a decision
strategic planning across linking biodiversity and ecosystems to climate change adaptation
sectors” and disaster risk reduction (Decision X/33. para. 8). The CBD COP
CBD, Decision XIII/4, para 4 13, held in Cancun, Mexico upheld Decision X/33 and expanded on
ecosystem-based approaches for CCA and DRR in decision XIII/4.
40 41
03
Figure 3.3 UNCCD and CBD also include mandates on women’s rights and gender
Environmental forum in Sudan on equality. The UNFCCC originally did not, being focused solely on emission
women’s role in environmental and reductions, but since 2001, it has included mandates on gender across
climate change action
multiple decisions and programmes (Aguilar et al. 2015). The need for
© UNEP 2017
CCA and its impact on women has driven gender issues up the agenda
since perhaps the findings from a UN report (United Nations 2009)
that “women have high exposure to climate-related risks exacerbated
by unequal rights, and that women’s empowerment and the reduction
of discriminatory practices has been crucial to successful community
adaptation and coping capacity”. Thus in the UNFCCC, to date, decisions
on adaptation have the most robust gender-sensitive language integrated.
The gender dimension of DRR and CCA is thus increasingly recognised
in principle but the translation of policies into adequate practices
remains scarce.
3.3 Conclusions
GENDER IN INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND RELEVANCE Reducing disasters has received broad political consensus from different
FOR DRR AND CCA policy angles, has been guided by its own UN agency, and is not restricted
The Gender and Development (GAD) approach grew out of the Women by a legal framework as is climate change mitigation and adaptation
in Development (WID) and Women and Development (WAD) moving (Hannigan 2012). Climate change action, on the other hand, through the
away from focusing on exclusively on women to the social construction UNFCCC and other Multilateral Environmental Agreements is receiving
of gender. GAD brings in an analysis of power and the use of the term more financial and political attention. Convergence between DRR and CCA
‘empowerment’ which is now seen as a crucial component of successful is occurring although it is not embraced by all, especially among those DRR
programs and policies. Empowerment refers to the “processes by which academics who consider the adaptation and resilience discourse to be
those who have been denied the ability to make choices acquire such something like a band-aid, rather than addressing main underlying causes
an ability. In other words, empowerment entails a process of change” of risk, rooted in poverty, poor governance and structural inequalities
(Kabeer 1999: 2). As such, it does not view addressing gender concerns, (Hannigan 2012). According to Pelling (2011), conventional approaches
as the WID and WAD does, as reallocating economic resources. Instead, to CCA are too conservative as they rarely embrace the transformational
gender concerns necessarily involve redistributing power and the current change that DRR academics advocate in order to address underlying
policy climate reflects this in their goals (Figure 3.3). With the GAD, gender risks factors.
minorities, such as the LGBTI (lesbian, gay, trans and intersex), can also Within the climate change community, mitigation remains the priority,
be taken into account within the policy sphere. However, there is a lack of but since the Paris Agreement which acknowledged the necessity of
translation into policies and actions, as one finds more focus on women adaptation, the emphasis of CCA in international development cooperation
than other sexual and gender minorities (Gaillard et al. 2016). is rising. The transformational change discussion is entering CCA from
The current understanding on mainstreaming gender within development various sources, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The GCF was set
is reflected both in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as up in 2010 as part of the UNFCCC’s financial mechanism. The GCF aims
well as in the SFDRR. SDG 5 is about achieving gender equality and to catalyze a flow of climate finance to invest in low-emission and climate-
empowering all women and girls. The SFDRR specifically calls for a gender, resilient development, driving a paradigm shift in the global response to
age, disability and cultural perspective to be integrated in all policies and climate change.
practices relating to disaster risk reduction, and to promote leadership of There is a significant amount of overlap between DRR and CCA, especially
women and youth (United Nations 2015). It has been specifically noted when it comes to working with weather-related hazards. While CCA may
that “Women and their participation are critical to effectively managing focus more on long-term and slow onset hazards than DRR, the distinction
disaster risk and designing, resourcing and implementing gender-sensitive is clearer in the future prospective lens of CCA. However, since the impacts
disaster risk reduction policies, plans and programmes; and adequate of climate change are being felt now, CCA and DRR could work more hand
capacity building measures need to be taken to empower women for in hand. However, Doswald and Estrella (2015) conclude that although
preparedness as well as to build their capacity to secure alternate means there is significant overlap between the two fields, there is an artificial
of livelihood in post-disaster situations” (United Nations 2015 :23). division often leading to a “silo approach” and unnecessary division
of budgets and actions and ecosystem-based approaches: notably,
Eco-DRR/EbA can act as natural bridges to connect the two (Doswald
et al. 2017). We will learn more about this in following chapters.
42 43
03
KEY INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS AND RELEVANT
INSTITUTIONS
Aguilar, L., Granat, M., and Owren, C. (2015). Roots for Mitchell, T and van Aalst, M. (2008). Convergence of Disaster
Convention on Biological Diversity (https://www.cbd.int/) the future: The landscape and way forward on gender and Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation. A Review
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (http://www.ramsar.org/) climate change. Washington, DC: IUCN and GGCA. https:// for DFID. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/7853_
genderandenvironment.org/roots-for-the-future/ Accessed ConvergenceofDRRandCCA1.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (http://www.unisdr. 24 July 2019.
org/we/coordinate/sendai-framework) Pelling, M. (2011). Adaptation to Climate Change:
Doswald, N. and Estrella, M. (2015). Promoting ecosystems From Resilience to Transformation. London and New
Sustainable Development Goals (www.sustainabledevelopment.un.org) for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: York: Routledge.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change opportunities for integration. Geneva: UNEP. https://www.
Sebesvari, Z., Woelki, J., Walz, Y., Sudmeier-Rieux, K.,
preventionweb.net/publications/view/44969 Accessed
(www.unfccc.int) and the Paris Agreement (https://unfccc.int/sites/ Sandholz, S., Tol, S., Ruíz García, V. and Renaud, F. (2019).
24 July 2019.
default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf) Opportunities for Green Infrastructure and Ecosystems
Doswald, N., Estrella, M. and Sudmeier-Rieux, K. (2017) in the Sendai Framework Monitor. Progress in Disaster
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch) Ecosystems’ Role in Bridging Disaster Risk Reduction Science, 2,
United Nations Convention on Combatting Desertification and Climate Change Adaptation. In: Kelman, I., Mercer, J.
100021 DOI: 10.1016/j.pdisas.2019.100021. UNISDR
(http://www.unccd.int). and JC Gaillard. The Routledge Handbook of Disaster Risk
(2005). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building
Reduction, including Climate Change Adaptation.
United Nations Office of Disaster Risk Reduction (www.unisdr.org) Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters.
Gaillard, J. C., Sanz, K., Balgos, B. C., Dalisay, S. N. M., https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (www.iucn.org) Gorman-Murray, A., Smith, F., and Toelupe, V. (2016). doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdfwww.
and World Park Congress (www.worldparkscongress.org). Beyond men and women: a critical perspective on gender preventionweb.net Accessed 24 July 2019.
and disaster. Disasters, 41(3), 429–447. DOI: 10.1111/
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) UNISDR (2011). Global Assessment Report, Revealing Risk,
disa.12209
Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses Redefining Development. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.
and International Lakes (www.unece.org/env/water.html) Hannigan, J. (2012). Disasters Without Borders. Cambridge: unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/19846 Accessed
Polity Press. 24 July 2019.
IPCC (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events UNISDR (2017). Technical Guidance for Monitoring and
and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. Reporting on Progress in Achieving the Global Targets of
IPCC Special Report on Extreme Events, Summary for the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva:
Policymakers. Special Report of Working Groups I and II UNDRR https://www.preventionweb.net/files/54970_
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, techguidancefdigitalhr.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi,
United Nations (2009). Report of the Office of the United
M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M.
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the
Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York:
relationship between climate change and human rights.
Cambridge University Press.
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/HRAndClimateChange/
IPCC (2014). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change Pages/Study.aspx Accessed 24 July 2019.
2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global
United Nations (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster
and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to
Risk Reduction 2015-2030. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
preventionweb.net/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.
on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J.
pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi,
Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, UNFCCC (2015). The Paris Agreement. https://unfccc.int/
S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1-32. agreement Accessed 24 July 2019.
Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, Agency, Achievements:
Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s
Empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3), 435–464.
DOI: 10.1111/1467-7660.00125.
44 45
Linking ecosystems and humans to disasters
04
4.1 The interlinkages between ecosystems,
natural hazards and disasters
Ecosystems provide a variety of goods and services upon which people
directly or indirectly depend (Christensen et al. 1996). The Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment (2005) defines four main categories of ecosystem
services: supporting (e.g. nutrient cycling, pollination), provisioning
(e.g. food, timber), regulating (e.g. erosion control, carbon storage and
climate regulation) and cultural services (e.g. recreation, spirituality), that
Chapter 4
support human well-being (Figure 4.1). Hazard mitigation is considered
a regulating service, which directly contributes to human well-being by
increased disaster security. Thus, healthy ecosystems serve as buffers
Linking ecosystems and provide the basis for the use of provisioning, regulating and cultural
services. As we know, during the past decades many efforts have been
and humans to disasters made to reduce negative impacts on the environment that have led to
various global environmental problems. Nevertheless, the Earth system
is moving towards an increasingly critical state.
Key questions
Figure 4.1
What are the interlinkages between PROVISIONING Linkages between ecosystem
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
ecosystems, natural hazards and disasters services and human well-being.
and how do they emerge? Credit: Nehren 2014, modified from
REGULATING
MA 2005. Redrawn by S. Plog
What are ecosystems and how do humans ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
SUPPORTING
interact with them?
HUMAN ECOSYSTEM
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
How can ecosystems mitigate disaster risk? WELL-BEING CULTURAL
SERVICES
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
In 2009, a group of scientists led by Johan Rockström from the Stockholm

Resilience Centre and Will Steffen from the Australian National University
constructed a new framework to define a “safe operating space for
humanity” (Rockström et al. 2009), known as the planetary boundaries
concept. The concept is based on nine main Earth system processes:
climate change, ocean acidification, stratospheric ozone depletion,
biogeochemical cycles (phosphorus and nitrogen), global freshwater use,
change in land use, biodiversity loss, atmospheric aerosol loading, and
chemical pollution. For each of these processes a threshold is defined,
which is called planetary boundary.
According to Rockström et al. (2009) “transgressing one or more of
these planetary boundaries may be deleterious or even catastrophic
due to the risk of crossing thresholds that will trigger non-linear, abrupt
environmental change within continental- to planetary-scale systems”
(Rockström et al. 2009:1). In 2009, three of nine planetary boundaries
were already overstepped, namely climate change, biodiversity loss,
and the nitrogen cycle as part of biogeochemical cycles (phosphorus
and nitrogen).
Recently, Steffen et al. (2015) presented a new study based on the same
processes as in 2009, but with slightly modified names for two of the
processes and considering a large number of recent scientific publications.
Moreover, regional-level boundaries have now been developed for
biosphere integrity (formerly biodiversity loss), biogeochemical flows, land-
system change and freshwater use. As a main result, the authors state
that in addition to the three boundaries that have already been crossed
© UNEP in 2009, the land-system change boundary has now been overstepped
46 47
04
as well. According to the lead author of the study, transgressing a These different interactions can be illustrated with two coastal Figure 4.3
boundary could have nefast consequences on the Earth’s state for human ecosystems: coastal dunes and mangroves. Removing sand from coastal Left: Fore dunes in Chile that serve
well-being. dunes for construction purposes or destroying dunes to build settlements as buffers and protect from wind
and waves. These fore dunes have
When we take a closer look to the nine main Earth system processes and tourism infrastructure can reduce the buffer function against high
been partly removed to create space
of the planetary boundaries concept, we see close linkages to the state waves (including tsunamis) and storms (Figure 4.3). Settlements and for coastal infrastructure. The new
of ecosystems. It is for instance obvious that ecosystem loss and infrastructure located behind the dunes, which were previously protected infrastructure will now be directly
degradation due to land-system change affect biodiversity integrity and due to the buffering function of the coastal dune system are now exposed exposed to storms and waves and
also reduce carbon storage and sequestration. to the impact of wind and waves. This means that conservation and even tsunamis that occur along the
sustainable use of the dune system would have been the appropriate way central Chilean coast.
There are many other interlinkages, which are less obvious, such as those to reduced disaster risk and adapt to climate change. Right: Destruction of coastal dunes
between ecosystems, natural hazards and disasters. The term natural in central Chile. © U. Nehren
hazards indicates that these types of hazards are natural occurrences,
such as earthquakes, storms, floods, or droughts. However, natural does
not mean that humans do not have any impact on the frequency and
intensity of some of these hazards. SREX (IPCC 2012), for instance, states
that climate change has an impact on the frequency and intensity of some
types of hazards, such as heat waves, extreme coastal high water levels,
and mass movements in high mountain areas. Taking into account that
ecosystem loss and degradation significantly contribute to anthropogenic
climate change, we see that there is an indirect link between ecosystem
loss and degradation and the frequency and intensity of certain types
of natural hazards. When people are exposed to these hazards and the
hazard overwhelms their capacity to cope with the effects, the hazard can
become a disaster.
Mangroves are important breeding grounds and nurseries for coral reef
However, there are also direct interlinkages between ecosystem loss and fish and other marine animals. But apart from their numerous biological
degradation, natural hazards and disasters (Figure 4.2). Environment functions, mangroves also buffer against storms and waves and protect
and disasters interact with each other in a number of ways. Disasters from coastal erosion. Destroying them can reduce the natural coastal
cause massive damage to the environment, while degraded environments protection and increase the risk of coastal erosion from cyclones and
exacerbate disaster impacts. Climate change will likely exacerbate storm surges. This happened for instance in Java Island, Indonesia
disaster impacts and also impacts on the environment in numerous (Figure 4.4). To counteract further coastal erosion, in some affected areas
ways (e.g. changes in seasons and changes in habitat suitability of mangroves have been restored with the support of researchers, NGOs,
species). Furthermore, responding to disasters often leads to additional and the local communities.
environmental impacts, due to emergency procedures and lack of
environmental contingency plans. Investments in sound environmental
management, especially in disaster prevention and post-disaster recovery
stages, can reduce disaster risks and thus contribute to more resilient
and sustainable development. Furthermore, environmental management
solutions are increasingly being applied for adaptation to climate change
because of these interlinkages between society, environment and
ecosystem services that can be used to help people adapt.
Figure 4.2
Interlinkages between
environment and disasters.
Source: S. Sandholz and U. Nehren,
In: CNRD-PEDRR 2013. Degraded environment Disaster response
Redrawn by L. Monk can exacerbate disaster Possible additional
impacts environmental impacts
Figure 4.4
In summary, ecosystem degradation can directly and indirectly contribute Left: Close to the city of Semarang
to a natural hazard becoming a disaster. Or, in other words according to on the North coast of Central Java,
the 2012 World Risk Report: “Not all storms and other natural hazards Indonesia, mangroves have been
ENVIRONMENT DISASTERS replaced by agricultural systems and
need to turn into disasters“ (Alliance Development Works 2012). This is a
settlements, which, in combination
crucial point which is often not considered in decisions on DRR. Ecosystem
Sound environmental with other factors, resulted in
Can cause Climate conservation, sustainable management and restoration should therefore increased coastal erosion.
management
massive damage to change impact be taken into account as suitable measures to reduce disaster risk.
Reduce disaster risk, Right: During the last ten years,
the environment Likely to exacerbate
adapt to climate change,
disaster impacts
mangroves have been restored to
enhance resilience counteract further coastal erosion
and protect the coastal zone.
© U. Nehren
48 49
04
Anthropocene 4.2 Socio-ecological systems A proposal was presented to the Stratigraphy Commission of the
Geological Society of London, suggesting that from the beginning of the
“The Anthropocene is The CBD defines an ecosystem as a “dynamic complex of plant, animal industrial revolution in the late 18th century be taken as the starting point
an informal geologic and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment of this new epoch. Since that time carbon emissions to the atmosphere
chronological term for the interacting as a functional unit” (United Nations 1992). There are other have increased significantly, as have plant and animal extinction rates. This
proposed epoch that began definitions of ecosystems, some of which explicitly include humans as means with respect to the impact on our planet, we became a geological
when human activities had a part of ecosystems. The term socio-ecological system (SES) is often factor. The discussion on the exact definition of the Anthropocene is still
significant global impact on used and denotes the intertwining of humans and nature into a complex, ongoing and there are also other suggestions for its delimitation ranging
the Earth’s ecosystems” dynamic and interacting system (Figure 4.5). The SES can be defined as from the Neolithic Revolution around 12,000 years ago to the first nuclear
(Redman et al. 2004): explosion on 16th July 1945 in Alamogordo, New Mexico, United States.
Crutzen and Stoermer 2000
A coherent system of biophysical and social factors that regularly If we take a closer look at human-nature interactions over the course
interact in a resilient, sustained manner; of evolution, we see that these interactions changed dramatically
A system that is defined at several spatial, temporal, and (Figure 4.6). While our early ancestors of the genus Australopithecus in
organisational scales, which may be hierarchically linked; Africa had to rely on their environment and adapt to the natural conditions,
Figure 4.5 tribes of Homo habilis who lived around 2.33 to 1.44 million years ago Figure 4.6
A set of critical resources (natural, socioeconomic, and cultural)
Socio-ecological system. already developed tools such as choppers and hand axes (Hartwig 2004). Human interaction with nature.
whose flow and use is regulated by a combination of ecological and We see that nature is the basis for
Redrawn and adapted from a generic Around 400,000 years ago Homo erectus then made controlled use of
social systems; and human life and that humans make
SES framework presented in Collins fire (Bowman et al. 2009). These inventions can be seen as initial steps
et al. 2010. Redrawn by L. Monk A perpetually dynamic, complex system with continuous adaptation. use of nature in several ways.
for conquering, occupying and partly destroying the natural environment.
During human evolution human-
However, the effects from that time must be seen as rather limited due to nature interactions have changed
low population density and limited geographical expansion. This is what from purely adapting to respecting
External Drivers we can also observe when we take a look at the few hunter-gatherer tribes and managing nature.
Climate; governance; management; policy that survived into modern times. Design: Hoang and Nehren.
Redrawn by L. Monk
NATURAL BASIS FOR LIFE INTERACTIONS WITH NATURE MAN’S USE OF NATURE
Social Dimension Interactions Ecological Dimension
Reliance
Human Behaviour Impacts and Stressors Biodiversity Outcomes Energy Food
Agriculture
sources supply
Land-use, migration, Forest loss, land-cover change, fire, logging, Species turnover, Tourism
population dynamics multiple degradation events, hunting diversity and abundance Adapting
Herbs and and recreation
medicine
Conquering/
Shelter Occupying Industry
Ecosystem Services Ecosystem Function Air to
Human Outcomes Provisioning: agricultural production, extraction Primary productivity, breathe Forestry
Well-being, health, of timber and nontimber forest products maintenance of soil Destroying
Natural
development condition, water quality resources for
Regulating: carbon sequestration,
water quality and stream flow and nutrient cycling industrial Settlements and
products Respecting
infrastructure
Cultural: species conservation, ecotourism Spiritual and
and scientific discovery religious basis
Managing
Water
Fishery
to drink
Our interactions through history with the environment have changed
dramatically and thus the SES is a different landscape to what it was. Source for
Taking a look at these changes is important to understand the current creation and
recreation Water use
SES. Such a systemic understanding of SES allows for linking human ... ...
action to ecosystem change. Our impact on ecosystems has become so
strong that the meteorologist Paul Crutzen and the ecologist Eugene F.
Stoermer suggested to even proclaim a new geological epoch, called the
Anthropocene (Crutzen and Stoermer 2000).
50 51
04
With the Neolithic Revolution (also called Agricultural Revolution) that
started around 12,000 years ago, humans settled down and systematically
4.3 Ecosystems can mitigate disaster risk
used the land for agriculture and livestock farming (Barker 2009). This led As many ecosystems in the world are already highly degraded, we try to
to a fundamental land cover change in many regions of the world. It was conserve, sustainably manage or even restore ecosystems to improve
also the trigger for urbanisation and population growth. The next stage of the ecological status of our planet. In so doing we can decrease the
human-nature interaction started with the industrial revolution. It is, among vulnerability caused by ecosystem degradation and therefore reduce
others, characterised by a rapid transition from hand production methods disaster risk. Furthermore, ecosystems provide important services
to machines, chemical manufacturing and iron production processes that are necessary for well-being and can also mitigate certain types of
that affected almost all aspects of daily life. According to Lucas (2002), natural hazard.
the impact of the Industrial Revolution was such that for the first time Indeed, in many cases ecosystem-based approaches can reduce the
in history, the living standards of the masses of ordinary people began impact of all three components of the disaster risk equation: exposure,
to undergo sustained growth. However, the Industrial Revolution was vulnerability and hazard. We consider that healthy ecosystems reduce
also a major turning point in human-nature interactions because it was exposure in certain cases, for example along coastlines where green belts
accompanied by massive environmental degradation at the global scale. act as natural buffers. Ecosystems also reduce vulnerability because
Today we are experiencing the highest life expectancies and living standards they provide many ecosystem services for supporting livelihoods and
in human history, at least for the majority of the world’s population (UNDP human well-being. Last, healthy ecosystems can reduce the impact
2014). At the same time we are facing severe environmental, social and of hazards by acting as natural buffers. Examples are provided in
economic challenges, as already stated almost 50 years ago in the highly Figure 4.7. Table 4.1 provides an overview of the hazard mitigation
regarded report “The Limits to Growth” by the Club of Rome (Meadows et functions of different ecosystems. However, we must also say that not all
al. 1972). More recent publications on global environmental challenges hazards can be effectively mitigated by ecosystems, which is for instance
include among others the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Report the case for earthquakes, and that the magnitude of the hazard can be a
(MA 2005), the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC 2014), the limiting factor, such as in the case of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and
Global Assessment Report 2019 (UNDRR 2019), and the IPBES’ Global the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan where coastal forests
Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES 2019). provided only limited protection.
The global challenges for humanity are also addressed in international
development agendas, in particular in the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs). These concepts and international agreements aim at respecting
and managing nature to secure human-well-being for future generations
under the guiding principle of sustainable development.
Figure 4.7
Examples of ecosystem types in
reducing hazard occurrence.
Mountain forests and vegetation on hillsides can Wetlands and riverine ecosystems are important for Coastal ecosystems, such as coral reefs, Dryland ecosystems can reduce the risks of
reduce the risk of landslides, rock fall, avalanches flood control as they store water and slowly release saltmarshes, mangroves and sand dunes, can serve droughts and desertification, as trees, grasses
and soil erosion. Moreover, forests store water and it, reducing speed and volume of runoff. Coastal as natural buffers against tropical cyclones, storm and shrubs conserve soil and retain moisture.
can reduce the runoff after rainfall events. Thereby wetlands tidal flats, deltas and estuaries can reduce surges, flooding, other coastal hazards and to some Shelterbelts, greenbelts and other types of living
they can reduce the risk of floods and droughts. the height and speed of storm surges and tidal waves. extent tsunamis. Moreover, coastal wetlands buffer fences act as barriers against wind erosion and
Photo: Mountain forest in Brazil Photo: Wetland in Nicaragua © U. Nehren against saltwater intrusion and adapt to sea-level rise. sand storms.
(Atlantic Forest of Rio de Janeiro) © U. Nehren Photo: Corals in Indonesia © S. Sandholz Photo: Dry forest in Kenya © U. Nehren
52 53
04
Table 4.1
Hazard mitigation functions of different ecosystems (adapted from Estrella and Saalismaa 2013).
4.4 Conclusions
There are indirect and direct linkages between ecosystems and disasters.
ECOSYSTEMS HAZARD MITIGATION It is known that ecosystem degradation feeds into disaster risk and
Mountain forests, Vegetation cover and root structures Catchment forests, especially primary forests, interventions within the socio-ecological system can either negatively or
vegetation on protect against erosion and increase slope reduce risk of floods by increasing infiltration positively influence disaster risk. Ecosystem-based approaches can be
hillsides stability by binding soil together, preventing of rainfall, and delaying peak floodwater flows, effective tools in reducing disaster and climate risks and one of the few
landslides.1 except when soils are fully saturated.3 approaches to reduce all three components of the risk equation: buffering
Forests protect against rockfall and stabilise Forests in watersheds are important for water and mitigating hazard impacts, reducing vulnerability by providing
snow, reducing the risk of avalanches.2 recharge and purification, drought mitigation ecosystem services to reduce vulnerability and reducing exposure when
and safeguarding drinking water supply.4 natural infrastructure is established in highly exposed areas.
Wetlands, Wetlands and floodplains control floods Coastal wetlands, tidal flats, deltas and However, depending on the magnitude of the hazard there are limitations
floodplains in coastal areas, inland river basins, and estuaries reduce the height and speed of storm to how much protection ecosystems can provide, just as there are
mountain areas subject to glacial melt.5 surges and tidal waves.6 limitations to engineered structures (Vosse 2008). Exactly how much
Peatlands, wet grasslands and other Marshes, lakes and floodplains release wet protection an ecosystem can provide may be locally specific, requiring
wetlands store water and release it slowly, season flows slowly during drought periods. the expertise of ecologists working together with disaster risk managers
reducing the speed and volume of runoff and engineers to design risk protective systems that work with nature,
after heavy rainfall or snowmelt in springtime. rather than against it to the extent possible. Furthermore, ecosystem-
based solutions often require a lot of land which may not be available
Coastal Coastal ecosystems protect against Coastal wetlands buffer against saltwater (Doswald and Osti 2011).
(Mangroves, hurricanes, storm surges, flooding and other intrusion and adapt to (slow) sea-level rise by
saltmarshes, coastal hazards – a combined protection trapping sediment and organic matter.9 Nevertheless, working with ecosystems can reduce disaster risk and help
coral reefs, from coral reefs, seagrass beds, and sand adapt to climate change. Furthermore, they provide a number of benefits
Non-porous natural barriers, such as sand
barrier islands, dunes/coastal wetlands/coastal forests is stemming from the services they provide. Due to this, ecosystem-based
dunes (with associated plant communities)
sand dunes) particularly effective.7 approaches have emerged in both the DRR and CCA community as natural
and barrier islands, dissipate wave energy
Coral reefs and coastal wetlands, such and act as barriers against waves, currents, solutions. The following chapter explores Eco-DRR and EbA in more detail
as mangroves and saltmarshes, absorb storm surges and tsunamis, depending on and discusses differences and similarities between them.
(low-magnitude) wave energy, reduce wave the magnitude.i.10
heights and reduce erosion from storms
and high tides.8
Drylands Natural vegetation management and Maintaining vegetation cover in dryland areas,
restoration in drylands contributes to and agricultural practices, such as use of
ameliorate the effects of drought and control shadow crops, nutrient enriching plants and
desertification, as trees, grasses and shrubs vegetation litter, increases resilience
conserve soil and retain moisture. to drought.11
Shelterbelts, greenbelts and other types of Prescribed burning and creation of physical
living fences act as barriers against wind firebreaks in dry landscapes reduces fuel loads
erosion and sand storms. and the risk of unwanted large-scale fires.
1 Dolidon et al. (2009), Peduzzi (2010), Norris et al. (2008).

2 Bebi et al. (2009), Dorren et al. (2004).
3 Krysanova et al. (2008).
4 World Bank 2010.
5 Campbell et al. (2009).
6 Batker et al. (2010), Costanza et al. (2008), Ramsar (2010), Zhao (2005).
7 Badola et al. (2005), Batker et al. (2010), Granek and Ruttenberg (2007).
8 Mazda et al. (1997), Möller (2006), Vo-Luong and Massel (2008), Narayan et al. (2016).
9 Campbell et al. (2009).
10 Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (2009), UNEP-WCMC (2006).
11 Campbell et al. (2009), Krysanova et al. (2008).
54 55
04
Alliance Development Works (2012). World Risk Report. Crutzen, P. J., and E. F. Stoermer (2000). The University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. Persson, F. S.
Berlin: Alliance Development Works. https://reliefweb. Anthropocene. Global Change Newsletter, 41, 17–18. Accessed 24 July 2019. Chapin, III, E. Lambin, T. M. Lenton, M. Scheffer, C. Folke,
int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/WRR_2012_en_ http://www.igbp.net/publications/globalchangemagazine/ H. Schellnhuber, B. Nykvist, C. A. De Wit, T. Hughes, S. van
IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report.
online150.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. globalchangemagazine/globalchangenewsletters der Leeuw, H. Rodhe, S. Sörlin, P. K. Snyder, R. Costanza, U.
Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth
no4159.5.5831d9ad13275d51c098000309.html Accessed Svedin, M. Falkenmark, L. Karlberg, R. W. Corell, V. J. Fabry,
Badola, R. and Hussain, S. A. (2005). Valuing ecosystem Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
24 July 2019. J. Hansen, B. Walker, D. Liverman, K. Richardson, Crutzen,
functions: an empirical study on the storm protection Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A.
P. and Foley, J. (2009). Planetary boundaries: exploring the
function of Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem, India. Dolidon, N., Hofer, T., Jansky, L. and Sidle, R. (2009). Meyer (eds.)]. Geneva: IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/
safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society,
Environmental Conservation, 32 (1), 85-92. DOI: 10.1017/ Watershed and forest management for landslide risk Accessed 24 July 2019.
14(2), 32. DOI: 10.5751/ES-03180-140232.
S0376892905001967. reduction. In Landslides – Disaster Risk Reduction. Sassa, K.
Krysanova, V., Buiteveld, H., Haase, D., Hattermann, F. F.,
and Canuti, P. (eds.). Springer, Berlin. 633-646. Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockstrom, J., Cornell, S.E.,
Barker, G. (2009). The Agricultural Revolution in Prehistory: van Niekerk, K., Roest, K., Martinez-Santos, P. and Schlüter,
Feltzer, I., Bennett, E.M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S.R., de Vries,
Why did Foragers become Farmers? Oxford: Oxford Dorren, L., Berger, F., Imeson, A., Meier, B. and Rey, F. (2004). M. (2008). Practices and lessons learned in coping with
W., de Wit, C.A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G.M.,
University Press. Integrity, stability and management of protection forests in climatic hazards at the river-basin scale: floods and
Persson, L.M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B. and Sorlin, S.
the European Alps. Forest Ecology and Management, 195, drought. Ecology and Society, 13, 32. DOI: 10.5751/ES-
Batker, D.P., de la Torre, I., Costanza, R., Swedeen, P., Day, (2015). Planetary Boundaries: Guiding human development
165-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.02.057. 02345-130232.
J.W., Boumans, R. and Bagstad, K. (2010). Gaining on a changing planet. Science, 347 (6223), 1259855. DOI:
ground—wetlands, hurricanes and the economy: The value Doswald, N. and Osti, M. (2011). Ecosystem-based Lucas, R. E., Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. 10.1126/science.1259855.
of restoring the Mississippi River Delta. Tacoma: approaches to adaptation and mitigation – good practice Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
UNDP (2014). Human Development Report 2014: Sustaining
Earth Economics. examples and lessons learned in Europe. BfN Skripten 306.
Mazda, Y., Magi, M., Kogo, M. and Hong, P.N. (1997). Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities and Increasing
Bonn: BfN. https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/
Bebi, P., Kulakowski, D. and Christian, R. (2009). Snow Mangroves as a coastal protection from waves in the Tong Resilience. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-
service/Skript_306.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
avalanche disturbances in forest ecosystems – State of Kong delta, Vietnam. Mangroves and Salt Marshes, 1,127– report-en-1.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
research and implications for management. Forest Ecology Estrella. M. and Saalisma, N. (2013). Ecosystem-based 135. DOI: 10.1023/A:1009928003700.
UNEP-WCMC (2006). In the Front Line: Shoreline protection
and Management, 257 (9),1883–1892. DOI: 10.1016/j. Disaster Risk Reduction (Eco-DRR): An overview. In The
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers J.and Behrens III, and other ecosystem services from mangroves and coral
foreco.2009.01.050. Role of Ecosystems for Disaster Risk Reduction. Renaud,
W.W. (1972). The Limits to Growth. New York: reefs. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC. https://www.unep-wcmc.
F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M. (eds.). Tokyo: United
Bowman, M., Balch, K., Artaxo, P.; Bond, J., Carlson, M., Universe Books. org/resources-and-data/in-the-front-line--shoreline-
Nations University Press. http://collections.unu.edu/view/
Cochrane, A., D’Antonio, M., Defries, S., Doyle, J.C., Harrison, protection-and-other-ecosystem-services-from-mangroves-
UNU:1995 Accessed 24 July 2019. MA (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state
S.P., Johnston, F.H., Keeley, J.E., Krawchuk, M.A., Kull, C.A., and-coral-reefs Accessed 24 July 2019.
and trends: Findings of the Condition and Trends Working
Marston, J.B., Moritz, M.A., Prentice, I.C., Roos, C.I., Scott, Granek, E.F. and Ruttenberg, B.I. (2007). Protective capacity
Group. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. UNISDR (2015). Global Assessment Report 2015. Making
A.C., Swetnam, T.W., van der Werf, G.R. and Pyne, S.J. of mangroves during tropical storms: A case study from
development sustainable, the future of disaster risk
(2009). Fire in the Earth System. Science, 324 (5926), 481- ‘Wilma’ and ‘Gamma’ in Belize. Marine Ecology Progress Möller, I. (2006). Quantifying saltmarsh vegetation and
management. Geneva: UNDRR https://www.unisdr.org/we/
484. DOI: 10.1126/science.1163886. Series, 343,101-105. DOI: 10.3354/meps07141. its effect on wave height dissipation: Results from a
inform/publications/42809 Accessed 24 July 2019.
UK East coast saltmarsh. Journal of Estuarine, Coastal
Campbell, A., Kapos, V., Scharlemann, J. P.W., Bubb, P., Hartwig W.C. (2004). The Primate Fossil Record. Cambridge:
and Shelf Sciences, 69(3-4), 337-351. DOI: 10.1016/j. UNDRR (2019). Global Assessment Report on Disaster
Chenery, A., Coad, L., Dickson, B., Doswald, N., Khan, M. Cambridge University Press, reprint.
ecss.2006.05.003. Risk Reduction. Geneva: UNDRR. https://gar.unisdr.org/
S. I., Kershaw, F. and Rashid, M. (2009). Review of the
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) Accessed 24 July 2019.
literature on the links between biodiversity and climate Narayan, S., Beck, M.B., Reguero, B.G., Losada, I.J., van
(2009). Tsunami risk assessment and mitigation for the
change: impacts, adaptation and mitigation. Technical series Wesenbeeck, B., Pontee, N. Sanchirico, J.N., Ingram, United Nations (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity.
Indian Ocean. Knowing your tsunami risk – and what to do
42. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological J.C., Lange, G.-M. and Burkes-Copes, K.A. (2016). The https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf Accessed
about it. UNESCO Manuals and Guides 52. Paris: UNESCO.
Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-42- Effectiveness, Costs and Coastal Protection Benefits of 24 July 2019.
https://www.jodc.go.jp/info/ioc_doc/Manual/IOC-M&G-52_
en.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. Natural and Nature-Based Defenses. Plos One, 11 (5),
eo.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. Vo-Luong, P. and Massel, S. (2008). Energy dissipation
e0154735. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154735.
Christensen, N.L., Bartuska, A.M., Brown, J.H., Carpenter, in non-uniform mangrove forests of arbitrary depth.
IPBES (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity
S., D’Antonio, C., Francis, R., Franklin J.F., MacMahon, J.A., Norris, J. E., Stokes, A., Mickovski, S. B., Cammeraat, E., Journal of Marine Systems, 74, 603–622. DOI: 10.1016/j.
and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-
Noss, R.F., Parsons, D.J., Peterson, C.H., Turner, M.G., and van Beek, R., Nicoll, B. C. and Achim, A. (eds). (2008). Slope jmarsys.2008.05.004.
Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. E.
Woodmansee, R.G. (1996). The Report of the Ecological stability and erosion control: ecotechnological solutions.
S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz, and H. T. Ngo (eds). Bonn: Vosse, M. (2008). Wave attenuation over marshlands:
Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Dordrecht: Springer.
IPBES Secretariat. determination of marshland influences on New Orleans’ flood
Ecosystem Management. Ecological Applications, 6(3),
Peduzzi, P. (2010). Landslides and vegetation cover in the protection [dissertation] University of Twente. https://www.
665–691. DOI: 10.2307/2269460. IPCC (2012). Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and
2005 North Pakistan earthquake: a GIS and statistical utwente.nl/en/et/wem/education/msc-thesis/2008/vosse.
Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special
Collins, S.L., Carpenter, S.R., Swinton, S.M., Orenstein, quantitative approach. Natural Hazards and Earth System pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
D.E., Childers, D.L., Gragson, T.L., Grimm, N.B., Grove, J.M., Sciences, 10, 623-640. DOI: 10.5194/nhess-10-623-2010.
Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, World Bank (2010). Convenient Solutions to an Inconvenient
Harlan, S.L., Kaye, J.P., Knapp, A.K., Kofinas, G.P., Magnuson,
D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (2010). Flood control. Truth: Ecosystem- based Approaches to Climate Change.
J.J., McDowell, W.H., Melack, J.M., Ogden, L.A., Robertson,
G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Wetland ecosystem services. Factsheet 1. https://www. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://documents.
G.P., Smith, M.D., and Whitmer, A.C. (2010). An integrated
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/library/ worldbank.org/curated/en/817801468341068096/
conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological
services_01_e.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. pdf/518380PUB0Clim101Official0Use0Only1.pdf Accessed
research. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 9, 351-357. IPCC (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
24 July 2019.
DOI: 10.1890/100068. Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Redman, C., Grove, M. J. and Kuby, L. (2004). Integrating
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Social Science into the Long-Term Ecological Research Zhao, B. et al. (2005). Estimation of ecological service
Costanza, R., Pérez-Maqueo, O.M., Martínez, M.L., Sutton, P.,
Climate Change. [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. (LTER) Network: Social Dimensions of Ecological Change values of wetlands in Shanghai, China. Chinese
Anderson, S.J. and Mulder, K. (2008). The value of coastal
Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and and Ecological Dimensions of Social Change. Ecosystems, Geographical Science, 15 (2), 151-156. DOI: 10.1007/
wetlands for hurricane protection. Ambio, 37, 241-248. DOI:
P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge 7,161-171. DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-8782-9_27. s11769-005-0008-8.
10.1579/0044-7447(2008)37[241:TVOCWF]2.0.CO;2.
56 57
Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and ecosystem-based adaptation
05
5.1 Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction DEFINITION: Eco-DRR
Chapter 5 The idea of Eco-DRR is relatively simple. It entails combining natural
resources management approaches, or the sustainable management
“Ecosystem-based disaster
risk reduction (Eco-DRR) is
Ecosystem-based of ecosystems, with DRR methods, such as early warning systems and
emergency planning, in order to have more effective disaster prevention,
the sustainable management,
conservation and restoration
disaster risk reduction reduce the impact of disasters on people and communities, and support of ecosystems to reduce
disaster recovery. disaster risk, with the aim
and ecosystem-based Well-managed ecosystems, such as wetlands, forests and coastal to achieve sustainable and
adaptation systems, act as natural infrastructure that reduce physical exposure to resilient development”.
many hazards and by increasing socio-economic resilience of people Estrella and Saalismaa 2013
and communities by sustaining local livelihoods and providing essential
Key questions natural resources such as food, water and building materials (Renaud et
al. 2013, Renaud et al. 2016). Ecosystem management also generates a
What is Ecosystem-based Disaster Risk range of other social, economic and environmental benefits for multiple
Reduction (Eco-DRR) and Ecoystem-based stakeholders, which in turn feed back into reduced risk.
Adaptation (EbA) and what are the
similarities and differences between them? CASE STUDIES
Switzerland
What are the benefits of further integrating
In Switzerland, protection forests are a main component of its disaster
Eco-DRR and EbA?
risk reduction program in the Alps in order to protect critical infrastructure
from frequent hazards, such as rock fall, avalanches or shallow landslides
(Figure 5.1). The Swiss government spends over $120 million annually on
the management of its protective forests to achieve a balance between
young and old trees and a mix of species to keep forests healthy and strong.
The government forest office manages the protection forests even if
they are owned privately. In some cases, the local government will even
financially compensate private land owners in the case that they have lost
income from logging. Local people prefer to have forests for protection
because they also provide places for recreation, are more aesthetic and
appear less threatening than avalanche barriers or rock nets.
Protection forest planning has a time span of 50-100 years and is based
on public willingness to maintain their forests. There are a number of
scientific studies, forest management guidelines and cost-benefit
analyses that demonstrate that protection forest cost 5-10 times less than
structurally engineered structures over time (Wehrli and Dorren 2013).
Figure 5.1
Protection forest, Davos,
Switzerland.
© UNEP
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UNEP
58 59
05
The alternative to maintaining protective forests are engineered solutions, In order to restore the areas affected by the landslides and mudslides
such as avalanche barriers that are frequently found in the Alps, and to mitigate hazards, the Government of Rio de Janeiro State is DEFINITION:
especially in areas where the protection forest have been cut. The past mainly investing in structural engineered measures. However, to a certain EbA
years, however, have seen a shift back to the non-engineered protective extent ecosystem-based approaches are considered as well, including “Ecosystem-based Adaptation
measures – wherever possible – because the public often prefers slope stabilization measures, river parks and reforestation of riparian (EbA) is the use of biodiversity
protection forests for the many additional benefits they get as compared areas and the construction of natural channels for water infiltration. and ecosystem services as
to avalanche barriers. However in some cases, it is useful and necessary However, government reports reference several barriers in implementing part of an overall adaptation
to have both. DRR measures, some of which are related to institutional coordination, strategy to help people adapt
Brazil bureaucracy and even corruption (Sandholz et al. 2018). to the adverse effects of
One of the worst weather-related disasters in Brazilian history took place For more detailed information on both the Swiss and Brazil example, climate change “
in January 2011 in the municipalities of Nova Friburgo, Teresópolis, as well as other examples from The Netherlands, Guatemala/Mexico, CBD 2009
Petrópolis and São Jose do Vale do Rio Preto in the State of Rio de Janeiro. Burkina Faso/Niger and the USA, please refer to the “Eco-DRR Case
After a 24 hour rainfall event between the 11th and 12th January, the Santo Study Source Book” (Nehren et al. 2014).
Antonio River level increased dramatically and many areas around the
state reported floods, land and mudslides (Figure 5.2). According to the 5.2 Ecosystem-based adaptation
Government of Brazil, more than 900 fatalities were reported, the material
damage was above $1.2 billion, more than 345 persons were missing, EbA has emerged in international climate policy for a as a “new” approach
and in the end more than 35,000 people were left homeless (SBF 2011). and is “the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall
adaptation strategy to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate
Most of the areas affected by landslides were riverbanks showing some change” (CBD 2009). The EbA concept stems from a long history of using
level of human intervention (for example for agricultural or residential environmental management to adapt to climatic variations, for example
purposes). Landslides that occurred in areas covered by natural changing planting dates, as well as reducing risks from natural hazards
ecosystems or with well-conserved native vegetation were of lower as stated above for Eco-DRR. EbA is currently growing with interest in
magnitude when compared with landslides that occurred in disturbed policy arenas with inclusion in the IPCC AR5 and with the production of
areas. Landslides in terrains covered with native vegetation were always catalogues of case studies, research, and development of guidelines and
located in the proximity of areas affected by human activities (SBF 2011). tools (IPCC 2014). A number of institutions have produced criteria and
Brazilian governmental authorities, like the Brazilian Ministry for guidelines for EbA (IUCN 2016, FEBA 2017).
Environment (MMA) and the Government of Rio de Janeiro State, are using
the concept of resilient landscapes as the basis to reduce vulnerability and CASE STUDIES
disaster risk and adapt to climate change. Mali
In order to reduce risks of landslides, mudslides and flooding, different A World Bank funded project “Natural Resources Management in a
measures were implemented by a number of actors: the government of Changing Climate in Mali” states its aim to expand the adoption of
the Rio de Janeiro State, the municipalities and also by the communities. sustainable land and water management practices in targeted communes
These developments and the implementation of these measures started in Mali. This objective is achieved through the implementation of
before the 2011 event but were accelerated after the catastrophe. capacity building, biodiversity conservation and support to poverty
reduction activities through an ecosystem-based adaptation approach.
It is an integrated approach to conservation, restoration and sustainable
management of territories to enable people adapting to climate change,
Figure 5.2 and ultimately increase their resilience (World Bank 2013).
Brazil landslides in 2011. Mountain EbA Programme
© S. Sandholz
The UNEP/UNDP/IUCN “Mountain EbA” projects in Uganda, Peru and
Nepal aimed to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience to climate
change through EbA (UNDP 2015). Methodologies for assessing the
vulnerability to climate change and decision tools for EbA were developed
and implemented at the ecosystem level. In pilot sites in each country, EbA
measures were implemented contributing towards ecosystem resilience
and reduction of livelihood vulnerability in the face of climate change
impacts (Figure 5.3).
60 61
05
Figure 5.3
The Nor Yauyos-Cochas Landscape
5.3 Similarities and differences between
Reserve in Peru. ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
© UNDP
ecosystem-based adaptation
While environmental management undertaken to tackle climate variability
and climatic hazards is not new and much evidence exists as to the
effective use thereof (Doswald et al. 2014), many EbA, Eco-DRR and hybrid
EBA/Eco-DRR projects are either embryonic or currently underway. Thus,
complete information on these is lacking. Therefore, juxtaposing theory
with practice will be useful to highlight differences and commonalities
between the fields of practice. Understanding the two is important for
project development and integration.
In a UNEP discussion paper (Doswald and Estrella 2015), 34 ecosystem-
based projects/initiatives were reviewed and analyzed. They were
classified into EbA, Eco-DRR and hybrid Eco-DRR/EbA projects to
understand how EbA and Eco-DRR projects are undertaken in practice and
to find key integration points. The following similarities and differences
Recent IPCC studies (2012, 2014) have highlighted the importance of between EbA and Eco-DRR are drawn from this discussion paper.
ecosystem-based measures as part of necessary adaptation and lists OBJECTIVES OF ECOSYSTEM-BASED DISASTER RISK
protection of ecosystems as one of several elements providing significant
REDUCTION AND ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION
co-benefits and synergies between mitigation and adaptation.
EbA and Eco-DRR both aim to achieve their goals using similar measures:
The IPCC (2014) in fact lists some ecosystem-based measures being
sustainable management, conservation and restoration of ecosystems.
undertaken around the world, including:
EbA, however, because of its connection to the CBD (see CBD 2009)
“Adaptation planning integrated into coastal and water perhaps, has more emphasis on ecosystem services and biodiversity than
management, into environmental protection and land planning, Eco-DRR. Indeed, some EbA projects primarily focus on maintaining and
and into disaster risk management; increasing the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services as a way
Mainstreaming climate adaptation action into subnational to help people adapt.
development planning, early warning systems, integrated water Eco-DRR projects usually do not have such a focus (at least in the stated
resources management, agroforestry, and coastal reforestation aims) to protect biodiversity per se. Instead, the focus is on increasing
of mangroves; resilience of people or reducing risks from hazards using environmental
Ecosystem-based adaptation including protected areas, management or utilizing ecosystem services. UNEP’s Eco-DRR project
conservation agreements, and community management of natural in The Democratic Republic of Congo, for example, aims to strengthen
areas is occurring. Resilient crop varieties, climate forecasts, and community capacity to maximise the ecosystem service benefits provided
integrated water resources management are being adopted within by the Lukaya river catchment, including its potential to regulate floods and
the agricultural sector in some areas”. for water pollution mitigation (UNEP 2016). Proper terrace management is
another way of reducing erosion issues and can contribute to Integrated
(excerpted from IPCC 2014: 8-9)
Water Resource Management (IWRM) (Figure 5.4).
Figure 5.4
Terracing in DR Congo.
© UNEP
62 63
05
Hybrid EbA/Eco-DRR projects often aim to reduce risk or increase Figure 5.6
resilience and apply adaptive measures often in broad terms. For n C li m a Eco-DRR/EbA major priorities
u c ti o te C
Red R (UNISDR) C li m a t
e Ag
han and decisions with regards to
example, the Partnership for Resilience’s project in Ethiopia aims “to i s k
r R rk for D
R ree m g e A
ste o ent d a p major international framework
reduce vulnerability of the community to current hazards, but also i s a m ew (U ta
N F tio
D ra Regulating and Regulating and CC agreements. Green arrows illustrate
incorporate measures that help people prepare for the future and adapt to ai
F
provisioning ES provisioning ES various levels of ecosystem
n
climate change”.
nd
C)
services (ES), red arrows highlight
Se
Priorities Preservation of
However, differences between EbA and Eco-DRR project objectives are for action 1-3 ecosystems for the main provisions of each
adaptation agreement related to Eco-DRR/
not always clear. The difference often depends on the implementing Eco-DRR/CCA
SDG targets Aichi Target 15 EbA. Source: Renaud et al. 2016,
institution. When biodiversity conservation organizations are involved, a 2.4, 6.5, 6.6, 11.4, 11a, CBD COP12 decision
Copyright permission granted.
Ramsar Decision XII/13
more ecosystem-focus is applied. This is not to say that one approach 14.2, 15.1, 15.3
Promise of Sydney Source: Renaud et al. 2016.
is necessarily right or wrong because ultimately the focus is on
it y
rs Redrawn by L. Monk
Su
us All ES All ES
ve ,
S
ai
helping people to adapt or reduce risk through the use of biodiversity na tain di e s
st
b le a b l i o m
& B t c o et s
and ecosystems. De e D ev t al u g
vel men ion O Tar
op m e l o p m e n En v iro n
r v a t n d
ent G t e a
In Figure 5.5, we give the example of watershed management, which is a oals (U Cons i s i o n s
N) Dec
way of managing water resources on the scale of a watershed. The main
goal is to manage water, whether too much - to prevent flooding, or too
little - to prevent the likelihood of future drought. It meets both the goal
of CCA and DRR.
Both Eco-DRR and EbA projects almost always involve implementation
by environmental agencies or environmental/conservation NGOs,
Figure 5.5 given their clear emphasis on the environment. One special case is the
Ecosystem-based management Partnership for Resilience whose Eco-DRR/EbA projects involve working
approaches, such as watershed
with humanitarian and disaster management organisations, such as the
management can be used to
manage flooding and drought.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC),
Cordaid and CARE.
CCA DRR
© W. Lange and S. Sandholz, E
MPL
redrawn by S. Plog EXA
Eco-DRR and EbA projects would also generally partner with environmental
WATERSHED ministries as well as with actors from key development sectors, such as
MANAGEMENT agriculture, water, and urban development. Both recognise the importance
of mainstreaming Eco-DRR and EbA into national and local development
REDUCE THE LIKELIHOOD REDUCE policies, programmes and plans. Hence, Eco-DRR, EbA and hybrid Eco-
OF FUTURE DROUGHT CURRENT FLOODING
DRR/EbA projects all recognize the importance of bringing together and
working with different government ministries and other stakeholders,
including civil society, universities, and businesses and the private sector.
POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXTS EbA projects also work within specific policies. For example, in Europe,
some EbA projects are undertaken under the EU water framework
At the policy level, the importance of including ecosystem management
directive. EbA projects are also working to develop guidelines/policies for
for CCA and DRR is recognized. The UNFCCC’s Paris Agreement invites
land management and population (e.g. CI’s EbA project in South Africa and
parties to engage in adaptation action, which may include “building
the GEF-funded project in Colombia). An exception is perhaps the case
resilience of socioeconomic and ecological systems” (UNFCCC 2015),
of CI’s EbA project in South Africa, which includes EbA as an integral part
while the SFDRR recognizes environmental degradation as a major
of the DRR strategy locally and is working nationally to influence policy
contributing factor to disaster risk. Environment will thus underpin
(Bourne 2013). Aside from the South African example, there is not enough
achievement of outcomes across the SFDRR’s seven global targets (see
information on the projects to know whether EbA projects generally try to
chapter 3). In parallel to EbA, Eco-DRR is emerging as a field of practice as
work with national DRR policies.
well as in the policy arena. In Chapter 3, we discussed the various policies
where Eco-DRR has been mentioned. These include the SFDRR (2015); Eco-DRR projects, on the other hand, aim to work and influence both
the UNFCCC Paris Agreement (2015); a number of SDG targets and DRR and environmental policies. The UNEP Eco-DRR project in the
several CBD decisions (e.g. decision X/33). Democratic Republic of Congo aimed to work with the Ministry of Social
and Humanitarian Affairs to ensure that environment was part of their
Figure 5.6 illustrates the major international framework agreements
disaster management framework and strategies (Figure 5.7). However,
passed in 2014 and 2015, which include priorities and decisions on
this remains challenging given the marginal roles played by environmental
Eco-DRR/EbA.
ministries within DRR.
64 65
05
Figure 5.7 Eco-DRR EBA Eco-DRR/CCA
Creating national mechanisms Sea surface Ocean
to mainstream Eco-DRR, Lukaya, Dust storms temperature acidification
Democratic Republic of Congo. 4% 17% 17%
© H. Partow/UNEP Tsunami GLOF
4% Avalanche
Drought
Drought 3%
13% Erosion
8% 14% Drought
Temperature 11% 21%
change
Erosion
17% Landslides
8% Floods
10%
Fires
Floods 20%
4% 29%
Rainfall
change
Landslides Storms
17% Floods
17% 21% 32%
Storms Sea level
rise Storms
13%
8% 3%
Erosion
Landslides
6% Fires
3% 6%
Just as CCA and DRR overlap, so do EbA and Eco-DRR, and perhaps even
more so given their common focus on ecosystem-based approaches.
More differences could be observed in the types of impacts addressed Figure 5.9
Furthermore, there are “hybrid projects” that integrate CCA and DRR EbA, Eco-DRR and Hybrid Eco-DRR/
by both approaches. While Eco-DRR mainly addressed impacts in terms
using an ecosystem-based approach. Yet, due to the largely different EbA projects and hazard types
of loss of livelihoods, lives, food security, water security and health, EbA
policy and institutional contexts of CCA and DRR, EbA and Eco-DRR tend addressed.
also addresses long-term impacts such as biodiversity loss, changes
to operate in separate silos. Moreover, hybrid projects tend to have either Source: Doswald and Estrella 2015.
within ecosystems (e.g. coral bleaching and habitat suitability changes) Redrawn by L. Monk
an EbA or Eco-DRR “slant” depending on the experts involved in the project
and potential increase in disease/pest outbreaks, alongside issues dealt
(Figure 5.8).
by Eco-DRR such as livelihoods, food and water security.
Figure 5.8 STARTING POINTS Projects equally covered drylands, marine, mountain, forest, inland waters,
Starting points for EbA versus NATURAL RESOURCES DISASTERS as well as marine and urban ecosystems. Urban projects tend to label their
Eco-DRR with a large zone of ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT actions more as adaptation (i.e. EbA2) than disaster risk reduction (Eco-
overlapping common measures. CONVERSATION COMMUNITIES HUMANITARIAN COMMUNITIES DRR). However, this is more likely due to the current political prominence
© S. Sandholz, W. Lange,
of climate change (Mercer 2010) than a real difference.
redrawn by S. Plog
TYPES OF ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY ECOSYSTEM-BASED
ADAPTATION AND ECOSYSTEM-BASED DISASTER RISK
REDUCTION PROJECTS
Both Eco-DRR and EbA will undertake a risk/vulnerability assessment and
decide on what measures to undertake. Vulnerability assessments for EbA
EbA Eco-DRR will try to incorporate future climate change scenarios/maps to determine
ADAPTATION OF FOREST MANAGEMENT EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS future vulnerabilities; however, local climate models are not often finescale
ECOSYSTEMS
MANGROVE RESTORATION EVACUATION PLANS enough for detailed planning and therefore general trends on climate will
PROTECTIVE AREAS be taken into account. Eco-DRR tends to focus more on past and current
MANAGEMENT WETLAND RESTORATION PREPAREDNESS
RISK MAPPING hazards in their risk assessments. These are often also taken into account
BIODIVERSITY AND
WILDLIFE CORRIDORS COMMON MEASURES CONTINGENCY PLANS in EbA but the depth of analysis may not always be the same.
FOCUS: FOCUS: EbA projects often address how to restore ecosystems or assist
BIODIVERSITY + LONG-TERM IMPACTS ECOSYSTEM-BASED MEASURES communities to better adapt to changing climate conditions, including
OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON ECOSYSTEMS + CONVENTIONAL DRR MEASURES
protected area management (PAM), or strengthening biodiversity and
wildlife corridors. Often the focus may be on biodiversity issues and the
long-term impacts of climate change on ecosystems and people. Eco-DRR
TYPES OF HAZARDS AND ECOSYSTEMS COVERED IN PROJECTS projects may include typical aspects of DRR: early warning, evacuation
Droughts, floods, storms, landslides, erosion and fires were the hazards plans, etc. in combination with ecosystem-based measures. Common
addressed by both EbA and Eco-DRR projects. Eco-DRR also dealt with measures include forest management, mangrove restoration, wetland
hazards, such as tsunamis, earthquakes, dust storms and avalanches, restoration or using an Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)
while EbA also dealt specifically with sea-level rise and broad (potential) approach, which takes into account natural watershed boundaries and a
changes to temperature and rainfall patterns. Hybrid Eco-DRR/EbA projects more holistic approach to addressing water and climate issues.
also included glacial lake outburst floods (GLOF) (see Figures 5.9).
2 The term “ecosystem-based adaptation” is not used by these projects.
They mostly refer to CCA in conjunction with green infrastructure or solutions.
66 67
05
5.4 The benefits of integrating ecosystem- Figure 5.11
Bamyan Province, Afghanistan.
based disaster risk reduction and ecosystem- © UNEP
based adaptation
As we have seen, ecosystems and their services are central, though not
primary, to the discussion of CCA and DRR. Indeed, the environment is at
the same time the context, the problem and the solution to many hazards
facing society. Environmental conditions can either increase or reduce
vulnerability and risk to disasters.
As we know, ecosystems are vulnerable to current anthropogenic
pressures and are being degraded, as outlined in the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment (MA 2005). The capacity of ecosystems to provide these
services may be further undermined by climate change or hazard impacts,
as well as by the unsustainable measures undertaken under CCA or DRR.
Strategic management of ecosystems, therefore, is necessary to ensure
provision of services that are important to society in the face of climate
change and natural hazards. However, it is important to state that solely can reduce risk of rock falls or landslides triggered by earthquakes (e.g. in
ecosystem-based solutions may not always be effective and practicable the case of protection forests in Switzerland; see Peduzzi 2010).
(Figure 5.10). There are important opportunities for bringing together different actors
and sectors at sub-national or local levels, for instance working with
Figure 5.10 provincial or municipal governments, as illustrated in the case of UNEP’s
The relationship between ECOSYSTEMS Eco-DRR project in Bamyan Province, Afghanistan (Figure 5.11), in the
ecosystems, society and climate case of PfR’s Eco-DRR/EbA project in Orissa, India or in CI’s EBA project
SOCIETY
change adaptation (CCA) and in South Africa.
disaster risk reduction (DRR). The
figure shows the impact (in terms of Technical CCA Ecosystem- Some of the national mechanisms for bringing together different
damage and cost versus benefits) or structural & based stakeholders around Eco-DRR/EbA issues may include: National Platforms
on ecosystems and society from approach DRR approach or Committees on Disaster Risk Reduction or Climate Change Adaptation
different scenarios of planned (where they exist and/or are functional), humanitarian clusters, working
adaptation strategies: solely groups, devolved municipal or local-level adaptation planning committees,
technical or structural (blue), solely
etc. The challenge remains in ensuring that such national mechanisms
ecosystem-based (green), and an
integrated framework containing or platforms integrate ecosystem-based considerations in their DRR or
both strategies (purple). The green CCA agendas.
arrows indicate positive impacts; Despite clear efforts within Eco-DRR, EbA and Eco-DRR/EbA projects
the red arrows negative impacts; One of the additional arguments to using ecosystem-based approaches
to bring together different stakeholders across different sectors, there
and the yellow arrows both positive within CCA and DRR, aside from their capacity to decrease hazard impacts,
remains a general tendency to work in parallel but separate tracks at the
and negative impacts. The impact is the fact that they provide multiple social, economic and cultural benefits
on society from the two measures policy level, depending on whether the project is more oriented towards
for local communities.
in isolation is positive and negative; DRR or CCA. Nonetheless, significant opportunities exist in focusing
negative in this instance is due to There are numerous case studies and scientific publications that show the advocacy efforts towards more integrated Eco-DRR/EbA policies and
cost and feasibility. benefits of ecosystem-based approaches, especially with respect to CCA overcome the policy divide between DRR and climate change communities.
Source: Doswald and Estrella 2015. (i.e. EbA). Furthermore, studies show that its use is mainstreamed within In this regard, the role of environmental ministries in government as well
Redrawn by L. Monk many sectors (e.g. coastal protection, agriculture and forestry, urban areas) as environmental/conservation national NGOs become all the more
albeit the term EbA is not explicitly used (Doswald and Osti 2011). It is worth critical in promoting ecosystem-based approaches to bridge the gap
pointing out, however, that there is a cross-over in terms of case studies that between DRR and CCA. Moreover, national coordination and planning
have been used to advocate for EbA and Eco-DRR (ProAct Network 2008, mechanisms for DRR or CCA also provide key entry points for promoting
Doswald and Osti 2011, Renaud et al. 2013, Renaud et al. 2016). Interest and mainstreaming integrated Eco-DRR/EbA approaches.
from the international arena is one of the reasons that these case studies
While efforts towards collaboration at the national level is crucial, at the
have been subsequently “labelled” as EbA rather than Eco-DRR.
local level, the formation of informal/formal groups or networks to either
In many of the available case studies, there is a focus on ecosystems in work collaboratively and/or to share knowledge is important not only
relation to addressing climate-related hazards as well as other climate for the long-term viability of projects but also for increasing resilience to
change impacts, such as sea-level rise and salinization in coastal zones. climate change and hazards. Moreover, it has been found that community
This is so because ecosystem-based approaches are not widely applied for involvement from the outset in projects is important for their success
non-climatic hazards, such as earthquakes or volcanic eruptions, although (e.g. one of the lessons learned from Columbia’s integrated national
several studies have shown how re-vegetation and forest management adaptation project).
68 69
05
5.5 Conclusions REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
We have examined the differences and similarities between Eco- Bourne, A. (2013). Adapting to climate change in the Namakwa Mercer, J. (2010). Disaster risk reduction or climate change
District municipality: learning exchange among municipalities adaptation: are we reinventing the wheel? Journal of
DRR and EbA. While there are key differences in overall approach and doing adaptation planning. Namaqualand District Municipality: International Development, 22, 247-264. DOI: 10.1002/jid.1677.
implementation especially at the theoretical level, practice shows that Lets’ Respond Workshop. 30-31 October 2013. Workshop Peduzzi, P. (2010). Landslides and vegetation cover in the
often it is a question of differences in discourse than a real difference. Summary. Arlington: Conservation International. 2005 North Pakistan earthquake: a GIS and statistical
Indeed, in many cases one can substitute “risk reduction” by “adaptation” Bourne, A., Donatti, C., Holness, S. and Midgely, G. (2012). quantitative approach. Natural Hazards and Earth System
and vice-versa (though not always). This is seen especially at the level of Vulnerability assessment for the Namakwa District, South Sciences, 10, 623–640. DOI: 10.5194/nhess-10-623-2010.
project implementation, where for all intent and purposes EbA and Eco- Africa. Conservation South Africa. Arlington: Conservation Pelling, M. (2011). Adaptation to Climate Change: From
International. Resilience to Transformation. London and New York: Routledge.
DRR activities are virtually indistinguishable from one another.
CBD (2009). Connecting Biodiversity and Climate Change ProAct Network (2008). The role of environmental
Nevertheless, EbA and Eco-DRR are generally undertaken by very separate Mitigation and Adaptation: Report of the Second Ad Hoc management and eco-engineering in disaster risk reduction
communities due to different policy and funding tracks. Hybrid Eco-DRR/ Technical Expert Group on Biodiversity and Climate Change. and climate change adaptation. ProAct Network. https://
EbA projects are emerging as communities converge due to mutual needs Technical Series No. 41, Montreal: Secretariat of the www.unisdr.org/files/4148_emecoengindrrcca1.pdf
Convention on Biological Diversity https://www.cbd.int/doc/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
for integration. However, hybrid projects tend to be still more recognisable publications/cbd-ts-41-en.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
as either Eco-DRR or EbA depending on who is involved in the project Renaud, F.G., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M. (2013). The
Doswald, N., Munroe, R., Roe, D., Guiliani, A., Castelli, role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. Tokyo: United
as well as factors such as data availability and outcomes sought I., Stephens, J., Moller, I, Spencer, T., Vira, B. and Nations University Press.http://collections.unu.edu/view/
(i.e. weather-related hazards or extreme events play more of a role than Reid, H. (2014). Effectiveness of ecosystem-based UNU:1995 Accessed 24 July 2019.
general climatic change). approaches for adaptation: review of the evidence-
Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, M. and U. Nehren
base. Climate and Development, 6 (2), 185-201. DOI:
Reducing disasters has received broad political consensus and is guided by (2016). Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
10.1080/17565529.2013.867247.
adaptation in practice. Warren: Springer International
an internationally endorsed global framework on DRR (i.e. SFDRR) but is not Doswald, N. and M. Estrella (2015). Promoting ecosystems Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-43633-3.
restricted by a legal framework, as is the case in CCA (i.e. Paris Agreement) for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation:
Sandholz, S., Lange, W. and Nehren, U. (2018). Governing
(Hannigan 2012). CCA, on the other hand, receives much more financial opportunities for integration. Geneva: United Nations
green change: Ecosystem-based measures for
Environment Programme. http://www.preventionweb.net/
and political attention. Convergence between DRR and CCA is occurring reducing landslide risk in Rio de Janeiro. International
publications/view/44969 Accessed 24 July 2019.
although it is not embraced by all, especially among DRR academics who Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 32, 75-86. DOI:
Doswald, N. and Osti, M. (2011). Ecosystem-based 10.1016/j-ijdrr.2018.01.020.
consider the adaptation and resilience discourse to be more like a band-aid approaches to adaptation and mitigation – good practice
solution instead of a real remedy for addressing the main underlying causes SBF (2011). Areas de Preservaçao Permanente e Unidades
examples and lessons learned in Europe. BfN Skripten 306.
de Conservaçao x Areas de Risco. O que uma coisa
of disaster risk that are rooted in poverty, poor governance and structural Bonn: BfN. https://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/
tem a ver com a outra? Série Biodiversidad 41. Brasilia:
inequalities (Hannigan 2012). According to Pelling (2011), conventional service/Skript_306.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Ministério do Meio Ambiente. http://www.terrabrasilis.org.
approaches to CCA are too conservative as they rarely embrace the Estrella, M. and Saalismaa, N. (2013). Ecosystem-based br/ecotecadigital/index.php/estantes/gestao/265-serie-
disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR): an overview. In The role
transformational changes needed to truly reduce underlying vulnerabilities biodiversidade-41-areas-de-preservacao-permanente-e-
of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. Renaud, F.G., unidades-de-conservacao-x-areas-de-risco-o-que-uma-
and address climate risks. In a similar context, resilience has also been Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M.(eds) Tokyo: United coisa-tem-a-ver-com-a-outra Accessed 24 July 2019.
regarded as a band-aid approach by many (academics and practitioners); Nations University Press. http://collections.unu.edu/view/
UNDP (2015) The reserve adapts to climate change: Nor
nonetheless, wide acceptance of the concept of resilience is providing clear UNU:1995 Accessed 24 July 2019.
Yauyos Cochas Landscape Reserve, Lima and Junin regions
opportunities for DRR and CCA integration. FEBA (2017). Making Ecosystem-based Adaptation Effective: of Peru. Mountain Ecosystem-based Adaptation Project.
A Framework for Defining Qualification Criteria and Quality https://www.adaptation-undp.org/sites/default/files/
Synergies between both DRR and CCA communities should be maximized Standards. FEBA technical paper developed for UNFCCC- downloads/2015_brochure_peru_mt_eba_community_vs_
in order to avoid mal-adaptation and/or increase risk, as well as avoid SBSTA 46. Bertram, M., Barrow, E., Blackwood, K., Rizvi, A.R., eng_undp_peru.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
duplication in efforts. The EbA discipline is still growing and could benefit Reid, H., and von Scheliha-Dawid, S. (authors). Bonn: GIZ,
UNEP (2016). Applying ecosystem-based disaster
from Eco-DRR knowledge. Potentially, Eco-DRR could help EbA in decision- London: IIED, and Gland: IUCN. https://www.iucn.org/sites/
risk reduction (Eco-DRR) in integrated water resource
dev/files/feba_eba_qualification_and_quality_criteria_final_
making in the face of uncertainty of climate change impacts through en.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
management (IWRM) in the Lukaya basin, Democratic
its focus on reducing disaster risk. EbA in turn could help provide more Republic of Congo. Geneva: UNEP. https://www.
Hannigan, J. (2012). Disasters Without Borders. Cambridge: unenvironment.org/resources/report/river-partners-
adaptive management that is sensitive to climatic and environmental Polity Press. democratic-republic-congo Accessed 24 July 2019.
changes and thus ensure long-term sustainability of Eco-DRR projects. IPCC (2014). Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: UNFCCC (2015) Paris Agreement. https://unfccc.int/sites/
Given that policy, institutional and funding tracks are likely to stay separate, Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf Accessed
integration is more likely to be achievable at the project level. II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental 25 July 2019.
Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken,
Fostering collaboration at the project level would provide good lessons Wehrli, A. and L. Dorren (2013). Protection forests: A key
K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L.
for future practice and facilitate the integration of CCA and DRR through factor in integrated risk management in the Alps. In The
Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma,E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy,
Role of Ecosystems in Disaster Risk Reduction. Renaud,
ecosystem-based approaches. This would then promote the development S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea and L.L. White (eds.)].
F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and M. Estrella (eds) Tokyo: UNU
of much needed integrated multi-level governance tools for CCA and Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Press. 343-415. http://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:1995
DRR, integrated multi-hazard and climate change assessments, as well IUCN (2016). The Ecosystem-based Adaptation Handbook. Accessed 24 July 2019.
Gland: IUCN. https://www.iucn.nl/files/klimaat_water_
as community-based approaches for both strategies. Gaps in knowledge voedsel/eba_handbook.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
World Bank (2013). Mali - Natural Resource Management
in both communities should be filled through dedicated research and in a Changing Climate Project (English). Washington DC:
MA (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
appropriate monitoring and evaluation frameworks that support learning and trends: Findings of the Condition and Trends Working en/862221555569811026/Mali-Natural-Resources-
and knowledge. Group. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Management-in-a-Changing-Climate-in-Mali-Project-
Restructuring Accessed 24 July 2019.
70 71
Principles of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and adaptation
06
6.1 Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
and adaptation
As seen in the previous chapter, integrating Eco-DRR and EbA or hybrid
projects into DRR and CCA strategies and projects can be very beneficial.
It is also possible to mix structural measures, i.e. grey measures, such
as dykes, seawalls, etc. with these green measures (Eco-DRR/EbA).
Indeed, such green-grey (hybrid) measures are usually very helpful since
ecosystem-based approaches may not always be applicable nor enough.
There exists much literature on EbA that has been generated via
different organisations such as IUCN, WWF, CI, UNEP, just to name a few.
Handbooks, guidelines and guides for various aspects of EbA exist. The
AdaptationCommunity.net is a useful resource for those interested in EbA.
Not as much exists for Eco-DRR and in the following section and chapters
the focus will be on Eco-DRR but much can also be applicable for EbA or
hybrid projects.
6.2 Core elements of ecosystem-based disaster

Chapter 6 risk reduction and adaptation
Principles of ecosystem- The following principles constitute the core elements of Eco-DRR/EbA
and guidance to better the understanding the role of ecosystems in DRR
based disaster risk and CCA.
reduction and adaptation 1. Ecosystems provide multiple functions and services, including
protection from hazard events.
2. Eco-DRR/EbA is a “no-regrets” strategy.
Key questions 3. Green infrastructure is often more cost-effective over time than grey
What are the core elements of infrastructure for DRR/CCA.
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction Additionally:
and adaptation? 4. Eco-DRR and EbA is anchored in sustainable livelihoods and
What are the challenges of development.
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction 5. Proper environmental management is critical to addressing the risks
and adaptation? associated with climate change and hazard events.
6. Integrating environmental approaches into disaster risk management
and CCA requires multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary collaboration,
all while involving local stakeholders in decision-making.
7. Eco-DRR/EbA has limitations and might have to be combined with
other strategies.
1. ECOSYSTEMS PROVIDE MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS AND

SERVICES, INCLUDING PROTECTION FROM HAZARD EVENTS
One of the main components of Eco-DRR/EbA that distinguishes it from
structural engineering measures is the multiple benefits ecosystems
provide (Figure 6.1). In addition to the main targets of disaster prevention
and recovery, hazard mitigation, and CCA, ecosystems contribute to
sustainable livelihoods by providing goods such as clean water, food
and fibre. This way ecosystems support poverty reduction in developing
countries as they are often the strongest base for livelihoods. Often
ecosystems also support heritage conservation and local identities, e.g.
when attaching sipirital values to mountains, forests or springs (Sandholz
2016). Services related to water and soil protection are closely linked
to hazard mitigation, as for instance reforestation in upper watersheds
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UNEP reduces the risk of landslides and flooding.
72 73
06
Figure 6.1 Several studies of coastal forests along Japan’s coasts determined
Multiple benefits of Eco-DRR/EbA. Carbon that during the 2011 tsunami, coastal vegetation provided some natural
U. Nehren 2014, modified from storage and protection by catching large debris (e.g. boats) as tsunami waves retreated
Estrella and Saalisamaa 2013 Biodiversity sequestration
conservation inland (Tanaka 2012). As a result, the Japanese government is expanding
Disaster
prevention and its national park system along Japan’s coast with strict land use guidelines
recovery for moving critical infrastructure inland (Onishi and Ishiwatari 2012).
Stabilisation
of regional Also in Chile the protective role of coastal dunes against tsunami
climate impacts has been recognized (Nehren et al. 2016), and restoration of
Potential Eco-DRR Hazard Main dune vegetation for tsunami mitigation has been included for instance
co-benefits and EbA mitigation targets
in Puerto Saavedra in the province of Araukaria, which suffered from the
Water
and soil
largest earthquake ever measured (magnitude 9.5) and a tsunami in 1960
protection (Acevedo 2013).
Climate change Several countries in Europe, such as Germany, the Netherlands, the UK,
Support adaptation
to heritage Switzerland, and cross-border initiatives from the countries bordering the
conservation Contribution Danube River aim to mitigate floods through “making space for water” by
and identities to sustainable
livelihoods removing built infrastructure, like concrete river channels, and restoring
wetlands and rivers to improve their water retention capacity. For
example, The Netherlands invested €2.3 billion to re-establish floodplains,
resulting in reduced flood risk for 4 million people along its main rivers
However, there are several other services such as erosion control, soil (Deltacommisie 2008) (Figure 6.4). In addition to risk reduction, these
fertility maintenance and water purification. Healthy ecosystems also initiatives consistently pursue integrated landscape and ecosystem
stabilise the regional climate and, depending on the type of vegetation, approaches which consider values of the wetlands in particular for
contribute to climate change mitigation by storing and sequestering biodiversity conservation, tourism, and recreation.
carbon (Lal 2004, Grenier et al. 2013). Finally, certain ecosystems can Another good example are mangroves, which can significantly reduce
have high biodiversity value, providing greater robustness during periods the impact of tropical cyclones and storms surges (Das and Vincent
of stress (Thompson et al. 2009, Willis et al. 2010). 2009). It is, however, controversial to what extent they can mitigate the
The physical risk reduction capacity of ecosystems depends on their impact of tsunamis (Danielsen et al. 2005; Kerr and Baird 2007; Alongi
health and structure, and the intensity of the hazard event. Ecosystems 2008; Cochard 2008). At the same time, mangroves provide various other
can reduce physical exposure to common natural hazards, namely services, such as supporting fisheries and tourism activities, providing
landslides, flooding, avalanches, storm surges, wildfires and droughts, by important wildlife habitats, storing high amounts of carbon, and improving
serving as natural infrastructure, protective barriers or buffers (Renaud et coastal water quality (Saenger 2002, Wicaksono et al. 2016, Nehren and
al. 2013, 2016) (Figure 6.2, Figure 6.3). Wicaksono 2018).
Figure 6.2 Figure 6.3 Figure 6.4

Coastal dunes in Valparaíso Region, Central Chile, Mangrove forest, Semarang, Indonesia. Nederrijn River Rhenen, Netherlands.
are an effective natural coastal barrier. © U. Nehren © M. van Staveren
© U. Nehren
74 75
06
2. ECO-DRR/EBA IS A “NO-REGRETS” STRATEGY Indeed, there are only a few well quoted examples comparing natural
ECO-DRR and EBA versus engineering approaches, such as the study conducted by New
benefits The “no-regrets” refers to the multiple benefits that investment in ecosystem
York City which compared green versus grey infrastructure investments
approaches bring. Interestingly, the IPCC SREX (IPCC 2012) also refers to
Ecosystems can prevent or for improving its ageing sewer system and reducing flooding. The green
“no-regrets” and actions for improving adaptation and reducing disaster
mitigate hazards infrastructure plan was estimated to cost tax payers US $5.3 billion,
risks, including investing in ecosystem management. In other words,
Ecosystems can reduce while the grey infrastructure renewal would have cost US $6.8 billion. In
investing in a green belt, for example, is a “no-regrets” strategy because it
exposure by functioning as addition, over time the benefits of green infrastructure accrue while grey
may provide not only protection from hazards, with or without combined
natural buffers infrastructure requires renewed investment after 10-15 years (Figure 6.6)
structural barriers, while also providing many other benefits, especially
(NYC 2010).
Ecosystems can reduce livelihoods support, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, etc.
vulnerability by supporting Another study, conducted by Conservation International (CI), Secretariat
UNEP in its address to the UN General Assembly on DRR highlighted
livelihoods – before, during of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), UNEP and
the role of ecosystem management as one of the few approaches that
and after disasters UN Habitat for the city of Lami, Fiji, carried out a cost-benefit analysis to
addresses all three components of the risk equation (see box on the left
assess adaptation options for the city. It compared green solutions, such
…but all solutions have and Figure 6.5).
as planting mangroves and replanting stream buffers, with engineering
limits… A variety of tools, instruments and approaches that are already used in measures, such as building seawalls and increased drainage (Rao et al.
ecosystem management, such as IWRM, Protected Area Management 2013). The study concluded ecosystem-based measures yielded a US
(PAM), Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), and Integrated $19.50 benefit to cost ratio, as compared to engineering actions estimated
Fire Management (IFM) can be readily adopted and applied as part of at US $9. Nonetheless, the study also revealed that in terms of avoided
risk reduction strategies (see chapter 13). Risk reduction can also be (flood) damage, engineered measures provided 15-25% greater protection
part of spatial and land-use planning. Improved and routine use of risk than ecosystem-based measures, thus recommending that hybrid green-
information (e.g. types of hazards over time and space, socio-economic grey infrastructure be used as part of the city’s coastal defence and
vulnerability profiles of communities, elements at risk, etc.) needs to adaptation strategy (Rao et al. 2013).
feed into the design of integrated ecosystem management interventions
to enhance their added value for DRR. For instance, rehabilitation of
upland watersheds can be harnessed for flood mitigation by improved
understanding of the local hazards, hydrology, topography as well as GREY INFRASTRUCTURE Cost: 6.8 Billion USD
socio-economic demands on forest products and the types of indigenous sewer system
tree species that are best suited for reforestation activities.
3. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IS OFTEN MORE COST-EFFECTIVE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE Cost: 5.3 Billion USD
OVER TIME THAN GREY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR DISASTER green rooftops • green sidewalks • upstream and urban wetlands • ponds
RISK REDUCTION/CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION
One of the main opportunities linked to ecosystem-based approaches BENEFITS OVER TIME
to DRR and CCA is its potential cost-effectiveness. However, measuring Figure 6.6
Benefits over time of green versus
cost-effectiveness is not without challenge.
grey infrastructure in New York City.
Source: NYC 2010. Modified by
S. Sandholz. Redrawn by L. Monk
Figure 6.5 Green belts can stabilize slopes and also reduce Healthy ecosystems support livelihoods before,
Dunes for mitigating sea waves in Sri Lanka. exposure of settlements. during and after disasters.
© B. McAdoo © UNEP © UNEP
76 77
06
4. ECOSYSTEM-BASED DISASTER RISK REDUCTION Thus, restoring and conserving ecosystems can increase their resilience
DEFINITION: LIVELIHOOD IS ANCHORED IN SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS and provide people with essential services as well as help people adapt to
“A livelihood comprises the AND DEVELOPMENT climate change. Climate change may also make it necessary to manage
capabilities, assets (including ecosystems to help them adapt to climate change, such as relocating
DRR is essentially about promoting sustainable development in hazard-
both material and social species or planting species that are suited to the new climate, especially
prone areas. As land and ecosystem degradation are accompanied by
resources) and activities in ecosystems that are highly fragmented due to the current land use.
increasing risks, costs, and poverty for some population groups, sound
required for a means of living.
land and ecosystem management is essential to sustain livelihoods for 6. INTEGRATING ENVIRONMENTAL APPROACHES INTO
A livelihood is sustainable
present and future generations. Against this background, the Eco-DRR/ DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT REQUIRES MULTI-SECTORAL
when it can cope with and
EbA approach comprises much more than just punctually preserving or AND MULTI-DISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION, WHILE ALSO
recover from stress and
restoring ecosystems or implementing ecological infrastructure to reduce INVOLVING LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS IN DECISION-MAKING
shocks and maintain or
disaster risks. Rather, the approach can be an essential component of
enhance its capabilities and Successful implementation of Eco-DRR/EbA needs multi-sectoral
integrated land management with the overall goal to reduce disaster risk
assets both now and in the cooperation and multi-disciplinary approaches and teams. It requires
and support sustainable development.
future, while not undermining involving people with different technical expertise and knowledge,
the natural resource base.” Eco-DRR strategies need to align with long-term development challenges, for instance city engineers and land developers working together with
such as poverty reduction and addressing unsustainable use of natural ecologists and disaster management experts, as well as including those
Chambers and Conway, 1991,
quoted after UNISDR 2010
resources through sustainable livelihoods development. Demonstrating with local or traditional/indigenous knowledge.
short-term tangible benefits especially to local communities is critical
to win and maintain necessary engagement for sound environmental Establishing cross-sectoral, multi-disciplinary collaboration and building
management. on existing platforms facilitates sharing of available data, helps ensure
scientific and technical rigor in designing and implementing Eco-
Nehren et al. (2016) identified several services from three coastal dune DRR/EbA initiatives and obtaining the political support necessary to
systems in Chile, Java, Indonesia, and Vietnam, which, while serving integrate ecosystem-based approaches into national, regional, and local
as a buffer against coastal hazards such as storms, storm surges and development plans, while gaining stakeholder buy-in.
tsunamis, directly contribute to local livelihoods through freshwater
provision, providing areas for tourism, recreation and leisure, plants and Understanding different local livelihoods needs and priorities, utilizing
animals, and several cultural services. These services depend on healthy local or traditional knowledge, and involving local stakeholders in decision-
ecosystems. Therefore, the overexploitation of provisioning services by making are critical for promoting risk reduction through sustainable
mining and use of sand for construction as well as sealing of dune areas ecosystems management. Local communities are direct users of the
for settlements and tourism facilities hamper sustainable development, natural resources in their area and their knowledge of local ecosystems
reduce the resilience of coastal communities, and increase disaster risk. should be used for planning of Eco-DRR/EbA initiatives. Raising the
awareness of local men and women by demonstrating the combined
5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IS CRITICAL TO livelihoods and risk reduction benefits of ecosystem management is
ADDRESSING THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH CLIMATE equally important in winning and sustaining local support.
CHANGE AND HAZARD EVENTS Initiatives often fail when there is limited or lack of participation by local
There is overwhelming evidence that climate change has caused impacts stakeholders, which may include local government authorities, informal
on natural and human systems and is expected to exacerbate certain leaders, women’s groups, community-based organizations and residents.
hazard occurrences (IPCC 2012). The linkages between environmental Identifying community actors, such as disaster management committees,
management, climate change and hazards are two-pronged: forest user associations, and farmers’ associations, who can become
Hazard events and climate change impact ecosystems advocates for Eco-DRR/EbA is essential. At the same time the cooperation
Many terrestrial, marine and freshwater species have shifted their among local level and higher-level authorities (regional or national) is also
geographic ranges and there is high “risk of loss of terrestrial and essential for long-term planning and implementation of measures.
inland water ecosystems, biodiversity, and the ecosystem goods, 7. ECO-DRR/EBA HAS LIMITATIONS AND NEEDS TO BE
functions, and services they provide for livelihoods” (IPCC 2014: 12). COMBINED WITH OTHER RISK REDUCTION/ADAPTATION
Poor ecosystem health impacts the magnitude of a hazard event STRATEGIES
and adaptability to climate change
Investing in ecosystems is not a single solution to risk reduction but
Well-managed highly biodiverse ecosystems are more resilient to
should be used in combination with other risk management measures.
climate-related risks and help people to maintain more assets needed
In order to be effective, ecosystem-based approaches need to be based
to make livelihoods sustainable and less vulnerable to climate change
on rigorous understanding of local ecological conditions, socio-cultural
(Elmqvist et al. 2003).
and economic circumstances and livelihoods, existing hazards, and
technical requirements of the intervention. In some cases, ecosystem
thresholds may be surpassed depending on the type and intensity of the
hazard event and/or health status of the ecosystem, which may therefore
78 79
06
be insufficient to provide adequate buffer against hazard impacts. For 8.3 Investing in Eco-DRR/EbA requires political will, long-term
instance, mangroves may not provide as much protection against strategies and inter-agency cooperation
tsunamis as they would for storm surges (Spalding et al. 2014). Thus As Eco-DRR/EbA strategies are often only more cost effective over the
promoting ecosystems management as the main risk reduction strategy long term, they require considerable political will and long-term planning.
could provide a false sense of security. On the other hand, many structural Such is the case in Switzerland, where investing in the management of its
engineering works may also provide a sense of false security and there protection forests is a national strategy that includes management plans
are many examples of where populations have settled immediately behind for the next fifty years and has with significant public support. Such long-
river dykes or sea walls and they have not sufficed to protect against term planning or political will is not always easily obtained. Furthermore,
unpredictable extreme events. Moreover, ecosystem-based approaches it requires intercommunal or even transboundary approaches. The forest
often require a lot of space/land which may not be available or practical which protects some village in the Swiss Alps might belong to another
as for within a city landscape for example. municipality, so long-term cooperation based on negotiations will be part
Sometimes combining ecosystems-based approaches with human-built of the strategy.
infrastructure (e.g. embankments) in a hybrid approach may be a good
way to provide protection of critical assets. 6.3 Conclusions
Strengthening early warning systems and disaster preparedness This chapter provided core principles of Eco-DRR/EbA. Ecosystem-
measures remain paramount in saving lives and major assets and not to based approaches are aligned with sustainable development, but it
be forgotten when there is a focus on ecosystem-based measures. requires a paradigm shift to start implementing these approaches more
fully, especially as they often demand an interdisciplinary, landscape
8. CHALLENGES and multisectoral approach. Although these approaches are gaining
We also need to be aware of some of the challenges in implementing momentum and recognition, there is still a lack of knowledge and
Eco-DRR/EbA: willingness to invest in long-term prevention, including risk sensitive land
8.1 The protection capacity of ecosystems to hazard events use management, ICZM, IWRM and other ecosystem-based approaches.
can be locally specific This is often due to a preference for immediate, structural engineering
The protection capacity of ecosystems is difficult to quantify and approaches – which may be the most appropriate depending on the
will depend on an ecosystem’s health and local parameters to resist situation – but may be costlier and offer fewer multiple benefits for
hazard events. For example, in general, vegetation on steep slopes will livelihoods over the long term. The following chapters will provide more
be beneficial to reducing erosion rates and many shallow landslides details and tools that can guide planning and implementation of Eco-
(Papathoma-Köhle and Glade 2013). However, trees that are too old and DRR/EbA. There has been much written on EbA and its planning and
heavy may actually even trigger landslides. implementation and we refer the reader to those sources.
Mangroves may be useful for absorbing wave energy during a “10 year”
coastal storm event but depending on its width and health may not be
resistant to a “100 year” storm – while it has to be acknowledged that “100
year” storms could become future “10 year” storms due to climate change
impacts. Therefore, the use of green belts or other natural infrastructure
requires a more detailed study of local conditions to ensure the same
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
protection as engineered structures. Furthermore, engineered solutions
can often be more easily quantifiable. In the past decade, fortunately more A landscape approach for disaster risk reduction in 7 steps:
scientific studies have been undertaken to quantify protective ecosystem https://www.wetlands.org/publications/landscape-approach-
services but more is needed. disaster-risk-reduction-7-steps/
8.2 Ecosystem benefits can be difficult to quantify and compare with Mangrove restoration: to plant or not to plant’ has been
structural engineering measures translated in 6 languages and there are more versions
Just as the protection capacity of ecosystems is difficult to measure and in development:
compare with structural engineering measures, so is the overall economic https://www.wetlands.org/publications/mangrove-restoration-to-
value of ecosystems. This makes it more difficult to conduct the classic plant-or-not-to-plant/
cost-benefit analyses most decision-makers use for making decisions Adaptation community:
about which investments to make toward DRR or CCA. Therefore, more https://www.adaptationcommunity.net/ecosystem-based-
similar economic valuation and cost-benefit studies and tools are required adaptation/international-eba-community-of-practice/
which provide decision-makers with more readily available information.
80 81
06
Acevedo, R. (2013). Bosques en las dunas: una barrera Grenier, J.T., McGlathery, K.J., Gunnell, J. and McKee, B.A. Nehren, U. and Wicaksono, P. (2018). Mapping and Saenger, P. (2002). Mangrove Ecology, Silviculture and
natural contra maremotos. Tendencias, La Tercera, (2013). Seagrass Restoration Enhances “Blue Carbon” modeling soils carbon stocks in an oceanic mangrove Conservation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
10 August 2013. Sequestration in Coastal Waters. PLoS One, 8(8), e72469. ecosystem in Karimunjawa Islands, Indonesia. Estuarine,
Sandholz, S. (2016). Ecosystem potentials for disaster
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072469 Coastal and Shelf Science, 214, 185-193. DOI: 10.1016/j.
Alongi, D.M. (2008). Mangrove forests: Resilience, risk reduction and climate change adaptation in the urban
ecss.2018.09.022.
protection from tsunamis, and responses to global climate IPCC (2012). Managing the risks of extreme events landscape of Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. In Ecosystem-based
change. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 76 (1), 1-13. and disasters to advance climate change adaptation NYC (2010). Green Infrastructure Plan, A Sustainable disaster risk reduction and adaptation in practice. Renaud,
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2007.08.024. IPCC Special Report on Extreme Events, Summary for Plan for Green Waterways. New York: City of New York. F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, M. and Nehren, U. (eds).
Policymakers. Special Report of Working Groups I and II http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_infrastructure/ Warren: Springer International Publishing. 335-360.
Cochard R., Ranamukhaarachchi, S.L., Shivakoti, G.P., Shipin,
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_LowRes.pdf Accessed
O.P., Edwards, J.P. and Seeland, K.T. (2008). The 2004 Tanaka, N. (2012). Effectiveness and limitations of coastal
C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, 24 July 2019.
tsunami in Aceh and Southern Thailand: A review on coastal forest in large tsunami: conditions of Japanese pine
M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M.
ecosystems, wave hazards and vulnerability. Perspectives in Onishi, T. and Ishiwatari, M. (2012). Learning from trees on coastal sand dunes in tsunami caused by great
Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York:
Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 10 (1), 3–40. DOI: Megadisasters, Urban Planning, Land Use Regulation, and eastern Japan earthquake. Journal of Japan Society of Civil
Cambridge University Press.
10.1016/j.ppees.2007.11.001. Relocation. KNOWLEDGE NOTE 2-7. Washington, D.C.: Engineers, Series B1, 68, 7-15. DOI: 10.2208/jscejhe.68.II_7
IPCC (2014). Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: World Bank. https://www.gfdrr.org/en/publication/learning-
Das, S. and Vincent, J.R. (2009). Mangroves protected Spalding, M. D., Ruffo, S., Lacambra, C., Meliane, I., Hale, L. Z.,
Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group megadisasters-knowledge-note-2-7 Accessed 24 July 2019.
villages and reduced death toll during Indian super cyclone. Shepard, C. C., & Beck, M. W. (2014). The role of ecosystems
II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
PNAS, 106, 7357-7360. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0810440106. Papathoma-Köhle M. and Glade T. (2013). The role of in coastal protection: Adapting to climate change and
Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J.
vegetation cover change for landslide hazard and risk. In coastal hazards. Ocean and Coastal Management, 90,
Danielsen, F., Sorenson, M.K., Olwig, M.F., Selvam, V., Parish, Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M.
The Role of Ecosystems in Disaster Risk Reduction. 50–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.09.007.
F., Burgess, N.D., Hiraishi, T., Karunagaran, V.M., Rasmussen, Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma,
G. Renaud, Karen Sudmeier-Rieux and Marisol Estrella (eds).
M.S., Hansen, L.B., Quarto, A. and Suryadiputra, N. (2005). E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea and Thompson, I., Mackey, B., McNulty, S., Mosseler, A. (2009).
Tokyo : UNU-Press, 293-320.
The Asian tsunami: A protective role for coastal vegetation. L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge Forest Resilience, Biodiversity, and Climate Change. A
Science, 310 (5748), 643. DOI: 10.1126/science.1118387. University Press. Rao, N.S., Carruthers, T.J.B., Anderson, P., Sivo, L., Saxby, synthesis of the biodiversity/resilience/stability relationship
T., Durbin, T., Jungblut, V., Hills, T. and Chape, S. (2013). in forest ecosystems. Technical Series no. 43. Montreal:
Deltacommissie (2008). Working together with water. A living Kerr, A.M. and A.H. Baird (2007). Natural barriers to natural
An economic analysis of ecosystem-based adaptation and Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
land builds for its future. Findings of the Delta comissie. disasters. BioScience, 57, 102–103. DOI: 10.1641/B570202.
engineering options for climate change adaptation in Lami
Summary and conclusions. http://www.deltacommissie. UNDP (2016). Making the case for ecosystem-based
Lal, R. (2004). Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Town, Republic of the Fiji Islands. A technical report by the
com/en/advies Accessed 24 July 2019. adaptation. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/
Global Climate Change and Food Security. Science, Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme.
librarypage/poverty-reduction/making-the-case-for-
Elmqvist, T., Folke, C., Nyström, M., Peterson, G., Bengtsson, 304(5677),1623-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.1097396 – Apia, Samoa: SPREP 2013. https://www.eldis.org/
ecosystem-based-adaptation/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
J., Walker, B., and Norberg, J. (2003). Response diversity, document/A64826 Accessed 24 July 2019.
Nehren, U., Hoang H.D.T., Marfai. M.A., Raedig, C., Alfonso
ecosystem change, and resilience. Frontiers in Ecology Wicaksono, P., Danoedoro, P., Hartono and Nehren, U.
de Nehren, S., Sartohadi, J. and Castro, C. (2016). Assessing Renaud, F.G., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M. (2013). The
and the Environment, 1 (9), 488-494 DOI: https://doi. (2016). Mangrove biomass carbon stock mapping of the
ecosystem services and degradation status of coastal role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. Tokyo: United
org/10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0488:RDECAR]2.0.CO;2 Karimunjawa Islands using multispectral remote sensing.
dune systems for Eco-DRR and EbA: Case studies from Nations University Press. http://collections.unu.edu/view/
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 37(1), 26-52. DOI:
Estrella and Saalismaa (2013). Ecosystem-based disaster Vietnam, Indonesia, and Chile. In Ecosystem-based Disaster UNU:1995 Accessed 24 July 2019.
10.1080/01431161.2015.1117679.
risk reduction: An overview. In The Role of Ecosystems Risk Reduction and Adaptation in Practice. F.G. Renaud, K.
Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, M. and Nehren,
in Disaster Risk Reduction. Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, Sudmeier-Rieux, M. Estrella and U. Nehren (eds). Springer Willis, K.J., Bailey, R.M., Bhagwat, S.A. and Birks, H.J.
U. (2016). Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
K. and M. Estrella (eds). Tokyo: UNU Press. 26-55. http:// Series: Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards (2010). Biodiversity baselines, thresholds and resilience:
adaptation in practice. Warren: Springer International
collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:1995 Accessed Research 42, 401-434. Cham: Springer. testing predictions and assumptions using palaeoecological
Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-43633-3.
July 25 2019. data. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 25 (10), 583-589. DOI:
10.1016/j.tree.2010.07.006
82 83
Principles of systems thinking and using natural systems for
disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation 07
7.1 Principles of systems thinking
Systems thinking emanated with the Greek philosopher and scientist
Aristotle (384-322 BC). He noticed that any kind of system, which can be
for instance biological, physical or economic, cannot be determined or
explained only by the sum of its components. Based on this observation
he defined the general principle of holism, which he published in his
classic work Metaphysics (original title: τὰ μετὰ τὰ φυσικά): “The whole
is more than the sum of its parts.” From the early works of Aristotle and
other philosophers and scientists a whole discipline evolved: Systems
science, which studies the nature of systems. Today, systems thinking has
become increasingly important in many scientific fields, but also in almost
every area of daily life. We talk for instance about urban systems, traffic
systems, sanitation systems, agricultural systems, computer systems,
virtual systems, or ecosystems. But how can we define systems and the
principles of systems thinking? As usual there are numerous definitions
that slightly differ from each other.
Widely used is the one by Churchman (1968), according to who “a system
is a set of interacting or interdependent entities. These can be real or
abstract and form an integrated whole.” Systems are moreover defined by
elements and processes within a defined boundary and an exchange of
matter, energy, and information. And finally, systems have in common that
the behavior of elements at the micro level determines the characteristics
of the system as a whole. This is what we call emergence. Systems
thinking can be defined as the process of understanding how things,
regarded as systems, influence one another within a whole.
In thermodynamics we distinguish between three types of systems
(Figure 7.1):
Chapter 7
1. An isolated system is one that does not have interactions beyond its
boundary layer. Such a system does not exist in nature but is used in
controlled laboratory experiments.
Principles of systems 2. A closed system is a system that transfers energy across its boundary,
thinking and using natural but no matter.
3. And finally an open system transfers both matter and energy across its
systems for disaster risk boundary to and from the surrounding environment.
reduction and climate
change adaptation Figure 7.1
Different types of systems.
Design: U.Nehren
Key questions E
E+
matter
What are systems, and why is systems
thinking important?
(a) Isolated system (b) Closed system (c) Open system
What are landscape systems and how are
they linked to ecosystems and disasters?
84 85
While naturalists, like Alexander von Humboldt and Charles Darwin, had
a very comprehensive knowledge on various areas of natural sciences of
their epoch, today’s scientists often work on very specific questions within
highly specialized disciplines. However, holistic approaches in sciences
are not outdated. The integration of specialized scientific knowledge into
comprehensive scientific models is one of the challenges of modern
research on natural resources management. But unlike in Humboldt’s
time, today multidisciplinary teams of researchers work together and
share their knowledge and computers help them to integrate the growing
Figure 7.2 volume of data into more and more complex models. However, not only
Ecosystem hierarchies. The Ecosystems are open systems because communities of organisms researchers but also practitioners are facing the challenge of system
photo on the left shows a tropical
interact with each other and with their environment outside ecosystem complexity. Here is an example.
lowland rainforest in the central
Amazon basin of Brazil. Within boundaries. Within ecosystems, we find that there are hierarchies, or As a result of historical deforestation and land use intensification, today
the floodplains of these lowland smaller systems within larger systems, linked to each other within the Atlantic Forest biome is a highly fragmented landscape dominated
rainforests we find seasonally complex functional networks. An example is the Amazon rainforest, by pastures and agricultural lands (Nehren et al. 2013; Figure 7.4), where
flooded riverine forests with distinct which is considered a huge ecosystem (Figure 7.2). However, within the forest remnants make up only 11.4-16.0% of the original forest cover
characteristics, such as the Igapó Amazon rainforest we find various types of smaller ecosystems that are (Ribeiro 2009). Despite the very high forest losses and degradation of the
forest in the Rio Negro shown on determined by climatic, topographic, geological and other factors, such as Atlantic Forest biome, the remaining forest patches are characterized by
the photo in the middle. The water-
riverine forests or mountain forests. outstandingly high biological diversity and rates of endemism (Galindo
filled rosette of the bromeliad on the
right photo is a micro-ecosystem; At the very small scale, even some flowering species like bromeliads can be Leal and Gusmão-Câmara 2003). Due to this biological richness and at
these bromeliads grow as so called considered an ecosystem, as they provide self-containing microhabitats for the same time ongoing threats from humans, the Atlantic Forest biome is
epiphytes on rainforest trees. aquatic insects, amphibians and even reptiles. Therefore, ecosystems are considered a so-called ‘biodiversity hotspot’ (Myers et al. 2000).
© D. Sattler also nested systems (Figure 7.3). This means that different subsystems
interact within the boundary of a larger system, such as different smaller
forest ecosystems within the Amazon rainforest.
Figure 7.3
Nested Systems.
Design: S. Plog
In the Brazilian state of Rio de Janeiro various initiatives have been taken Figure 7.4
to protect the remaining rainforest areas. However, at the same time The photo on the left shows
ongoing urban sprawl and infrastructural development leads to further an intact mountain rainforest
ecosystem in the Atlantic Forest of
forest fragmentation. This phenomenon occurs in many developing
Rio de Janeiro. Rainforests have
and emerging countries in particular close to economically growing been widely replaced by agricultural
Why is system thinking important? metropolitan regions. and pasture systems and forest are
In terms of impact on ecosystem services, the undertaken forest reduced to small patches (photo in
Earlier in this book, we pointed out that we need to manage nature the middle). Deforestation in slope
sustainably in order to support human well-being, and in the long-term to conservation and reforestation measures to establish larger biological
positions has led to accelerated
even assure our survival. But sound ecosystem management requires an corridors would have many benefits, such as improving regulating
soil erosion processes (photo on
understanding of the complex nature–human interactions to make the services (e.g. slope stabilization, erosion control, flood control as well the right).
right decisions. carbon storage and sequestration). Also, biodiversity conservation would © U. Nehren
be supported by establishing larger wildlife corridors and better habitat
Thus thinking in terms of systems and developing models to explain reality networks. On the other hand, the areas of Rio de Janeiro state where such
and consider dynamic processes is important. In 1845, the famous naturalist forest conservation and reforestation measures could be implemented
and geographer Alexander von Humboldt published his five-volume work are close/in rural areas which are dominated by livestock and agricultural
“Kosmos” (Humboldt 1862), in which he tried to unify the knowledge of production systems. Furthermore, closer to the metropolitan region
various branches of scientific disciplines of his time, such as geography, (about 1-2 hours driving distance) we find intensive vegetable production
botany, anthropology, geology, and astronomy. His holistic studies, which systems. As a result, in some regions ecosystem conservation goals
aimed at a very full explanation of the “unity of all nature”, were based on compete with food production. This is a challenge and also an opportunity
observations and comprehensive measurements and resulted in (Martinelli and Filoso 2009, Nehren et al. 2019).
outstanding scientific works. His quantitative methodology with modern
instruments and techniques became known as “Humboldtian science.”
86 87
Indeed, replacing larger areas of agricultural and pasture land by natural
forests would affect the provisioning service of food production the region
7.2 Landscape systems, ecosystems
needs. As a consequence, the following scenario is conceivable: Farmers and disasters
lose their main income source from intensive agricultural production In geography and landscape ecology, the concept of landscape systems
and without sufficient alternative income opportunities their livelihoods is used as a theoretical framework to describe, analyze and manage
would be negatively affected. Most probably some families would move the environment. Landscape systems consist of natural subsystems.
to nearby cities to find employment. In the cities they would have to find According to Leser (1997) these are the so called “geoecofactors” climate,
living space and socialize in the new environment. At the same time, they relief, rock and water as well as the “bioecofactors” vegetation and fauna.
would lose part of their rural cultural identity. Soil represents an intermediate category, as soils are made of biotic
Situations like this can be complex. Coming back to the systems and abiotic compounds. Human systems interact with these natural
perspective, in this example, there are several interacting systems: forest subsystems and have a fundamental impact on landscape development
ecosystems, agricultural systems, social systems, economic systems and (Figure 7.5).
cultural systems. These systems are highly interlinked, competing and
working together as well as being related to many other systems (e.g. SPATIAL SCALES Figure 7.5
weather system, etc.) which are not explicitly mentioned. Even though it GLOBALSCALE BIOE
CO
Conceptual model of a landscape
is not possible to capture all systematic relationships, we should be aware MACRO SCALE FA system (based on Leser 1997,
CT
of the complexity and try to identify main cause-effect chains. MESO SCALE O modified by Nehren 2008;
VEGETATION Design: S. Plog)
RS
RS
MICRO SCALE
Thus, in thinking about undertaking reforestation in a specific context, it
TO
is important to be aware of the possible impacts on agricultural systems
FAC
WATER FAUNA
and rural livelihoods – with potential impacts even on larger scales – and
GEOECO
therefore carefully plan reforestation schemes, involve local stakeholders
and communities, balance with agricultural needs and choose the right
tree species. Furthermore, biodiversity and ecosystem processes need LANDSCAPE
to be thought through and thus avoid reforesting with monocultures at a ROCK SOIL
large scale, which may make the forest more susceptible to disease and
negatively affect local livelihoods.
Furthermore, there could be opportunities to combine ecosystem RELIEF CLIMATE
conservation and restoration with sustaining or ideally improving livelihood
TIME SCALE
and reducing disaster risk. Alternative income possibilities could be
AC
T
provided by the reforestation and ecosystem restoration and agroforestry P
M
systems could be suitable to create livelihood opportunities while NI
providing protective services. Further considerations could be Payment for H UMA
Ecosystem Services (PES) schemes that could serve as incentive systems
offered to farmers or landowners for sustainably managing their land
and thereby contribute to improving watershed services and mitigating Time scales and spatial scales are important for these landscape
climate change (Rodrigues Osuna et al. 2014). Overall it is important to features. Thus, when we take land management decisions, for instance
take care to not only protect the forest ecosystems as a natural system, to reduce disaster risk, time scales and spatial scales need to be taken
but also the socio-ecological system as a whole. If we ignore the systemic into account. Spatial scales can be categorized as global, macro, meso
relationships between the natural and human systems, the situation and micro scales. Climate change, for instance, is a phenomenon at global
could worsen. scale, while transboundary flood risk management in a large watershed
such as the Nile River belongs to the macro scale. Examples of the meso
Even small ecosystem features, such as in coastal dunes, mangroves, scale are the management of mangroves and coastal dunes in a district
seagrass beds, coral reefs, wetlands and protection forests, in a landscape or community, while the stabilization of a slope represents the micro
need to be considered and managed within the landscape as a whole – scale. However, be aware that a clear distinction between the scales is
including agricultural, forestry, urban, industrial and other strongly human- not always possible. Time scale is very important to think about, especially
impacted areas. when considering management for the provision of certain services. It can
take time for a newly planted forest to mature enough to be a protective
feature in a landscape and to provide other ecosystem services.
88 89
Both the ecosystem and the landscape approach are very useful for Eco- Aristotle (1924). Metaphysics. 2 vols. Ross, W. D. (ed.). Nehren, U., Kirchner, A., Sattler, D., Turetta A. and Heinrich,
DRR and EbA. Ecologists or biologists tend to use ecosystems because Oxford: Clarendon Press. J. (2013). Impact of natural climate change and historical
they focus on the biological components of the system. Their conceptual land use on landscape development in the Atlantic Forest of
West Churchman, C. (1968). The Systems Approach. New
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Anais Academia Brasileira de Ciências
models are around these ecosystemic integrations and thus talk about York: Dell Publishing.
85(2), 497-518. DOI: 10.1590/S0001-37652013000200004.
“agro-ecosystems” or “urban ecosystems” and their emphasis is on
Galindo Leal, C. and de Gusmão-Câmara, I. (2003). The
ecological patterns and processes. In contrast, the landscape approach Nehren, U., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Sandholz, S., Estrella, M.,
Atlantic Forest of South America: Biodiversity Status, Threats,
puts stronger emphasis on the abiotic components and the human-nature Lomarda, M. and Guillén, T. (2014). The Ecosystem-based
and Outlook (State of the Hotspots, Book 1). Washington
Disaster Risk Reduction Case Study and Exercise Source
interactions within the systems. Therefore, the landscape approach is DC: Center for Applied Biodiversity Science at Conservation
Book. Cologne/Geneva: Center for Natural Resources and
very helpful for spatial planning. Moreover, it is very useful when we for International.
Development and the Partnership for Environment and
instance plan a slope stabilization measure. Here we have to consider the Humboldt, A.V. (1845-1862). Kosmos. Entwurf einer Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.preventionweb.net/
geological subsurface, soils, water, topographical conditions, and affected physischen Weltbeschreibung. http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/ publications/view/54582 Accessed 25 July 2019.
settlements and infrastructure, in addition to the type of forest cover. autor/alexander-von-humboldt-294. Accessed 25 July 2019.
Nehren, U., Schlüter, S., Raedig, C., Sattler, D. and Hissa, H.
Moreover, it is important to remember that landscapes are open systems, Leser, H. (1997). Landschaftsökologie, 4th edition. Stuttgart: (2019). Strategies and Tools for a Sustainable Rural Rio de
which usually do not have clearly defined boundaries. Therefore, often Eugen Ulmer. Janeiro. Springer Series on Environmental Management.
other physical units are used when it comes to management decisions. For Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Martinelli, L.A. and Filoso, S. (2009). Balance between food
water management issues for instance, watersheds or catchment areas production, biodiversity and ecosystem services in Brazil: Ribeiro, M., Metzger, J. P., Camargo Martensen, A., Ponzoni,
are used as clearly definable geo-hydrological units. But if we consider a challenge and an opportunity. Biota Neotrop, 9(4). DOI: F. J. and Hirota, M. M. (2009). The Brazilian Atlantic
managing a mountain forest for conservation purposes, we would rather 10.1590/S1676-06032009000400001. Forest: How much is left, and how is the remaining forest
consider the forest cover and elevation to define a landscape boundary. distributed? Implications for conservation. Biological
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca,
Conservation, 142(6), 1141-1153. DOI: 10.1016/j.
However, political decisions related to natural resources management are G.A.B. and Kents, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for
biocon.2009.02.021.
mainly taken based on administrative units, usually defined by national, conservation priorities. Nature, 403, 853–858. DOI:
federal state, province, district, and community boundaries. To manage 10.1038/35002501. Rodríguez Osuna, V., Börner, J., Nehren, U., Bardy, R., Gaese,
watersheds or conservation corridors for DRR, it is sometimes therefore H. and Heinrich, J. (2014). Priority areas for watershed
Nehren, U. (2008). Quartäre Landschaftsgenese und
service conservation in the Guapi-Macacu region of Rio de
necessary to cooperate across administrative borders. historische –degradation in der Serra dos Órgãos, Rio de
Janeiro, Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Ecological Processes, 3(16),
Janeiro. PhD thesis, Faculty of Physics and Geosciences,
1-22. DOI: 10.1186/s13717-014-0016-7.
University Leipzig.
90 91
Managing resilience and transformation
08
8.1 Resilience a key concept DEFINITION: RESILIENCE
Resilience is a central term in the post-2015 Sustainable Development “The capacity of social,
Agenda and the SFDRR. Resilience is at the heart of a debate about how economic and environmental
best to encourage governments, civil society and the private sector to systems to cope with
invest in DRR measures. Humanitarian and development agencies are a hazardous event or
finding their mandates further blurred: should humanitarian agencies trend or disturbance,
focus mainly on the post-disaster phase and should development agencies responding or reorganizing
focus mainly on prevention? In parallel, there is considerable debate about in ways that maintain their
how to integrate DRR with CCA and more effectively mainstream these into essential function, identity
development activities. The concept of resilience presents an opportunity and structure, while also
to strengthen coherence between the humanitarian, climate change, DRR
Chapter 8
maintaining the capacity
and sustainable development agendas. Moreover, resilience has become for adaptation, learning and
an attractive concept because of its more positive connotations that focus transformation”
Managing resilience on enhancing local capacities and adaptation potential than the negative
connotations attributed to vulnerability and risk reduction.
IPCC 2014, building from the
definition used in Arctic Council, 2013
and transformation However, despite its increased popularity in international discourse, there “The ability of a system,
is limited theoretical understanding and multiple, often contradictory community or society
definitions of resilience – for example even IPCC and UNDRR use different exposed to hazards to resist,
Key questions definitions. Taking a more detailed look at the different documents of the absorb, accommodate,
post-2015 Agenda it is surprising that despite using the term all over, adapt to, transform and
Why has resilience to disasters and
only the SFDRR gives a definition for resilience, while neither the Paris recover from the effects
adaptation become such a popular term?
Agreement nor the SDGs do. In operational terms, due to the complexity of of a hazard in a timely and
What is the link between resilience, the concept of resilience, a main challenge is determining which indicators efficient manner, including
DRR and CCA? should be used, and how to measure them in order to inform DRR policies. through the preservation and
Nonetheless, resilience has become the new goal of many international restoration of its essential
and national development policies, with little guidance or benchmarks that basic structures and functions
describe what resilience is, how to increase it, or when resilience has been through risk management.”
achieved (Sudmeier-Rieux, 2014). This chapter explores ‘resilience’ and its
UNISDR 2017
inputs to the international discourse in the fields of DRR and CCA and what
are the links between resilience, DRR and ecosystem-based approaches.
Originating in engineering sciences in the 19th century, the term was later
popularized by ecological sciences and child psychology before becoming
popular in literature on climate change and disaster management, with
UNDRR including it in its mandate since 2005: “to increase the resilience
of nations and communities to disaster risk”.
As can be seen by the definitions of UNDRR and IPCC, quite a few elements
are thought to compose resilience: “bounce-back”, “resourcefulness”,
“absorb”, “retain function, identity and structure” and “adaptation, learning
and transformation”. Some of these elements, such as the last two
mentioned can seem at first glance contradictory.
In systems sciences, resilience is: “the ability of a system to withstand
a major disruption within acceptable degradation parameters and to
recover within an acceptable time and composite costs and risks” (Haimes
2009). According to systems thinking, other characteristics of resilience
include robustness, which refers to the degree of insensitivity of a
system to perturbations, and redundancy, which refers to the ability
of certain components of a system to assume the functions of failed
components without adversely affecting the performance of the system
itself (Haimes 2009).
© UNEP
92 93
08
In building engineering, seismic resilience of buildings is part of a 8.2 Resilience, disaster risk and climate
system which has: change adaptation
1. Reduced failure probabilities; When defined in the narrower sense of “returning to a normal state”,
2. Reduced consequences from failures in terms of lives lost, resilience parallels coping capacities or recovery strategies for dealing with
damage, and negative economic and social consequences; shock and adversity, rather than favouring long-term capacity building and
3. Reduced time to recovery. reducing underlying vulnerabilities. Adaptation can be seen as a longer-
term process of slowing adjusting and changing to the conditions, while
(Bruneau and Reinhorn 2006, as quoted by Bahadur et al. 2010).
coping is usually considered a short-term strategy for dealing with stress
or a shock. Both require making adjustments to systems, (i.e. livelihoods),
Tierney and Bruneau (2007) use the “R4 Framework”, which describes based on decisions and choices following an appraisal of events and
resilience as: possible outcomes or consequences.
Robustness Thus resilience, when thought only as coping, is similar to adaptation but
The ability of systems and other units of analysis to withstand disaster also different. In this conceptual framing, it is also possible to be resilient
forces without significant degradation or loss of performance. to change in a harmful way; i.e. coping with shocks and stressors but
Redundancy ultimately staying stuck in a way of doing things. Adaptation requires
The extent to which systems or other units are substitutable if significant learning and change, or at least adjusting to a certain extent.
degradation or loss of functionality occurs. There are many examples this harmful state of “resilience”, of highly
Resourcefulness “resilient” populations around the world, living in harsh environments and
The ability to diagnose and prioritize problems and initiate solutions by often subjected to small and large shocks, such as flooding as well as
mobilizing material: monetary, informational, technological and human from everyday economic and health issues. These populations often have
resources. a high capacity to “bounce back”. Consider the example given in chapter
2 from Nepal. Here the people built very simple houses in the floodplain,
Rapidity which floods every year (Figure 8.2, 8.3).
The capacity to restore functionality in a timely way, containing losses and
avoiding disruptions. (Modified from Tierney and Bruneau 2007) These people can be considered highly resilient because they are used
to rebuilding their houses and recover after frequent small flooding.
Figure 8.1 illustrates the resilience triangle (Tierney and Bruneau 2007). However, they remain highly at risk of a large and dangerous flooding as N
It depicts a disturbance at t0 followed by a certain time of recovery (t). well as other risks, such as epidemics.
One example can be a bridge which fails during an earthquake. In this
illustration, resilience can thus be the time and cost for reconstructing
the bridge.
100
Quality of Infrastructure
Figure 8.1
The Resilience triangle as a function
of quality of infrastructure and time.
Modified from Tierney and
Bruneau 2007. Redrawn by L. Monk 50
%
0
t0 t1 time
In economics, resilience refers to the inherent ability and adaptive

responses of systems that enable them to avoid potential losses (Rose
2007). Increasingly, also social aspects of resilience are emphasized. N N
POTENTIAL FLOOD AREA
Thus, the concept of resilience can be seen as having different facets to it, Figure 8.2 Figure 8.3
while incorporating timeframes of during and after a disturbance. Vulnerable house in Nepal. Redrawn figure from Google maps.
© K. Sudmeier-Rieux Above: Seuti Khola River, Dharan
Nepal in 2004;
Below: Seuti Khola River, Dharan
Nepal in 2009.
Credit S. Plog
94 95
08
Nevertheless, resilience as a conceptual “bouncing forward” changes the
original meaning of resilience but it provides the promise of a framework
against which disaster prevention and post-disaster measures should be
undertaken. Seeing resilience in this light is a paradigm shift, which mirrors
the process required of addressing the underlying causes of vulnerability
as well as improving capacities to recover after a disaster.
Figure 8.5 illustrates different types of resilience along a time scale.
During this time scale, there are various shocks or levels of stress
with different responses and types of resilience: recovery (or passive
resilience), adaptation and transformation. The figure uses a simple ball
and curve figure to illustrate differences between these different types. In
recovery the ball bounces back, in adaptation the curve moves outward,
in transformation, the ball moves to a higher state. Chelleri et al. (2015)
assign recovery to the engineering definition of resilience, adaptation and
Figure 8.4 transformation to a socio-ecological definition of resilience.
Bamiyan, Afghanistan.
Let’s take another example from Bamiyan Province in Afghanistan
© UNEP
(Figure 8.4). People have lived in the valleys of these high mountains
for centuries and have developed strategies for coping with extreme Threshold NEW
REGIME
winters and flash floods during springtime. If we follow the most common
Shock
definition of resilience, “bouncing back”, we can say that these populations SYSTEM
are highly resilient. But these people continue to live in places at high risk REGIME
from mountain hazards, with everyday economic and health challenges. Stress Stress TIME scale
As a result, their high capacity to rebounce to the “normal state” does not
necessarily mean they are able to lower their risks.
The bottom-line issue and main criticism of the concept of resilience ACTION/
to disasters is that communities at subsistence level have very low RESPONSES Recovery Adaptation Transformation
marginal capacities to deal with shocks, and their thresholds leading to
a non-functioning state may be easily transgressed. For marginalized
populations, the “normal state” is thus not necessarily the desired state
TYPE OF
and cannot be addressed through emergency measures but rather RESILIENCE
through long-term development interventions. Thus, resilience as
defined as the capacity to recover to the normal state does not suffice to
reduce underlying risk factors, or vulnerabilities to disasters or climate Social-Ecological
change impacts (Sudmeier-Rieux, 2014). System (Engineering) (Social-Ecological) RESILIENCE
(Folke et al., 2010) RESILIENCE/ROBUSTNESS
(Walker and Salt, 2006)
FROM BOUNCING BACK TO BOUNCING FORWARD:
TRANSFORMATIONAL RESILIENCE Socio-Technical
System RESILIENCE ROBUSTNESS TRANSITION
In recognizing that “bouncing back” does not take into account that (Smith and Stirling, 2010)
disasters are accompanied by change, Manyena et al. (2011) offer
an alternative definition: “the ability to bounce forward following a Figure 8.5
disaster”, which could also be described as “positive transformation” of Types of resilience according to
a community, or system. If mainstream resilience definitions represent In this light, proponents of transformative resilience argue that it can different schools of thought and
more conservative notions of maintaining stability or the status quo, then provide a common platform for addressing DRR, adaptation and poverty in various stages.
reduction, moving away from hazard-oriented, technology-driven DRR © Chelleri et al. 2015. Redrawn by
“transformability” is a more appropriate notion for addressing underlying
that is the current norm. According to this viewpoint, it has the potential L. Monk
risk factors and engaging in new development pathways, which include
disaster prevention and vulnerability reduction measures. The IPCC to bring about more systemic approaches to DRR and understanding
definition of resilience, which is influenced by the CCA process, also of complex systems while offering a stronger entry point for critical
aims to reflect partially this need to “bounce forward”, by recognising the long-term but neglected aspects of DRR and CCA, such as ecosystem-
processes of “adaptation, learning and transformation”. based approaches.
96 97
08
Resilience in its traditional definition as “returning to a normal state” Bahadur, A., Ibrahim, M. and Tanner, T. (2010). The Technical Series 1. http://www.fsincop.net/fileadmin/user_
(or passive resilience) may be a useful concept to describe a more efficient Resilience Renaissance? Unpacking of resilience for upload/fsin/docs/resources/FSIN_29jan_WEB_medium%20
recovery process after a crisis as one step in the disaster management tackling climate change and disasters. Strengthening res.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
Climate Resilience Discussion Paper 1. Brighton: Institute
cycle, but will not necessarily change population’s everyday risks, well- Manyena, S.B., O’Brien, G. O’Keefe, P. and Rose, J.
of Development Studies. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/
being, and sustainability or reduce vulnerability in the long run. In other (2011). Disaster resilience: a bounce back or bounce
opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/2368/The%20
words, a population can be vulnerable and at risk, while simultaneously forward ability? Local Environment, 16(5), 417-424. DOI:
resilience%20renaissance.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
resilient. Looking towards a concept of transformative resilience can 10.1080/13549839.2011.583049.
Accessed 25 July 2019.
aid move towards the needed paradigm shift required to deal with the Mitchell, T. and Harris, K. (2012). Background Note.
Bruneau, M. and Reinhorn, A. (2006). Overview of the
challenges of climate change and disaster risk. Thus, in spite of several Resilience Concept. Paper No. 2040. 8th U.S. National
Resilience: A risk management approach. London: Overseas
caveats of how it is understood and depending on whether it is considered Development Institute. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. San Francisco,
as passive or transformative, the concept of resilience can be a useful uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/7552.pdf
California, 18-22 April 2006. https://www.eng.buffalo.
bridge between DRR and CCA. Furthermore, resilience is a key concept edu/~bruneau/8NCEE-Bruneau%20Reinhorn%20Resilience.
for ecosystem-based approaches because ecosystems and socio- pdf Accessed 25 July 2019. Poulsen, L. (2013). Costs and Benefits of Policies and
ecological systems operate along these scales of recovery, adaptation Practices Addressing Land Degradation and Drought in the
Chelleri, L., Waters J.J., Olazabal, M. and Minucci, G. (2015).
and transformation. Understanding these complex processes is difficult Drylands. White Paper II. UNCCD 2nd Scientific Conference:
Resilience trade-offs: addressing multi-scale and temporal
Economic assessment of desertification, sustanaible land
but necessary when working on a system level. aspects of urban resilience. Environment and Urbanization,
management and resilience of arid, semi-arid and dry
27(1), 181-197. DOI: 10.1177/0956247814550780.
One main challenge is the operationalisation of the resilience concept sub-humid areas. Bonn, 9-12 April 2013. Bonn: UNCCD
for DRR and CCA. Notwithstanding the choice of definitions, assessing IPCC (2014). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change Secretariat. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/
and measuring resilience remains a difficulty. If one sees resilience as a 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global content/documents/888White_Paper_2.pdf Accessed
and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to 25 July 2019.
capacity rather than an outcome, then the picture might become slightly
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
easier (FSIN Resilience Measurement Technical Working Group 2014) but on Climate Change. Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken,
Rose, A. (2007). Economic resilience to natural and man-
nevertheless, multiple indicators at different levels will be required. These made disasters: Multidisciplinary origins and contextual
K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L.
issues will be further considered in Chapter 17. dimensions. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 383-398. DOI:
Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N.
10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.10.001.
Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L. White
(eds.). Cambridge/New York, NY: Cambridge University Sudmeier-Rieux, K. (2014) Resilience – an emerging
Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ paradigm of danger or of hope? Disaster Prevention and
ar5_wgII_spm_en-1.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019. Management, Volume 23, issue 1.
Haimes, Y. (2009). On the Definition of Resilience in Tierney, K. and Bruneau, M. (2007). Conceptualizing and
Systems. Risk Analysis, 29(4), 498-501. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539- Measuring Resilience, A Key to Disaster Loss Reduction.
6924.2009.01216.x. TR News, 250, 14-17. Washington, D.C.: Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies. http://
Frankenberger, T., Spangler, T., Nelson, S. and Langworthy,
onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews250_p14-17.
M. (2012). Discussion Paper. Enhancing Resilience to Food
pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
Security Shocks in Africa. Discussion Paper. https://www.
fsnnetwork.org/sites/default/files/discussion_paper_usaid_ UNISDR (2017). Disaster terminology. http://www.unisdr.
dfid_wb_nov._8_2012.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019. org/we/inform/terminology Accessed 25 July 2019.
FSIN Resilience Measurement Technical Working Group
(2014). Techical Series No. 1. Resilience measurement
principles: towards an agenda for measurement design.
98 99
Ecosystems management contributions pre- and post-disasters
09
9.1 Ecosystem management and the
disaster management phases
We start by questioning the dominant view of disaster management
(Figure 9.1), where the hazard event is the trigger for the post-disaster
emergency responses, the recovery and reconstruction phase. The
disaster management phase then returns to the pre-disaster phase which
includes disaster mitigation and disaster preparedness activities.
Figure 9.1
ding Pre
-
ui l im Disaster management cycle
t yB pa
c
ci t
Pre
ion
pa
pa
at
Ca
ra
ig
t
Mi t
ion
Disaster
Management Event
Recons
Cycle
se
Re
tru
on
ve sp
co
cy
ry
cti
Re
en
on
rg
e
Em
Res
to ra t i o n
In this predominant situation, the emphasis and most budgets are placed
in the post-disaster phase and on pre-disaster preparedness activities,
such as early warning systems or emergency preparedness. This is how
disasters have been most commonly managed. Over the past decade this
Chapter 9
notion has been challenged by NGOs, development- and UN agencies,
such as UNDRR, which are advocating for a paradigm shift towards disaster
prevention through long-term planning and investments in reducing
Ecosystems management underlying risk factors in order to reduce hazard impacts (Figure 9.2).
Here the emphasis is on reducing disaster risks through investments
contributions pre- and in poverty reduction, risk-sensitive land-use planning, and sustainable
development, rather than just managing risks as in the old paradigm.
post-disasters
Figure 9.2
Disaster risk reduction spiral.
Key questions Source: Modified from Tony Lloyd-
Jones (editor), Max Lock Centre,
How can ecosystem management support University of Westminster, 2009.
different disaster phases? Redrawing by: S. Plog
How can gender considerations be taken
into account pre- to post-disaster?
© Bhushan Thimla, UNEP
100 101
09
Ecosystem-based activities can be implemented at all stages of the DRR TIME FRAME AFTER MAIN ECOSYSTEM-MANAGEMENT
spiral from the early stages after a hazard event, through reconstruction, HAZARD EVENT OBJECTIVES ACTIONS COMPONENT
mitigation and especially in the prevention phases. Table 9.1 shows
PHASE I. RELIEF
the four main phases of the DRR spiral along with the main ecosystem
management component. Hours to Save lives Search and rescue, Avoiding dumping of hazardous materials in
days after emergency skills environmentally-sensitive areas or habitats;
This chapter will go through the different phases of the DRR spiral and
possible use of provisioning services from
will explore different options for including ecosystem-based activities as ecosystems (food, wood, shelter, etc.)
part of a more comprehensive DRR portfolio of activities alongside more
“classical” DRR activities. PHASE II. EARLY RECOVERY/TRANSITION
In addition, the gender lense will be included because experience and Days to Secure livelihoods Temporary shelters, Rapid environmental assessments, sourcing
months after provision of basic services of sustainable materials for recovery, waste
data from around the world have shown that women can play a critical
e.g. water, food management
role in protecting the environment as they find source of sustenance –
such as water, firewood, fodder, medicinal plants, forest products and PHASE III. RECONSTRUCTION
nature-friendly agricultural practices – in a healthy environment. Often Months to Reconstruct Reconstruction/ Environmentally sensitive reconstruction,
women have been called ‘stewards of natural environment conservation’ years after livelihoods provision of housing and sustainable materials sourcing, improved
because they have a wealth of knowledge to protect, conserve, and infrastructure, job creation waste management, ecosystem restoration,
regenerate natural resources. Thus, examples of women’s activities that green infrastructure and improved
are invaluable for DRR will be given. We will examine at the roles women ecosystem management for DRR
can and do play in the disaster risk reduction cycle – including during an PHASE IV. PREVENTION a) Risk and vulnerability assessments
emergency, recovery, reconstruction, and preparedness and prevention.
Continuously Analyse and Hazard and exposure Combined ecosystem mapping with risk/
This will help inform future strategies for including women in all stages updated assess risk mapping, vulnerability hazard mapping
of Eco-DRR. assessments, risk
mapping
9.2 Ecosystem management and post- PHASE IV. PREVENTION b) Development planning and risk reduction
disaster recovery Continuous Hazard, Risk sensitive land use Ecosystem and land management plans,
process, on regular vulnerability and planning, based on ecosystem protection and restoration
PHASE I. RELIEF intervals exposure reduction assessments included in planning and zoning
The main objective of the relief phase, which takes place during and PHASE IV. PREVENTION c) Preparedness
immediately after a hazard event, is to save lives (Figure 9.3). Main actors
Continuously Increase readiness Creation and maintenance Including ecosystems in environmental
are usually neighbours, community members and, when available, local
updated for future hazard of early warning systems, emergency preparedness programmes
fire brigades, search and rescue teams, or national armies. events evacuation plans
The relief phase is most effective when there are existing contingency
Table 9.1
plans, frequent rescue and emergency drills and well established
The four main phases of the DRR spiral. Credit: Authors
evacuation plans. Since the main focus is on saving lives, there may
be little time to include environmental considerations, other than basic
considerations to avoid pollution of water sources or dumping waste
materials in waterways. Environmental contingency plans may be part of Figure 9.3
relief training. Services of ecosystems, such as provision of construction Collapsed supermarket in
material, fire wood, food, etc., can be used. Green open spaces can be Haiti during earthquake of
12 January 2010.
used for temporary shelters (camps).
© UNEP
When hazardous materials are released during a disaster, such as oil spills
or ground water pollution, we call this an environmental emergency. Such
emergencies must be dealt with proper techniques that go beyond the
scope of Eco-DRR/EbA.
Rather than being people who need to be helped, women can become
helpers when emergency strikes. This shift can happen through long-term
activities that empower women and training to respond to disasters. This
can be more effective than top-down approaches where women do not
have information and cannot take decisions to respond appropriately
to disasters. Research conducted in Papua New Guinea by Mercer et
al. (2008) highlights the need for more participatory approaches. They
discuss response of the Singas villagers who were asked by disaster
officials to move from river banks to higher grounds to solve their problem
102 103
09
of flooding. While the villagers did not contest this, they had no intention Women’s leadership often emerges when communities struggle to recover
of complying with these top-down instructions because their livelihood after a disaster. Enarson and Morrow (1998) document how a Women will
depended on the river ecosystem. Participatory approaches enable those Rebuild coalition was formed in Miami after being hit by Hurricane Andrew
at the are directly affected by the hazard concerned to be involved at all in 1992, which was successful in “achieving visibility for women’s needs in
points, including arriving at emergency strategies (Mercer et al. 2008). disaster, influencing the distribution of relief funds, and challenging male
power structures, including control over post-disaster reconstruction”
PHASE II. EARLY RECOVERY (Enarson and Morrow 1998: 178). Examples from Nepal in the aftermath
The main objective of the early recovery stage is to secure livelihoods, of the 2015 Earthquake also show how women’s organizations have been
return to «normal life», find missing persons and belongings, clean debris instrumental in the recovery process and reaffirm that disaster recovery
and establish temporary shelters, secure food and water supplies (Figure efforts can also be a time for challenging and resetting gender relations.
9.4). This phase takes place days to weeks or months after a hazard In Nepal, restrictive social norms limited the access of single/widowed
event. Main actors involved are usually neighbours, community members, women to post-disaster recovery efforts. The period of mourning for
civil protection, humanitarian agencies and NGOs. This phase is most 13 days after death of the husband when women were restricted from
effective when there are already existing contingency recovery plans. touching anyone or eating anything restricted their ability to meet their
needs (Mawby and Applebaum 2018: 17). In many instances, Nepali men
Figure 9.4. were absent in the communities because they were outside the country
Looking for valuables after 2010
for work, had been participating in the civil war, or killed in the conflict.
Haiti earthquake.
© UNEP Haiti This meant women had to take responsibility for recovery efforts. This
was the context that Nepali women’s civil society organisations (CSOs)
stepped in, and in doing so, “the work of women’s CSOs helped create a
stronger recovery that more thoroughly addressed the needs of Nepali
communities. A more robust societal recovery helps reduce future
instability and advancing the status of women and enabling their full
participation can yield a stronger response to multi-layered instability.”
(Mawby and Applebaum 2018:19).
Indeed, as UNDP et al. (2010) note, it is important to address gender
inequalities in recovery efforts and long-term development strategies so
that they are not perpetuated leading to the same vulnerabilities in the future
too. This requires a “holistic approach that engages all recovery actors and
embeds gender in all disaster recovery planning activities, from reviewing
national policies to post-disaster evaluations” (UNDP et al. 2010: 10).
Some of the biggest challenges of the early recovery stage include:
PHASE III. RECONSTRUCTION
Location of temporary settlements
This phase usually takes place months to years after a hazard event and
Pollution of drinking water by human waste involves returning livelihoods to «normal» or better than before, rebuilding
Waste management and sanitation issues houses, infrastructure, and businesses. Main actors are neighbours and
Environmental considerations are possible and should be taken into communities, government, humanitarian and development agencies and
account during the early recovery phase. They should include the basic the private sector. This phase is much more effective where there are
principle “do no harm”, which means avoiding actions that may be reconstruction plans and guidelines for building back better and greener
damaging to lives and livelihoods in the long run. (Figure 9.5).
Inappropriate location of temporary settlements and lack of sanitation Figure 9.5

can easily lead to water pollution and thus to long-term environmental Haiti post hurricane Matthew 2016.
and human-social problems. Location of temporary shelters near animal © UNEP
pathways can lead to dangerous human-animal conflicts.
Other environmental recommendations include:
Keeping sources of contamination away from water sources
Avoid dumping debris in waterways that may cause
flooding/pollution
Careful management of water and sanitation are key to
preventing diseases
104 105
09
Challenges during the reconstruction phase:
Gender-sensitive reconstruction efforts in Pakistan
Location and proper planning of reconstructed housing
Pattan, an NGO with a long history in trained female staff to ensure women’s
Unsustainable sourcing of construction materials
development and disaster assistance, began needs were assessed and addressed. The
Proper infrastructure planning, e.g. water supply or road access work with flood-affected communities in forums also offered gender training for its
Waste and debris management 40 Pakistani villages in 1992. Pattan staff staff and analyzed the gender impact of all
identified weaknesses in flood mitigation of its programs. Women were responsible
Cleaning up in sustainable way and preparedness programs, including for distributing food, and households
Including ecosystems in reconstruction plans to reduce future risks an inadequate warning system, absence were registered in women’s names during
Environmental considerations should be carefully included in this phase as of community organizations, lack of distributions to ensure female-headed
building back better and greener is possible in most cases. The potential community participation in flood response, households and women in polygamous
of ecosystem restoration and creating green infrastructure for DRR should and failure to recognize how disasters affect households received assistance.
be considered as well. In many cases, it may be necessary to relocate women and men differently. Pattan set out Pattan also involved women in housing
settlements if they were constructed in inappropriate locations away from to improve community flood response by reconstruction. Traditionally, the house of a
hazard-prone areas. It is necessary to avoid sourcing building materials integrating disaster reduction strategies married couple was owned by the husband.
from unsustainable sources, for instance excavating sand from dunes into development policies and projects However, Pattan persuaded communities
on coasts or taking down forests on steep slopes, which could degrade and incorporating a carefully thought- to register houses constructed with project
natural protection functions and thus increase vulnerability of already out gender perspective into its disaster funds in the names of both wives and
affected populations to future hazard events. response program. Pattan began by husbands. Before construction began,
organizing forums to encourage community couples signed a contract stipulating that, in
Also, production processes for building materials that might harm the participation in projects addressing disaster the event of divorce or separation, whoever
environment should be avoided or improved. Sustainable waste and preparedness, response, and recovery. remained in the house had to pay half its
debris management continue to offer challenges as well as ensuring that However, the practice of sex segregation value to the former spouse. Interviews with
the clean-up process does not cause long-term damage. For example, in prevented women from joining the forums the women revealed that home ownership
Sri Lanka, following the 2004 South Asian Tsunami, the beach clean-up in most villages. Women asked that Pattan had dramatically increased women’s status
created more damage than the hazard event itself, because the clean-up organize parallel women’s forums. These in their families and communities and
led to the spread of invasive species (Sudmeier-Rieux et al. 2013). forums soon became the primary vehicle for increased their participation in decision-
Post-disaster efforts may also reinforce social and gender inequalities women’s representation and participation making processes.
in many ways “by distributing resources to male head of households, in disaster assistance projects. Male Adapted from Swoebel (2000) Unsung Heroines:
by provisioning traditional male occupations, ignoring women’s small staff could not interact with women in Women and Natural Disasters Gender Matters,
Information Bulletin No. 8, US Agency for
enterprises, by seeking support and decision making only from make the community, so Pattan recruited and International Development.
leaders” (Drolet et al. 2015: 438). Most Post Disaster Needs Assessment
would include chapters on gender in recovery and reconstruction, usually
gender would be considered a cross-cutting topic affecting any other 9.3 Ecosystem management and
sector investigated (Hinzpeter and Sandholz 2018).
Women and men’s contribution in the reconstruction phase may be
disaster prevention
different depending on the social context. Women may do more work The previous stages described belong to various states of the post-
relating to water and food provision and care jobs within the household. disaster management cycle. The pre-disaster, prevention phase should
They may also be actively involved in rebuilding efforts and agricultural be a continuous process throughout disaster management, which
work that were considered ‘men’s work’. For example, in Pakistan, although unfortunately often only receives higher priority once a disaster has
many women in affected communities abided by strict laws regarding struck, causing governments and NGOs to take up disaster prevention
social interaction outside the household, the post-disaster recovery efforts with more urgency.
saw them involving in labour outside home, alongside men (Drolet et al.
2015). They also note that “Living in poverty as part of a marginalised PHASE IV. PREVENTION
group creates few opportunities to build up the resources needed to fall Prevention is multi-faceted, involves several elements and can include
back on at a time of disaster. Social protection initiatives that provide both structural and non-structural measures. This section will consider
access to essential services and income, including protection from the the following elements in disaster prevention:
risks of disasters, is a universal human right and contributes to building Preparedness
resilience by improving economic security, health, and well-being” (Drolet Early warning, emergency drills and evacuation
et al. 2015:445). Therefore, it is important that women and all affected
Risk and vulnerability assessment
people and groups are involved in decision-making in the post-disaster
Analyze and assess risk for prevention
reconstruction planning. The long-term challenge is to build sustainable
livelihoods. Example of a similar intervention by an NGO called Pattan Development and long-term risk reduction
drawing from a UN study is included below. Planning procedures and ecosystem management to reduce vulnerability
and exposure and increase resilience
106 107
09
Although gender is often not seen as important to factor in while making PREPAREDNESS
disaster plans, the recognition of specific conditions that make women
Disaster preparedness is one of the objectives of the HFA and SFDRR and
vulnerable necessitates that gender be especially considered in disaster
one of the areas where governments have made most progress as self-
prevention and preparedness strategies. Myers (1994: 15–16) elaborates
reported, between 2007 and 2011 (Figure 9.6).
on how gender can be incorporated into the components of disaster
prevention and preparedness (see Table 9.2).
Average score of progress Figure 9.6
3.5
2007–2009 HFA progress reports, 2007-2011.
Table 9.2 DISASTER 3.4
2009–2011 Source: UNISDR 2011 Redrawn by
Gender concerns to be addressed GENDER CONCERNS L. Monk
PREPAREDNESS 3.3
at various stages of disaster SPECIFIC TO THE ACTIVITY
ACTIVITIES 3.2
preparedness activities. 3.1
Adapted from Myers 1994 Public awareness Including and appropriately targeting women
3.0
raising in educational campaigns designed to prepare
2.9
populations for disasters
2.8
Tapping women’s talents as informal educators
2.7
Taking into account women’s heavy domestic
workloads when designing training schemes Governance Risk identification Knowledge Underlying Preparedness
and institutional and early warning and education risk and response
Assessing onsidering how women might be vulnerable
C arrangements
HFA Priority Areas
vulnerabilities within the high-risk communities identified
Hazard mapping Taking into account indicators based on women’s
needs and coping strategies Disaster preparedness is often one of the first elements that is prioritized
Listening to women at the grassroots level in DRR. Preparedness is often a highly effective way of saving lives by
reducing people’s exposure temporarily during a hazard event through
Provision of Disaggregating vulnerable population at the
evacuation. Preparedness can make use of highly sophisticated early
baseline information minimum by sex
warning systems or be based on local knowledge and observations of
Establishment Using appropriate media to ensure you are pending hazard events (Figures 9.7, 9.8).
of early warning reaching all sectors of the population, especially
systems women and children
Ensuring women can take part in rehearsals POST-DISASTER MONITORING & MAPPING Figure 9.7
An example of the Indonesian
Practice of Ensuring women can take part in rehearsals RAPID MAPPING
tsunami early warning system, from
emergency drills lanning drills keeping women’s domestic time
P DISSEMINATION the German Aerospace Center.
tables in mind Credit: DLR, Szarzynski. Redrawing
Realistically simulating cultural norms in the society EARLY WARNING AND by S. Plog
RISK INFORMATION
Stockpiling food Stockpiling materials with women’s needs in mind FLOOD SENSOR WEB
and materials Including obstetric/gynecological medicines/
RISK ASSESSMENT
equipment in medical supplies (HEALTH, FLOODS, DROUGHTS)
Ensuring that supplementary food items correspond
with local cooking customs HAZARD
Training emergency Ensuring that ‘in the heat of the moment’ women will
response teams not be side-lined and rendered even more vulnerable
lanning to encourage women survivors in the
P
disaster relief process Disaster preparedness is intended as a response to potential hazards but
Being careful to not have the relief plans overburden it does not necessarily address underlying causes of risk, which require
women as careers and thereby create unforeseen
more development-oriented solutions. For example, a flood early-warning
problems further down the line
system will enhance the disaster preparedness of a coastal community
Anticipating the gender dynamics/conflicts that
by prompting early evacuation, but in order to effectively reduce disaster
will inevitably be brought on by trauma
risk over the long-term, their relocation to a less flood-prone area would be
Development of a Consulting women at every stage necessary. Relocation is, however, a very difficult social and cultural issue,
community-based Wording the plan such that it does not assume which is not always easily acceptable by communities.
approach to DRR that women are victims and disaster planners and
responders are only men
Building on women’s strengths in the plans
Figure 9.8
A local tsunami warning system in
American Samoa
© B. McAdoo
108 109
09
RISK AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS 9.4 Conclusions
In a perfect world, any area at risk from a hazard event would have a risk
Disaster risk reduction can be seen as a spiral consisting of four phases:
map or at least a hazard map that provide the basis for land use or urban
Relief, Recovery, Reconstruction and Prevention. Ecosystem and gender
planning in order to reduce risks (Zimmermann et al. 2005). Such maps
considerations can and need to be taken into account through each phase
provide guidance to municipalities and homeowners about which areas
of the DRR spiral. Within the first two phases of relief and recovery, the
should be avoided for future constructions. In some countries, risk and/
main importance is to protect vital ecosystems and their services and
or hazard maps may be mandatory and form an important basis for land
to minimize any further damage. Ensuring environmental contingency
use or urban planning. We will discuss this important aspect in more detail
plans and rapid environmental assessment procedures are in place is
in Chapters 10 and 11.
important to help in this stage where environmental considerations often
Maps can establish non-construction zones or provide information to take the back seat compared to saving lives. The period of reconstruction
insurance companies which may reduce the likelihood of obtaining provides the opportunity to “build back better” and include an ecosystem
insurance for homeowners in high risk areas. However, in practice, many approach. The prevention phase is often where the majority of the work
risk/hazard maps are only developed after a disaster has occurred. on incorporating Eco-DRR/EbA can be undertaken. The next chapters will
In recognition of the linkages between ecosystem services and disaster detail tools for Eco-DRR/EbA.
risk, there are a few but increasing number of risk / hazard maps that also
incorporate ecosystem services. One example is from West Africa where
the entire coast of 11 countries has been mapped illustrating ecosystem
services and coastal risks. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
Drolet, J., Dominelli, L., Alston, M., Ersing, R., Mathbor, Swoebel, M. (2000). Unsung Heroines: Women and Natural
DEVELOPMENT AND LONG-TERM RISK REDUCTION
G., and Wu, H. (2015). Women rebuilding lives post- Disasters. Gender Matters, Information Bulletin No. 8. Office
Addressing the drivers of vulnerability, such as poverty, environmental disaster: innovative community practices for building for Women in Development, U.S. Agency for International
degradation, governance issues, etc. is the goal of sustainable resilience and promoting sustainable development. Development. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACL189.pdf
development, which when well thought out to include DRR and CCA has Gender and Development, 23(3), 433–448. DOI: Accessed 25 July 2019.
10.1080/13552074.2015.1096040.
the potential to reduce risk in the long-term. Ecosystem-based approaches Sudmeier-Rieux, K, Ash, N. and Murti, R. (2013).
are of major importance here because, as seen throughout this book, Enarson, E., and Morrow, B.H. (1998). Women Will Rebuild Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction:
well-managed and conserved ecosystems provide services to enhance Miami: A Case Study of Feminist Response to Disaster. In Healthy Ecosystems for Human Security. Revised Edition.
The Gendered Terrain of Disaster: Through Women’s Eyes. Gland: IUCN. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/
protection against hazards, avoid or reduce the magnitude of hazards, Enarson, E. and Morrow, B.H. (eds.). Praeger. 171-184. files/documents/CEM-008-2013.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
while providing vital services to communities that can also help CCA. http://www.gdnonline.org/resources/women_will_rebuild_
UNDP, UNISDR, and IRP (2010). Guidance Note on Recovery:
miami.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
Gender. Kobe: IRP Secretariat. https://www.unisdr.org/
Hinzpeter, K. and Sandholz, S. (2018). Squaring the circle? files/16775_16775guidancenoteonrecoverygender1.pdf
Integrating environment, infrastructure and risk reduction Accessed 25 July 2019.
in Post Disaster Needs Assessments. International Journal
UNEP (2010). Risk and Vulnerability Assessment
of Disaster Risk Reduction, 32, 113-124. DOI: 10.1016/j.
Methodology Development Project (RiVAMP) Linking
ijdrr.2018.05.016.
Ecosystems to Risk and Vulnerability Reduction, The
Lloyd-Jones, T. (ed.), Kalra, R., Mulyawan, B.and Theis, M. Case of Jamaica, Results of Pilot Assessment. Geneva:
(2009). The Built Environment Professions in Disaster Risk UNEP Division of Environmental Policy Implementation
Reduction and Response:A guide for humanitarian agencies. (DEPI). https://www.preventionweb.net/files/13205_
Westminister: Max Lock Centre, University of Westminister. RiVAMPexsummary.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
https://www.ifrc.org/PageFiles/95743/B.a.07.Built%20
UNISDR (2011). Global Assessment Report, Revealing Risk,
Environment%20Professions%20in%20DRR%20and%20
Redefining Development. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.
Response-Guide%20for%20humanitarian%20agencies_
preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2011/en/home/
DFDN%20and%20RICS.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
index.html Accessed 25 July 2019.
Mawby, B. and Applebaum, A. (2018). Rebuilding Nepal:
Women’s Roles in Political Transition and Disaster
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR THIS CHAPTER Recovery. Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and
SPHERE Project provides minimum standards in humanitarian response and includes Security. https://giwps.georgetown.edu/wp-content/
24 July 2019.
uploads/2018/04/Rebuilding-Nepal-Womens-Roles-in-
environmental considerations: Zimmermann, M., Pozzi, A. and Stoessel, F. (2005).
Political-Transition-and-Disaster-Recovery.pdf Accessed
www.sphereproject.org 25 July 2019 Vademecum, Hazard Maps and Related Instruments. The
UNEP’s Training toolkit: Integrating the environment into humanitarian action and early recovery: Swiss System and its Application Abroad, Capitalization of
Mercer, J., Kelman, I., Lloyd, K., and Suchet-Pearson, S.
Experience. Bern: PLANAT/Swiss Development Cooperation.
http://postconflict.UNEP.ch/humanitarianaction/training.html (2008). Reflections on Use of Participatory Research
http://www.planat.ch/fileadmin/PLANAT/planat_pdf/
for Disaster Risk Reduction. Area, 40(2), 172–183. DOI:
WWF’s Greening the Recovery Training Toolkit for Humanitarian Aid: alle_2012/2001-2005/PLANAT_2005_-_Vademecum.pdf
10.1111/j.1475-4762.2008.00797.x.
www.green-recovery.org Accessed 25 July 2019.
Myers, M. (1994). ‘Women and children first’: Introducing
For more information on environmental emergencies: a gender strategy into disaster preparedness. Gender &
http://www.unocha.org/what-we-do/coordination-tools/environmental-emergencies Development, 2(1), 14–16. DOI: 10.1080/09682869308519991
110 111
Incorporating ecosystems in risk assessments
10
10.1 Vulnerability, hazard and risk assessments DEFINITION
Let’s first quickly revise the concept of “risk”. Risk refers to potential The potential disaster
losses and is composed of three main elements: hazard, vulnerability and losses, in lives, health status,
exposure. This is the most commonly used definition given by UNDRR. If livelihoods, assets and
there are no potential losses, (i.e. if a hazard event takes place in a remote services, which could occur
area with no population, infrastructure or other resources of value), then to a particular community or
there is no risk, even if there is a hazard. a society over some specified
future time period.
Risk = Hazard * Exposure * Vulnerability
Comment: The definition
The basic idea behind establishing a risk assessment is to reduce of disaster risk reflects the
the likelihood of future damages and human suffering due to hazard concept of disasters as the
events. This is why one of the first steps in establishing an integrated outcome of continuously
risk management plan is to assess the risks, or potential of loss to a present conditions of risk.
population over time. The next step is to communicate these risks and Disaster risk comprises
take the appropriate measures to reduce them. We often communicate different types of potential
risk through maps, whether they are simple hand drawn representations losses which are often
or more data dependent Geographic Information System (GIS) maps. difficult to quantify.
However, there may be many other ways of communicating about Nevertheless, with knowledge
immediate or pending risks, depending on cultural norms, such as through of the prevailing hazards and
oral history, songs, or street theatre (Figure 10.1). the patterns of population and
In some countries, risk assessments are mandatory and an important socio-economic development,
part of land use planning. For example, in France, “risk prevention plans” disaster risks can be
Chapter 10 are stipulated by law and contribute to managing risk by defining areas
on which construction is allowed.
assessed and mapped, in
broad terms at least.
The local French State representative, “the préfet”, enforces this law,
Incorporating ecosystems
UNISDR 2017
which usually goes through a public participation process where citizens
in risk assessments can give advice on the zonings and contest them. However, in the end
the “préfet” must enforce the law, which indicates for example that no
construction is allowed in “red” or high risk zones (Pigeon 2017). Usually,
risk maps are an important part of this process.
Key questions
In Switzerland, federal laws since the 19th century provided the basis
What are vulnerability, hazard and risk for protection works by local governments. In 1991 and 1994, new laws
assessments and why do we need them? required local governments (cantons) to perform hazard assessments as
What are the most common approaches part of land use planning, emergency management, and to determine the
to assessing vulnerability and risk and cost efficiency of structural and non-structural measures (Zimmermann
how can we integrate ecosystems et al. 2005). The Swiss have two binding instruments to implement
in these assessments? these laws: “hazard indication maps” and “danger maps”, which have
been established for most municipalities that are affected by some
type of natural hazard. Whereas the Swiss hazard map only depicts the
type of hazard on a map, the danger map is the most commonly used
instrument. It is particular as it illustrates not only the type of hazard and
where it may occur but also the intensity and probability of occurrence
as established by various return periods (0-30 years, 30-100 years, 100-
300 years) represented by red, yellow and blue. The use of these colors
is quite specific to the Swiss method for depicting hazard occurrence.
Other countries may use red, orange and yellow to illustrate high, medium
and low hazard zones (or to illustrate risk). However, it is very important
to understand which return periods are represented for each category
of hazards. It is interesting to note the cost for producing such maps:
Figure 10.1
estimated at around 500 USD (2005 values) per km2 for the Swiss hazard Tsunami early warning
map and for the danger map, it can take around one year to develop for communications
one municipality (Zimmermann et al. 2005). © B. McAdoo
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UN Environment
112 113
10
Once we have such maps, it is up to society, i.e. decision-makers and Although risk is generally accepted as a function of vulnerability, exposure
civil society, to decide on the most cost-effective measures for reducing and hazard, there is no universally accepted equation for calculating
risk. It may actually be physically impossible to consider a zero-risk risk and the equation will differ depending on the purpose of the risk
situation, and depending on the situation, it can be very expensive and calculation. Often, risk assessments involve assessing the different parts
economically unfeasible to completely reduce risk. Often decision-makers of the equation, focusing on vulnerability and hazards and finally risk. We
have to consider the lowest possible risk considering the economic costs can think of a risk assessment in terms of various layers.
of certain measures and may decide to accept a certain level of risk. For
deciding on the extent to which a society can afford to reduce risk, decision VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS
makers may use the so-called ALARP principle, “As Low As Reasonably Vulnerability is the element of risk that is perhaps the most challenging
Practicable” (Figure 10.2). For example, as a society, we may be willing to to assess. To start with, natural or physical scientists assess it in very
spend a lot on making sure that schools, hospitals and retirement homes different ways from social scientists. Natural or physical scientists
are made as safe as possible. might consider vulnerability to be the physical damage of a house or of
a landscape to a certain hazard. They may calculate vulnerability as the
degree of damage to a building quantitatively.
Social scientists or professionals working with NGOs usually combine
the assessment of social vulnerability with capacities or so-called
Vulnerability and Capacity Assessments (VCAs). The data collected
ALARP are often very rich and qualitative yet not always easy (but possible) to
translate into the kind of quantitative data needed for a risk assessment.
For this, we tend to use socio-economic data on income, education levels,
AS and household status, among some of the indicators.
LOW Many types of vulnerabilities arise from conditions linked to ecosystems

degradation, including competition or conflict over scarce natural resources
AS in specific ecosystems. So considering the aspects of vulnerability that
REASONABLY arise from poor access to or degraded ecosystem services can improve
our understanding of the local populations’ vulnerability.
PRACTICABLE
HAZARD ASSESSMENTS
Hazard assessments are usually more standardised and less subject to
interpretation. Usually, two types of data for hazards are identified: the
probability of an event reoccurring, or its return period, and the intensity
of the hazard. For these data, historical records, such as well as climate
forecasts, to the extent they exist for the area being studied, are used.
Figure 10.2 Where several hazards are present, it is useful to develop a multi-hazard
The ALARP principle with map which provides a more comprehensive overview of all hazards that
risk increasing inversely to can occur. The data used for this can be high quality GIS data or can
increasing costs. be drawn from local knowledge using drawn or 3-D maps to capture
Design: L. Rharade, UNEP. Modified information where no digital information exists (Figure 10.3).
from Talbot and Jakeman (2015)
10.2 Common approaches to assessing Figure 10.3

Participatory 3D mapping in the
vulnerability and risk Democratic Republic of Congo.
© UNEP
Depending on your purpose, scope, budget, time and availability of
data, there are many ways of developing a risk assessment. There are
several assessment methods depending on the study scale, availability of
data and aims of the analysis and whether the assessment is to be
undertaken through participatory means or is expert-led (Van Westen
et al. 2006). These can be grouped into qualitative, semi-quantitative and
quantitative methods.
We present a simplified overview which provides the basics to understand
the difference between vulnerability, hazard and risk assessments and
how to integrate data on ecosystems.
114 115
10
RISK ASSESSMENTS “Individual risk is the predicted increase in the chance of fatality per year
to an individual due to a potential hazard. The individual risk guidelines
Since risk assessments often require quite involved data collection and
require that the maximum level of individual risk should not exceed 1 in
expertise, we often find that many NGOs and local governments focus
100,000 per year i.e. 1 x 10-5 per year. Societal risk expresses the risks
on vulnerability and hazard assessments. But in order to develop the
to the whole population. The HKRG is presented graphically in Figure
complete risk assessment, the final piece of data we need is on exposure.
10.5 in terms of lines plotting the frequency (F) of N or more deaths in
Data on exposure can be collected from satellite images, household
the population from incidents at the installation. Two F-N risk lines are
surveys or other population statistics.
used in the HKRG that demark “acceptable” or “unacceptable” societal
The risk assessment usually takes the form of a risk map (Figure 10.4) risks. The intermediate region indicates the acceptability of societal
risk is borderline and should be reduced to a level which is “as low as is
Figure 10.4 reasonably practicable” (ALARP). It seeks to ensure that all practicable and
Tsunami risk map for City of Galle, cost effective measures that can reduce risk will be considered.”3
Sri Lanka.
© Hettiarachchi/UNDP 2011 Various community risk assessment tools are available, ranging from
participatory mapping of risks and resources to a social or institutional
network analysis. Especially for the development context, various
handbooks on participatory assessments have been developed by
international institutions such as CARE or UNEP to address both CCA and
DRR in the context of better environmental management (see box below).
EXAMPLES FOR COMMUNITY RISK AND VULNERABILITY

ASSESSMENT TOOLS
A well-developed risk map will show areas at high, medium to low risk CRiSTAL– Community-Based Risk Screening Tool – Adaptation
and will qualify what this means in terms of expected return periods of and Livelihoods is a tool designed to help project planners and
the hazard. The scale can be a neighbourhood, a district or even global managers integrate climate change adaptation and risk reduction
depending on the scope. Thus, quite a lot of data and expertise are into community-level projects. Developed by IISD, SEI and IUCN.
required to develop risk maps. (https://www.iisd.org/cristaltool/)
Risk can also be represented as risk curves. For example, societal risk Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis Handbook,
represented in Frequency and Number of Fatalities Curves (F-N Curves) developed by CARE, which assesses hazard impacts on
F-N curves or annualized risk total in probabilities and losses. F-N curves each of the five categories of livelihood resources and
relate the probability per year of causing N or more fatalities (F) to N. provides a framework for community-based adaptation.
Such curves can be used to express social risk criteria and safety levels (http://www.careclimatechange.org/index.php?option=com_
of facilities. Figure 10.5 illustrates the Hong Kong Government Risk contentandview=articleandid=25andItemid=30)
Guidelines (HKGRG), which were developed for a hazardous installation The Vulnerability and Impact Assessments for Adaptation to
but also provides a good example for natural hazards using a F-N curve. Climate Change – VIA Module (UNEP), which assesses climate
change impacts on ecosystems and human well-being.
Figure 10.5 (http://www.UNEP.org/ieacp/climate/)
Hong Kong Government Risk 10-2 CEDRA – The Climate Change and Environmental Degradation
Guidelines for hazardous Risk and Adaptation assessment
installations and example
Frequency (F) of accidents with N or More Fatalities
10-3 (by Tearfund) analyses risks posed by climate change and

of F-N curve.
UNEP, modified from HKGRG UNACCEPTABLE environmental degradation and supports NGOs in understanding
10-4 communities’ experiences of environmental change. (http://tilz.
tearfund.org/en/themes/environment_and_climate/cedra/)
10-5
(per year)
ALARP region
10-6
10-7
ACCEPTABLE
10-8
10-9
10 100 1000 10000
Number of Fatalities (N)
3 Source:http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/register/report/eiareport/eia_1252006/html/eiareport/Part2/Section13/Sec2_13.htm
116 117
10
CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS THE RISK AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
For CCA purposes, assessments undertaken are generally Vulnerability DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (RiVAMP)
and Impact Assessments (VIA). They involve similar steps to those RiVAMP (UNEP 2010) was conceived to develop an assessment tool that
described above but additionally focus on future climate change scenarios takes into account ecosystems and climate change factors in the analysis
to assess vulnerability to and impact from climate change. There exist of disaster risk and vulnerability. Implemented in 2009, the project aimed
different climate models at global and regional scales as well as different to assist national and local government decision makers in evaluating their
scenarios for future change (IPCC 2013) that can be used to predict future development options effectively by recognizing the role of ecosystems
vulnerability. These are often also analysed and presented in map form in reducing risk and adapting to climate change impacts. It involved a
or a matrix form. Depending on the scale of the assessment, however, scientific assessment, which undertook remote sensing to identify
the use of global or regional models is not possible because they are too ecosystem functions, modelling of exposure to storms and statistical
coarse. Another option is creating future scenarios with stakeholders and analysis, and stakeholder consultations to identify the main drivers of
deriving future risk that way (see WWF 2013 for steps for a VIA for EbA). ecosystem degradation and assess awareness of environmental and
disaster linkages.
10.3 Integrating ecosystems in risk assessment It specifically targeted Small Island Development States (SIDS) and
and mapping other coastal areas that are highly vulnerable and exposed to tropical
cyclones and related hazards (storm surges, landslides, flooding) and
Each step of the risk assessment process can be related to ecosystem to accelerated sea level rise. The RiVAMP methodology was pilot tested
conditions and ecosystem mapping. Adding one more layer of data on in Jamaica. It uses information such as location of key ecosystems
ecosystems can improve vulnerability, hazard and risk assessments (Figure 10.6), waves and currents and modelling how corals reduce wave
by providing additional information on the interface between the risk height (Figure 10.7) in order to map the exposure of population and assets
components and ecosystem properties. Depending on the level of the to storms with different return cycles (Figure 10.8).
assessment, you can use qualitative data from communities on how well
their ecosystems protect them from hazards or you can include more
formal data on ecosystem services, either through natural resources or
habitat surveys. You could also include not just the location of key habitats
but also information on their level of health or degradation which affects
their protection or buffering functions against a certain hazard. This
may require working across disciplines, i.e. with biologists or ecosystem
experts in order to integrate such information.
There are various open source models that can be used for modelling the
relationship between natural capital, or ecosystem services and hazards,
such as InVEST by the Natural Capital Project (see Chapter 11).
Figure 10.7
Figure 10.6
Modeling waves and currents. Numerical model results for wave heights (a)
Habitats of Negril, Jamaica.
and wave-induced currents (b) at the Negril coast. Conditions: Offshore wave
© UNEP 2010
height (Hrms) = 2.8m, Tp= 8.7s. Waves approach from the northwest. Note Figure 10.8. Exposure of population and assets to ten-year return period storms (top) and
the diminishing wave heights and changed nearshore flow patterns at the lee fifty-year periods storms (bottom). Return period exposure for a) population, b) asset
of the shallow coral reefs. © UNEP 2010. © UNEP 2010.
118 119
10
Figure 10.9 Figure 10.10
Shoreline erosion over time as Example of input (ecosystem
compared to ecosystem services. coverage, hazard exposure) and
© UNEP 2010 output (risk reduction. opportunity
at global and national level).
© UNEP 2019
Table 10.1
Tsunami Cyclone wind Cyclone surge Landslide Flood Selected hazard-
The RiVAMP project conducted by UNEP in Negril, Jamaica, also ecosystem
Forest ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ combinations
developed a methodology for assessing the relation between ecosystem
services, in this case coral reefs, and seagrasses in relation to coastal
Mangrove ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✗ (✓= applies,
erosion (Figure 10.9). This hazard map shows how degradation of the Sea grass ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ = does not apply)
Source: UNEP/GRID-
coastal ecosystem services led to increased coastal erosion of one of Geneva, 2016
Coral reef ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✗
Jamaica’s most famous beaches, Negril. It also compares coastal erosion
over two time periods 1968-2006 and 2006-2008.
The project involved community consultations and mapping to document Each ecosystem-hazard combination is split into six categories which
environmental changes that have led to increased vulnerability of the represent the potential of the ecosystem type in reducing exposure to that
community in Negril. By doing so, it helped raise awareness among local specific hazard and the recommended Eco-DRR action (Figure 10.11).
stakeholders about the importance of protecting its natural infrastructure. Using six categories allows the user to easily differentiate colours on
maps and figures and identify:
UNEP OPPORTUNITY MAPPING FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION INITIATIVE the level of exposure for a given hazard;
This initiative has developed global datasets to visually compare on a the level of coverage by a given ecosystem;
Figure 10.11
global-scale map, ecosystem cover and population exposure to hazards the type of priority action to be undertaken. Eco-DRR opportunity categories.
in order to find opportunity areas where ecosystem management © UNEP 2019
By comparing the categories on the map, the user can identify areas
(restoration or conservation) can be used to protect the highest number where ecosystem-based solutions can be applied to reduce exposure, and
of people (Figure 10.10). the type of action required (ecosystem protection or restoration).
Datasets on different types of ecosystems and physical exposure to Two types of products are available:
various natural hazards are aggregated globally on a 10 x 10 kilometre
resolution grid. The area covered by each ecosystem type is measured, A “Global” product which allows comparison between countries.
and the physical exposure of the population calculated for each grid cell. In this product, the Eco-DRR opportunity categories are relative to all
other countries in the world and the resolution is coarse
A given hazard exposure is then combined with a given type of ecosystem (10x10 km grid).
coverage. As each ecosystem type is only effective for exposure reduction
of specific types of hazards (e.g. corals can reduce cyclone surge and “National” products which allows analysis for certain countries. In this
tsunamis but have no influence on landslide hazards), cross-mapping product, Eco-DRR opportunity categories are only relative to other
between ecosystem coverage and hazard exposure was performed only grid cells within the same country and the spatial resolution is higher,
with a selection of ecosystem-hazard combination (Table 10.1). depending on data availability.
120 121
10
According to OECD (2012), there is a need to develop and share best Alliance Development Works and United Nations University Talbot, J.and Jakeman, M. (2015). The external context –
practices, methodologies and standards to ensure data harmonization (2013). World Risk Report. Berlin: Alliance Development what’s outside the door? Risk the effect of uncertainty
and standardization initiatives for calculating risk. There are a few Works. http://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU:2018/ on objectives. http://31000risk.blogspot.fr/2011_04_01_
WorldRiskReport_2013_online_01.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019. archive.html Accessed 26 July 2019.
initiatives for harmonization such as the Integrated Research on Disaster
Risk (IRDR), the International Disaster Database (EM-DAT), DesInventar, Höppner, C., Bründl, M. and Buchecker, M. (2010). Risk UNEP (2010). Risk and Vulnerability Assessment
UNEP’s PREVIEW and the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) (see “data Communication and Natural Hazards. Birmensdorf: CapHaz- Methodology Development Project (RiVAMP) Linking
sources” below). However, with few exceptions there has been little Net WP5 Report, Swiss Federal Research Institute. WSL. Ecosystems to Risk and Vulnerability Reduction, The
https://www.wsl.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/WSL/Projekte/ Case of Jamaica, Results of Pilot Assessment. Geneva:
attempt to incorporate data on ecosystem degradation or ecosystem
CAPHAZ/CapHaz-Net_WP5_Report_final.pdf Accessed UNEP Division of Environmental Policy Implementation
services as part of risk assessments. The few exceptions include the 25 July 2019. (DEPI). https://www.preventionweb.net/files/13205_
RiVAMP project, the UNU World Risk Report (2013) and the PREVIEW RiVAMPexsummary.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
Global Risk Data Platform. There are also very few examples of risk IPCC (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth UNISDR (2017). Disaster terminology. http://www.unisdr.
assessments that consider green infrastructure as alternative scenarios
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on org/we/inform/terminology Accessed 25 July 2019.
to grey infrastructure for reducing risk, where appropriate. This is thus a Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M.
new area of research and innovation that is still in its infancy. van Westen, C., van Asch, T. & Soeters, R. Landslide hazard
Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and
and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol
P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
Environ (2006) 65: 167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-
University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/
005-0023-0
2018/02/WG1AR5_all_final.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
WWF (2013). Operational Framework for Ecosystem-based
McAdoo, B.G., Dengler, L., Eeri, M., Prasetya, G. and Titov,
Adaptation: Implementing and Mainstreaming Ecosystem-
V. (2006). Smong: How an Oral History Saved Thousands
based Adaptation Responses in the Greater Mekong Sub-
on Indonesia’s Simeulue Island During the December 2004
Region. Gland: WWF. http://awsassets.panda.org/downloads/
and March 2005 Tsunamis’. Earthquake Spectra, 22(S3),
wwf_wb_eba_project_2014_gms_ecosystem_based_
661–69. DOI: 10.1193/1.2204966.
adaptation_general_framework.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
OECD (2012). Global Modeling of Natural Hazard Risks:
Zimmermann, M., Pozzi, A. and Stoessel, F. (2005).
Enhancing Existing Capabilities to Address New Challenges.
Vademecum, Hazard Maps and Related Instruments. The
Paris: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/sti/sci-tech/Final%20
Swiss System and its Application Abroad, Capitalization of
GRMI%20report.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
Experience. Bern: PLANAT/Swiss Development Cooperation
Pigeon, P. (2017). Dike Risk: An Applied Issue Revealing http://www.planat.ch/fileadmin/PLANAT/planat_pdf/
Academic Links Between Disaster Risk Reduction, alle_2012/2001-2005/PLANAT_2005_-_Vademecum.pdf
Sustainable Development, Climate Change And Migration. Accessed 25 July, 2019.
In Identifying Emerging Issues In Disaster Risk Reduction,
Migration, Climate Change And Sustainable Development.
Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Fernandez, M., Penna, I., Jaboyedoff,
M., and Gaillard, J.C. (eds.). New York: Springer. 67-80. DOI:
10.1007/978-3-319-33880-4_5.
DATA SOURCES
DESINVENTAR website: NatCatSERVICE – Munich Re website:
http://www.desinventar.org/ http://www.munichre.com/natcatservice
EM-DAT website: PREVIEW Global Risk Data Platform –
http://www.emdat.be/ UNEP/ GRID website:
https://preview.grid.unep.ch/
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR THIS CHAPTER GRID (Global Resource Information Database).
https://unepgrid.ch/en
Opportunity mapping
http://EcoDRRmapping.grid.UNEP.ch.
Coastal Restoration and Superstorm Sandy
http://cdnapi.kaltura.com/index.php/extwidget/preview/partner_
id/1012331/uiconf_id/24075381/entry_id/0_s8hef17v/embed/
dynamic
Information on RiVamp
https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/report/risk-and-
vulnerability-assessment-methodology-development-project-
rivamp-linking
122 123
11
11.1 Spatial planning to reduce risks
Chapter 11 from disasters
First of all, it is important to differentiate between planning and
Planning tools for ecoystem- management tools and formal processes (Figure 11.1). Planning can
be described as a future-oriented approach to allocate land to certain
based disaster risk reduction purposes while management aims to achieve or maintaining a certain
and adaptation ecosystem status. Formal process such as environmental impact

assessments are also important to consider. Chapter 13 will follow up on
the management tools in more detail.
Key questions
What planning tools exist to inform
Eco-DRR/EbA?
How can spatial data, GIS and remote sensing
be used for Eco-DRR/EbA?
What is an environmental impact assessment
and how can it contribute to Eco-DRR/EbA?
Figure 11.1
Planning can involve both non-spatial and spatial elements. Non-spatial Planning and Management
Approaches appropriate for
elements can be the enumeration of the resources required, the time-
reducing disaster risks
frame the plan will cover, the strategies and actions, the actors involved, © S. Sandholz
etc. The spatial element is of vital importance when planning to reduce
risks from disasters because disasters strike areas or regions. Thus,
making a spatial plan, whether local, regional or global, helps to prescribe,
regulate and determine land utilization for various purposes, such as
agriculture, industrial sites, human settlements or protected areas. This
is increasingly difficult due to the growing population around the globe.
A spatial plan made on a large scale serves as a basis upon which more
detailed plans for urban or rural areas are formulated or upon which sector
plans for agriculture or infrastructure development are made. Spatial
plans play a significant and influential role in preventing or mitigating
losses from hazards and managing environmental risks, because they
determine the physical location of activities and investments. In addition,
they are increasingly important for CCA – including EbA – to determine
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/ areas for action.
UNEP
124 125
11
GOALS OF SPATIAL PLANNING 11.2 Participatory rural appraisals for ecosystem-
Organize land uses and the basis for subsequent urban planning
or land use planning in rural/semi-rural areas (which is then
based disaster risk reduction and adaptation
more detailed); Participatory rural appraisals (PRA), also called Participatory Learning
Promote sustainable development (social, environmental, economic); for Action (PLA), are an important planning tool used in development
projects because they aim to incorporate and use the knowledge and
Develop access to information and knowledge; opinions of the local people (Chambers 1994). They are also non-
Enhance and protect natural resources and cultural heritage; technology dependant like some mapping or modelling methods often
Find a balance among multiple demands and competing interests; used for planning, which can therefore be more accessible as well as
more inclusive. PRA’s aim to be as inclusive as possible and thus often
Reduce the impacts of hazard events by: restricting development use methods of communication and information gathering that does not
in hazard prone areas; accommodating and planning land require writing. Symbols, drawings and oral communications are used
use according to levels of risk; zoning and coding; designing such as participatory mapping (Figure 11.3).
infrastructures for hazard reduction.
Some of the main tools used in PRA are:
Case Study Focus groups and (semi-structured) interviews, consultations
The Netherlands “Room for the River” programme aims to reduce flood Community mapping, matrix scoring, ranking, timelines,
risks while improving quality of life for people living near rivers. It is seasonal calendars
based on spatial planning and allocating space for different purposes
Participatory maps, transect walks, diagrams
(Figure 11.2). The main goal is to increase the safety and improve the
overall environmental quality of Dutch river regions by allocating extra
Figure 11.3
room for its rivers. Many of the contentious issues involved in spatial Participatory risk mapping using
planning revolve around the fact that different sectors value land coconut leaves in Solomon Island.
differently and these values are often in conflict. Land-use planning occurs © J.C. Gaillard
within a political context and oftentimes, short-term gains take priority
over what is sustainable and what will be safe in the future. Such conflicts
are logically aggravated by land scarcity, for example in the Netherlands,
where limited land resources have to be allocated wisely while allowing
for future development and to adapt to climate change impacts. Here the
exposed areas along the rivers are no longer considered as constructible
zones, in order to reduce flood risks.
The Room for River programme illustrates that spatial planning is always
a compromise: if the river banks and retention areas are no longer
designated for human use land resources need to be allocated elsewhere
for development. This is where involving communities in the decision-
making process is critical in order to navigate the trade-offs and forge
sustainable solutions.
Figure 11.2
11.3 Geographic information systems and
River restoration in Netherlands. remote sensing for ecosystem-based disaster
© M. van Staveren
risk reduction and adaptation
Spatial data refers to any geographically referenced data (do Carmo Dias
Bueno 2011). It means that data are connected to a place on the Earth.
GIS, which is short for Geographic Information Systems, is an information
or computer system to input, retrieve, process, analyze and output multiple
layers of spatial data. A GIS is composed of hardware, software, data and
brainware (or the user). Within a GIS, different information layers can be
overlaid due to its spatial reference. One of the most important uses of GIS
and its capabilities for spatial analysis is to support decision making on
land use planning. It can be a great tool for decisions about risk reduction
and adaptation. Input data can range from cartographic maps, to field
126 127
11
data and satellite images. The most common outputs from GIS software To use GIS to support this Eco-DRR/EbA project, first baseline data
are maps, statistics and tables, charts or databases (Figure 11.4). on demographics and geo-physical data such as elevation, water
GIS was for example used to support Eco-DRR/EbA in a small municipality depth and type of shoreline were gathered to better understand the
in the South of Haiti (Figures 11.5, Figure 11.6). The south of Haiti is area (Figure 11.7 and 11.8). These maps were also complemented by
frequently hit by storms, which cause storm surges and flooding. As information provided by the local community regarding historical records
discussed in earlier chapters, coastal ecosystems, such as coral reefs, of storms and changes in ecosystems.
sand dunes, seagrass beds and mangroves, can reduce the impact
of storms and subsequent flooding. But like many areas of Haiti,
the degradation of ecosystems has resulted in higher risk in this
municipality. Since 2013, UNEP has been working with the community
and the municipal government to protect the coastal habitats and reduce
disaster risk. As a large portion of the population relies directly on coastal
ecosystems for livelihoods, protection of ecosystems can also reduce
population vulnerability.
Figure 11.4
Geographic information for spatial
planning and risk assessments.
Design: S. Plog
Figure 11.7
Figure 11.8
Satellite images of the shoreline in Port Salut over
Location of exposed buildings to river flooding
the years suggest that the sandy beach is
(within 25 m of water channels) and coastal flooding
experiencing erosion.
(within 50 m of the coastline).
© UNEP 2016
© UNEP 2016
Then remote sensing was used to map the existing ecosystems. Remote
sensing can be used to monitor ecosystems or land use. For example,
satellite images can show changes in the extent of forests or wetlands
over time. It can also be used to assess hazards and exposure, for
example to track hurricanes or model floods. Remote sensing can provide
information that can be used in land use planning for example to reduce
impact of urban growth on the environment or prevent sprawl into hazard-
prone areas (NOAA 2015).
Figure 11.5 Figure 11.6
Port Salut (South Department) where fishing provides vital income. Map of Port Salut, Haiti.
© UNEP © UNEP
128 129
11
Figure 11.10
DEFINITION: Resilience Exposure scenarios with and
“Remote sensing is the science without habitat.
© UNEP
of obtaining information
about objects or areas from
a distance, typically from
aircraft or satellites.”
NOAA 2015
For more information about

remote-sensing, please
refer to additional material:
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/
earth-sciences/geomatics/
satellite-imagery-air-photos/
satellite-imagery- products/
educational-resources/9309)
Figure 11.9
Port Salut habitat map based
on remote sensing and ground-
truthed through marine and
terrestrial field surveys.
© UNEP
A high resolution satellite image of the municipality of Port Salut was used
to map the existing natural coastal ecosystems. A field survey was used to
As with any models, InVEST also has its limitations. Furthermore, the
verify, or ground-truth the map and add information about the degradation
terminology used is based on the IPCC terminology prior to 2014, and
or health status of coastal habitats using Geographic Positioning System
thus is different from the UNDRR terminology. However, it is currently one
(GPS) devices. The result is a map the types of ecosystems and their
of the most advanced open source models available for producing various
location (Figure 11.9).
scenarios of exposure (InVEST refers to this as vulnerability) considering
This information was then applied in an open source GIS model, InVEST ecosystem services.
The Natural Capital Project (Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Tradeoffs) developed
“The Natural Capital Project by the Natural Capital Project. InVEST is a suite of modelling tools that SPATIAL MULTI-CRITERIA EVALUATIONS (SMCE)
aims to align economic forces map, measure and value the goods and services that sustain human life When resources are limited and several objectives exist that cannot be
with conservation. We are while providing several scenarios. met simultaneously, we speak of a decision problem. In such situations
an innovative partnership The InVEST Coastal Vulnerability Model was used to determine what we turn to spatial decision support systems or spatial planning support
between Stanford University, areas of the coastline are more exposed to flooding and storm surges, and systems that help us to make judgments about the facts or expected facts
The Nature Conservancy, where habitat conservation or restoration can reduce exposure to hazards we obtain from GIS and models. They assist individuals to analyze trade-
World Wildlife Fund, and (Figure 11.10). This model is unique because it includes the protective offs, assist groups to understand where compromises can be found and
the University of Minnesota role of habitats in the exposure assessment. The model was run multiple layout possible pathways to make gradual improvements toward several
working together to value times with different scenarios of habitat degradation. Figure 11.10 objectives (Boerboom et al. 2009).
nature’s benefits to society. shows that under current conditions only some parts of the municipality
We develop tools that make For example, imagine that the government of a fictional island is proposing
are highly exposed to storms. But if all habitats were to be destroyed in a number of measures to reduce risk. A first step will be to determine which
it easy to incorporate natural the future, most of the municipality would be highly exposed to coastal
capital into decisions, apply measures are the best based on a number of stakeholder-determined
hazards. This is where conservation and restoration of seagrasses, coral criteria. These could be economic, social, and ecological suitability as well
these tools in select places reefs, mangroves and coastal vegetation would reduce exposure of the
around the world, and engage as hazard mitigation benefits. Layers of data can then be overlaid in a
municipality while providing livelihoods benefits. GIS to find the most optimal alternatives for risk reduction, which can
leaders to transform decision
making by taking up this The outputs of the InVEST model are being used in decision making related for instance be mangrove restoration along the coastline or establishing
approach.” to land use planning and conservation. In 2013, Port Salut was designated protection forests on steep mountain slopes.
https://naturalcapitalproject. as one of Haiti’s first marine protected areas and the results of the spatial
stanford.edu/ analysis are being the basis in the development of a management plan
for the protected area.
130 131
11
DEFINITION: 11.4 Environmental impact assessments Next are measures to minimize negative effects on site, or alternatively
or additionally some compensation, for example some river renaturation
Environmental impact An Environmental Impact Assessment or EIA is a formalized and project (Figure 11.14) which is not in the dam site. Step six involves
assessement systematic process to identify and evaluate the environmental impacts analyzing whether impacts that cannot be mitigated are acceptable.
“an analytical process that of a proposed project, such as a road, a dam or some industrial site. EIA Then finally, to approve or reject the dam project, an environmental impact
systematically examines can involve the construction, operation, extension, modification or even statement report is developed. As a follow-up and last step, a monitoring
the possible environmental decommissioning of such projects. The need for an EIA depends on process is established to see the project impacts and how effective the
consequences of the the scale of the project, its location, and the nature and magnitude of mitigation measures are.
implementation of projects, the potential environmental impacts. For example, the World Bank has
Increasingly, the EIA is mandatory for planning projects. It is a must in
programmes and policies” established three categories:
most European countries. It can also serve for Eco-DRR/EbA, especially if
Glossary of Environment Statistics, a. ‘likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts beyond the it incorporates an assessment of risk.
Studies in Methods, Series F, No. 67, project area’ and thus requiring a full or comprehensive EIA;
In summary, EIA is a very helpful tool for better decision making and
United Nations, New York, 1997.
b. ‘site-specific potential adverse environmental impacts’ which require is used worldwide. But it has its limitations. Indeed, the problems of
a limited EIA coherence of EIA for international bilateral aid were addressed by the
c. not requiring an EIA Working Party of the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD
(OECD 2016). A practical guide on this subject was prepared to help both
(World Bank Operational Policy 4.01, Environmental Assessment,
officials in bilateral donor agencies and their counterparts in developing
January 1999).
countries. It summarizes the various EIA procedures used by the different
Environmental Impact Assessments address goods and services to be agencies and provides two key means of promoting coherence:
protected - they are very similar to ecosystem services as you can see in A framework Terms of Reference for the EIA of development
Figure 11.12. assistance projects; and
Figure 11.12 OBJECTS OF CULTURAL VALUE AND OTHER MATERIAL GOODS A comprehensive checklist for managing EIA.
Goods and Services to be (OECD 2016)
protected in EIAs.
Credits: S. Sandholz and M. Khalifa; LANDSCAPE SCENERY SOILS EIAs are part of an integrated planning process to the extent that two main
Design: S. Plog types of legal provisions are taken into account: general environmental
or resource management law, which incorporates EIA requirements and
EIA
FLORA, FAUNA AND
BIODIVERSITY
HFA procedures; and an EIA specific law, which can either be comprehensive
or take the form of a framework or enabling statute. However, there is no
Figure 11.14
GROUNDWATER single EIA model appropriate for all countries: for example, some have
River renaturation in Germany.
AND SURFACE WATER established a separate EIA authority while in others, the EIA process is © Zumbroich Consulting
administered by environment departments or by the planning authorities.
HUMANS & THEIR HEALTH, Canada has distinguished its EIA process by applying it only to projects
LIVING & RECREATION ENVIRONMENT CLIMATE AND AIR
and it applies strategic environmental analysis (SEA) for policy and plans.
See below for more information on SEAs.
An EIA is composed of ten steps (Figure 11.13). Consider a plan to
construct a dam. The first step is screening to see if an EIA is required. This HOW DO EIAS RELATE TO ECO-DRR/EBA?
may depend on the country, the project size or the area. If so, the second By expanding EIAs to incorporate DRR and CCA, they have the potential to
step is scoping to identify important impacts the dam construction would be a powerful tool into which disaster risk and climate change concerns
have. This is followed by an examination of alternatives. The fourth step can be integrated with development activities. EIAs should also be fully
is an analysis of the impacts the dam might have. integrated into activities in the post-disaster period in order to help prevent
disaster recurrence and to promote sustainability.
Figure 11.13 EIA steps. L IMPACT ASSESSMENT Early EIAs focused primarily on the impacts of a project to the natural
E NTA
Credits: S. Sandholz and M. Khalifa;
O NM SCREENING 1 or biophyiscal environment (e.g. effects on air and water quality). Over
Design: S. Plog time, increased considerations have been given to the social, health and
R
2
SCOPING
VI
ecological consequences of projects. This trend has been driven partly

EN
EXAMINATION OF ALTERNATIVES 3
by public involvement in the EIA process and is reflected in the evolving
4
IMPACT ANALYSIS definition of environmental EIA legislation, guidance and practice, which
MITIGATION AND IMPACT MANAGEMENT/COMPENSATION 5 include effects on, among others: human health and safety or on use of
6
EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
land, natural resources and raw materials (Bhatt and Khanal 2009).
FOLLOW-UP
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) REPORT 7 Although national policies that integrate environment and DRR are more
8
pronounced in developed than in developing countries, the Philippines
EIS REVIEW
offers an interesting example. In 2011, the Department of Environment and
10
DECISION MAKING 9
132 133
11
Resources developed guidelines for integrating DRR and CCA strategies macro level and has established an environmental framework for its
in its EIA processes (see Box). country assistance strategies: it intends to make greater use of SEAs
As illustrated in the Philippines’ example, disaster risk analyses can be at programme and regional levels. Indeed, the World Bank’s broader
incorporated into the EIA process. Information generated by EIAs can environmental policy has moved from a ‘do no harm’ approach to
help improve early warning because the EIA process can provide data for minimizing the adverse effects of its projects, to the use of SEAs as part of
risk mapping and scenario building in relation to the potential impacts a strategy of promoting long-term sustainability (UNEP 2002). Therefore,
of projects. Hence, EIAs can be applied to help assess the conditions of an increasing number of developed countries and countries in transition
hazards and patterns of vulnerability in the context of the developmental now make formal provisions for SEA of policies, plans and programmes.
planning process. EIA reports also include an environmental monitoring Many developing countries also have planning systems that include
plan. Monitoring parameters usually can cover early signals of potential elements of SEA. Indeed, the legal, policy and institutional arrangements
risks. EIAs applied in the disaster prevention and mitigation phase for SEA are more varied than those for project EIA.
can help inform planning for DRR, for instance by providing guidance SEAs and EIAs also have many similarities and a common foundation. SEAs
on choices mitigation methods (Gupta and Yunus 2004), technology were developed largely as a response to the levels and types of decision-
investments and site locations for activities. making not covered by EIA. In doing so, SEAs have derived, adapted
In a post-disaster context, conducting a rapid environmental assessment and implemented EIA arrangements, procedures and methodologies,
(REA) helps to ensure that sustainability concerns are factored into the particularly at the plan and programme levels. Other process models
relief, reconstruction and recovery planning stages (Gupta et al. 2002). The also have been adapted, particularly at the policy level where integrative
REA does not replace an EIA but fills a gap in an emergency context until appraisal and environmental “tests” compress the basic steps followed in
an EIA can be appropriately conducted. To conclude on EIA legislations, EIAs, such as screening and reporting.
here is a summary of EIA key international developments. HOW DO SEAS RELATE TO ECO-DRR/EBA?
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS In contrast to EIAs, SEAs generally have a broader focus on integrating
Although EIAs have the significant advantage of being one of the few environmental considerations into policies, plans or programmes at the
legally binding environmental instruments, another limitation is that EIAs earliest stages of strategic decision-making. They may be applied to a
do not analyse cumulative and large scale environmental and social specific sector or geographical area and ideally prior to the identification
impacts. Thus, to overcome this limitation, the Strategic Environmental and design of individual projects. For example, in Sri Lanka, the Government
Analysis (SEA) was developed. They can be defined as “analytical and in collaboration with UNDP and UNEP undertook an Integrated Strategic
participatory approaches to strategic decision-making that aim to integrate Environmental Assessment (ISEA) process that took into account major
environmental considerations into policies, plans and programmes, and hazards (storm surges, flooding, strong winds, sea level rise and tsunami)
evaluate the interlinkages with economic and social considerations” in defining a sustainable development framework for post-conflict
(OECD-DAC 2006). rebuilding in its Northern Province (PEDRR 2011).
The World Bank has reviewed the policies of the energy, rural development
and other sectors, in order to integrate environmental concerns at the
Key international developments in EIA law, policy and institutional arrangements
in the last decade:
EIA DRR/CCA Guidelines in the Philippines
Rio Declaration on Environment and Development EC Directive on SEA of certain plans and
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Technical These Guidelines were formulated to provide EIA
calls for use of EIA as an instrument of national programmes (2001) which is to be implemented by
Guidelines for Incorporating Disaster Risk Reduction practitioners and stakeholders with:
decision-making (Principle 17); other principles member states by 2004.
(DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) an understanding of the implications of disaster also relevant to EIA practice (e.g. Principle 15 on UNECE (or Espoo) Convention on EIA in a
concerns in the Philippine Environmental Impact and climate change risks in relation to the the application of the precautionary approach). Transboundary Context (1991) entered into force
Statement System (PEISS; EIA DRR/CCA Technical preparation of an EIA Report;
Guidelines), adopted by Department of Environment UN Conventions on Climate Change and Biological in 1997 as the first EIA-specific international treaty.
direction on a project-specific basis on how Diversity (1992) cite EIA as an implementing
and Resources, Republic of Philippines in 2011, Doha Ministerial Declaration encourages
disaster risks and climate change need to be mechanism (Articles 4 and 14 respectively refer).
intend to promote CCA and DRR at the project level, countries to share expertise and experience with
considered in an EIA;
as well as to streamline EIA requirements under the EIA requirements and procedures applied by Members wishing to perform environmental
PEISS. Specifically, the Guidelines aim to: sources of information for use in assessing international financial and aid agencies to loans reviews at the national level (November 2001).
disaster risks and climate change implications, and projects in developing countries.
provide enhanced standards for the preparation UNECE (or Aarhus) Convention on Access to
and guidance in incorporating DRR and CCA
of EIA Reports that are customized for specific Amendment of EC Directive on EIA (1997) Information, Public Participation in Decision
considerations into the EIA process.
industry types as required under the PEISS; and required all member states to be in compliance Making and Access to Justice in Environmental
to provide guidance for project proponents in Thummarukudy and Kanwar 2014 by 1999; also being transposed into the EIA laws Matters (1998) covers the decisions at the level of
integrating DRR and CCA concerns in the project of certain countries in transition, which are in the projects and plans, programmes and policies and,
planning stage through the EIA Process to process of accession to the European Union. by extension, applies to EIA and SEA (Articles 6
facilitate review and implementation of projects and 7 respectively refer).
by incorporating international best practices. UNEP 2002
134 135
11
Additional resources 11.5 Conclusions REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
for this chapter Spatial tools are extremely promising for Eco-DRR/EbA. The example Abaza, H., Bisset, R. and Sadler, B. (2004). Environmental PEDRR (2011). Demonstrating the Role of Ecosystem-based
Blue Solutions is a global from Haiti is only one of the endless possibilities of applying GIS and Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Management for Disaster Risk Reduction. 2011 Global
remote sensing to support spatial analysis and decision making. As with Assessment: Towards an Integrated Approach. Geneva: Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. PEDRR.
platform to collate share
many other tools that we will be exploring, we find that spatial tools have UNEP. https://unep.ch/etu/publications/textONUBr.pdf https://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2011/
and generate knowledge Accessed 26 July 2019. en/bgdocs/PEDRR_2010.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019.
and capacity for sustainable been used for collecting data and tracking ecosystem health on the one
management and equitable hand, and on the other for assessing post-disaster damages. It is only Bhatt, R.P and Khanal, S.K. (2009). Environmental Impact Sadler, B. (1999). A framework for environmental,
recently that we are finding an emerging interest in merging these two Assessment System in Nepal – An Overview of Policy, Legal sustainability assessment and assurance. Handbook of
governance of our blue planet:
applications, for example using spatial data on ecosystem services for Instruments and process. Kathmandu University Journal of environmental impact assessment, Oxford: Blackwell.
http://bluesolutions.info/ Science, Engineering and Technology, 5(2), 160-170. DOI:
disaster prevention or to improve land use planning and research on Eco- Sadler, B. (1996). Environmental Assessment in a changing
Marine Spatial Planning 10.4314/ajest.v4i9.71316.
DRR/EbA. Despite the opportunities, accurate and high-resolution spatial world: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance.
Concierge, a website to Boerboom, L., Flacke, J., Sharifi, A. and Atlan, O. (2009). International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental
data may be lacking for many parts of the world, which can be a limitation
facilitate marine spatial Web-based spatial multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) software. Assessment. Ottawa: International Association for Impact
to applying this tool. But certain software, such as InVEST models can be
planning. http://geointerest. https://www.academia.edu/27497880/Web-Based_Spatial_ Assessment/Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
applied even in data poor countries. And fortunately, most countries are
frih.org/msp/ Multi-Criteria_Evaluation_SMCE_Software Accessed
now investing in spatial data infrastructure. Sadler, B. and Verheem, R. (1996). Strategic environmental
25 July 2019.
For free SMCE software, assessment: key issues emerging from recent practice.
Most of the tools and approaches presented above are not new and have Chambers, R. (1994). The Origins and Practice of The Hague: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and
developed by ITC:
been the mainstay of natural resources management for decades. What Participatory Rural Appraisal. World Development, 22(7), the Environment.
http://www.itc.nl/ilwis/
is innovative is the greater emphasis on combining land use planning 953-969. DOI: 10.1016/0305-750X(94)90141-4.
downloads/ilwis33.asp Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2012).
and community-based natural resources management with risk reduction do Carmo Dias Bueno, M. (2011). Spatial Data: Use Cities and Biodiversity Outlook. Montreal: Secretariat
NASA ARSET for applied (see next chapters), yet such approaches are yet to be mainstreamed. and Dissemination. IBGE. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/ of the Convention on Biological Diversity. https://
remote sensing training Fortunately, in many countries a risk assessment or risk zoning is demographic/meetings/wshops/Chile_31May11/docs/ sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1104cbo-
and free webinars. mandatory for land use planning approaches (e.g. the consideration of country/brazil02-s10.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019. action-policy-en.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019.
http://arset.gsfc.nasa.gov/ flood, storm, earthquake or avalanche risk zones as done in Austria or Gupta, A.K., Kumar, A., Misra, J, and Yunus, M. (2002). Thummarukudy, M. and Sharma Kanwar, S. (2014).
For GIS software for flooding in the Netherlands). While this is a promising development, Environmental Impact Assessment and Disaster BACKGROUND PAPER Prepared for the 2015 Global
and applications: growing pressures due to population growth, a growing demand for land Management: Emerging Disciplines of Higher Education Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015:
http://freegis.org/ and increasing risks induced by climate change impacts are resulting in and Practice. In Environmental Education. Srivastava, P. and Disaster Risk Reduction is an integral objective of
new planning challenges. At the same time, community involvement is Singh, D.P. (eds.). New Delhi: Anmol Publishers. 7- 23. DOI: environment related policies and plans, including for land
http://www.esri.com/ 10.13140/RG.2.2.32500.55682. use, natural resource management and adaptation to climate
increasingly considered as crucial and is being mainstreamed into EIA
software/arcgis/explorer change, Geneva: UNEP. https://www.preventionweb.net/
legislation. Communities have a crucial role in disaster risk reduction as Gupta, A.K. and Yunus, M. (2004). India and WSSD (Rio +10)
english/hyogo/gar/2015/en/bgdocs/UNEP,%202014.pdf
they are often the first responders in case of a hazard event, often with Johannesburg: Issues of National Concern and International
expert knowledge of areas at risk, whereas, a purely top-down disaster Strategies. Current Science, 87(1), 37-43. http://www.iisc.
risk management and response approach may fail to address specific ernet.in/~currsci/jul102004/37.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2019. UNEP (2002). Training session outline: Topic 2: Law, policy
and institutional arrangements for EIA systems. In EIA
local needs. Natural Capital Project.InVEST: Integrated Valuation
Training Resource Manual. Sadler, B. and McCabe, M. (eds.).
of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs. http://www.
EIAs and SEAs are very promising tools to this effect and are among the Geneva: UNEP. https://unep.ch/etu/publications/EIA_2ed/
naturalcapitalproject.org/pubs/InVEST_brochure.pdf
few legislated tools that set out to protect environmental resources. To Accessed 26 July 2019.
EIA_E_top2_body.PDF Accessed 26 July 2019.
date, with a few exceptions, there has been little effort to integrate DRR UNEP (2016). Coastal Partners: applying ecosystem-based
in EIAs. There is therefore a huge untapped potential to institutionalize NOAA. What is remote sensing? http://oceanservice.noaa.
disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) through a ridge-to-reef
gov/facts/remotesensing.html Accessed 16 February 2015.
Eco-DRR/EbA by integrating DRR with EIAs and SEAs. approach in Port Salut, Haiti. Geneva: UNEP.
OECD (2006). DAC Guidelines and Reference Series:
World Bank (1999). OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment.
Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment: Good
Operational Manual. https://policies.worldbank.org/sites/
Practice Guidance for Development Cooperation. Paris:
ppf3/PPFDocuments/090224b0822f7384.pdf Accessed
OECD. https://www.oecd.org/environment/environment-
26 July 2019.
development/37353858.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019.
World Bank (2012). Strategic environmental assessment
OECD (2016). Improving Partnerships for Effective
in the World Bank: Learning from recent experience and
Development: The Working Party on Aid Effectiveness. Paris:
challenges. Washington, D.C.: World Bank http://documents.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
worldbank.org/curated/en/729811468331017746/
Philippines Department of Environment and Natural Strategic-environmental-assessment-in-the-World-Bank-
Resources Environmental Impact Assessment (2011). learning-from-recent-experience-and-challenges Accessed
Technical Guidelines for Incorporating Disaster Risk 26 July 2019.
Reduction (DRR) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA)
Concerns under the Philippine EIS System (EIA DRR/CCA
Technical Guidelines).
136 137
Gender, disaster risk reduction and community-based tools for
ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and adaptation 12
12.1 Disaster risk reduction and gender Advantages of
One important factor of community-based DRR is to integrate the voices gender-balanced DRR
that are marginalised in crisis periods, including those of women, especially “Disaster risk reduction that
those from underprivileged locations, and gender minority groups. Gender delivers gender equality is a
issues and power relations in general that are important are often not cost-effective win-win option
sufficiently considered while designing gender-responsive policies and for reducing vulnerability and
programs. Cultural norms and institutional barriers can get in the way of sustaining the livelihoods of
full inclusion of women and other gender minorities in community-based whole communities.”
DRR. The gender mainstreaming approach adopted by the UN and other
Margareta Wahlström,
international organisations places importance on integrating a gender UN Assistant Secretary-General
perspective into the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, for Disaster Risk Reduction
and allocation of resources in all planned policies and programs.
As seen in Chapters 2 and 9, women’s experiences and needs should be
taken into account and women should be included in the DRR process.
First of all, human security is a fundamental human right and furthermore
empowerment of women can make a big difference to the success of DRR
programs (UNISDR 2008). Indeed, without a gender sensitive approach,
not all society is taken into account and this can potentially increase or
exacerbate vulnerability or exposure. Involving women at all stages of the
DRR process, from post-disaster to pre-disaster preparedness can thus
improve a community’s response and resourcefulness (Figure 12.1).
Figure 12.1
Women capacitated to participate
effectively in natural resource
governance and management.
© UNEP 2015
Chapter 12
Gender, disaster risk reduction
and community-based tools
for ecoystem-based disaster
risk reduction and adaptation
Key questions
There are many instances of successful DRR programs that demonstrate
Why are gender considerations important
a) how women may specifically hold the knowledge to strengthen local
in DRR?
capabilities in disaster risk management, b) how women’s activities can
How can gender considerations be practically simultaneously conserve the environment and develop entrepreneurship,
taken into account in Eco-DRR/EbA? and c) how women’s gender-specific roles can be used as a starting point
to combat the adverse effects of climate change while also challenging
What role do communities play in managing
traditional gender roles.
ecosystems and how can they be involved
in natural resource and risk management?
© Oli Brown/UNEP
138 139
Case Studies has been vital for transferring agricultural success into stable livelihoods,
through women’s traditional skills and roles in crop and seed storage, and
Reducing Vulnerability in Bolivia (from UNISDR 2008)
in accessing markets. The gender element of the system arose from the
An initiative in Bolivia, “Reducing vulnerability through indigenous
need to focus and improve on productive farm work assigned to women.
knowledge of ‘Yapuchiri’ (‘sowers’) in Bolivia”, aimed to support and use
For instance, women are traditionally responsible for the storage of
traditional knowledge of climate prediction for better decision-making in
seeds and reproductive materials but not every woman in the community
agricultural production and risk management. Gradually, it turned to a
manages this at a high standard. Women yapuchiris were storing a very
focus on strengthening human capabilities of both women and men in
wide quantity of potato varieties, grain seeds, and other species, including
rural communities. Local groups of technology suppliers were formed,
medicines. Moreover, they researched and knew under which conditions
called yapuchiris, who sell their services at market prices to other farmers.
and where to sow every species and variety. They had the knowledge
Those services are ten times cheaper than training offered by engineers,
to design strategies for risk management and assisted other women
and just 20% less efficient. The initiative started in October 2006 and
farmers in doing so. In a majority of cases, women yapuchiris did not
concluded in July 2008, covering two complete agricultural cycles. The
only transfer knowledge, but helped to build up analytical capabilities of
first cycle emphasized climate prediction through the observation of local
farming women. The female yapuchiris are also taking an active role in
flora and fauna. This allowed for crop planning that was more sensitive
adaptive risk management, and in monitoring bioindicators of climate and
to risk. The yield losses were reduced by 30-40% in this first cycle. The
weather-related hazards.
second cycle then focused increasingly on the empowerment of women
in market participation. That year, yield losses from frost, flooding, drought Sustainable livelihoods in Mali (from UNISDR 2008)
and hail were also reduced by 80-90%. The Sinsibere project in Mali aimed to reduce desertification by developing
sustainable sources of income for rural women as an alternative to their
The initiative strengthened local capabilities in disaster risk management by
commerce in wood. These alternative livelihoods include vegetable
consolidating and spreading indigenous knowledge through local experts.
gardens and making shea butter products like soap. An important part
This has reduced vulnerability to this harsh area’s hydrometeorological
of the success of these alternative sources of income was a microloan
hazards, particularly frost, rain and hailstorms, and conversely, extreme
system that was developed for the women’s groups who participated.
heat and dryness, which are predicted to intensify due to climate change.
This system made it possible to kickstart female entrepreneurship in the
The yapuchiris’ increased outreach to communities in the face of climate
villages. The project is based on the Local Environmental Plan that the
shifts will prove a significant step in increasing the region’s resilience to
municipal councils and the local people developed collaboratively, and so,
these changes. The inclusion of women’s expertise in the yapuchiri system
has been a cooperative effort between the project workers and the local
communities from the beginning. Literacy and mathematical courses
have been organized for the women so that they are able to manage the
Women’s Leadership in Implementation of Disaster Preparedness Measures in Bangladesh micro loans and small commerce, encouraging entrepreneurship.
Some remote coastal villages in southern addressed by the project were special types of Food security in Brazil (from UNISDR 2008)
Bangladesh are not yet reached by the country’s vulnerability such as violence, sexual harassment Pintadas is located in the Northeastern region of Brazil, the poorest
elaborate national disaster management system. and limited access to recovery support. Women’s region in the country where 42% of the population, or 18.8 million people,
In light of the above, Action Against Hunger (ACF) forums served as key catalysts to raise and are poor. About half of them live in rural areas, with income and life
implemented a DRR pilot project in 10 villages, address such concerns. The women’s forums expectancy well below the national average. The region is characterized
establishing a Village Disaster Management offered them a place to talk about general and by a semi-arid climate with very little precipitation, high temperatures, a
Committee (VDMC) and a Women’s Committee specific feminine issues (health, pregnancy, deep groundwater table, sandy soils and prolonged periods of drought.
in each of them. The project targeted over 4,000 menstrual hygiene management, etc.). But the Water scarcity in rural areas of Northeastern Brazil seriously affects the
households, mostly female-headed households pilot project was a new experience for women in economic development of entire villages, because of the limited water
and poor women’s households highly exposed to the selected villages, and many of the women’s available for sanitation and agriculture.
disaster risks. When the tropical storm Mahsen forum members never had an opportunity to The Project Pintadas Solar is an innovative good practice as it
struck in May 2013, shortly after the end of the participate in village meetings previously. Forums encompasses irrigation and energy efficient technologies for small scale
project, the women put in practice the disaster served as key catalysts to raise and address such agriculture. Women and other members of the family can learn to use it,
preparedness measures that were explained to concerns. The women’s forums offered them a and the irrigation can also be used at the level of the household.
them. They protected their lives and livelihoods, on place to talk about general and specific feminine Both women and men are learning how to handle new irrigation and water
their own initiative, without the intervention of the issues (health, pregnancy, menstrual hygiene management technologies for the improvement of small-scale agriculture.
national disaster management system. management, etc.). But the pilot project was a new In the history of Pintadas this is a breakthrough. Due to the participatory
The successful implementation of preparedness experience for women in the selected villages, and process of the initiative and grassroots work with the local Women’s
measures can be attributed largely to women’s many of the women’s forum members never had Association, gender analysis was a strong factor in choosing beneficiaries,
leadership. Indeed, a large percentage of the an opportunity to participate in village meetings and technologies that could be effectively implemented by all. The impact
households targeted by the project were either previously. of this initiative reduces the risks of food and water shortage during
female-headed or those of women living in Adapted from UNISDR (2015) Women’s Leadership in Risk- the long periods of drought in this region that are becoming even more
Resilient Development: Good Practices and Lessons Learned
extremely poor conditions and highly exposed to intense, consistent with climate change predictions.
disaster risk. Other gender dimensions/issues
140 141
In the long-term, Eco-DRR/EbA is an opportunity to address the
complexities of interactional gendered dimensions, thus contributing
to the sustainable development goal to “leave no one behind.”
While social norms can make women more vulnerable to disasters, the
unique position of women and their strengths can be used to plan for
Eco-DRR/EbA strategies. The challenge is to ensure that Eco-DRR/EbA
measures are planned in such a way that they do not place additional
burden on women – mainly in terms of labour and time. Some broad
recommendations on what effective Eco-DRR strategies can do are:
1. Building skills to do more rewarding productive and community roles;
2. Education of both girls/women can go a long way in enabling women
Figure 12.2 Figure 12.3 to increase their leadership roles in NR management, governance,
Planning Eco-DRR in Sudan © UNEP 2017 Re-greening in Sudan © UNEP 2017 decision making
3. Educating boys/men in sharing responsibility for reproductive roles will
Eco-DRR in Sudan (from UNEP 2016) also reduce women’s burden and free up time for community roles;
A project, funded by the European Commission, led by UNEP and Practical
4. Changing ownership of, and access to resources to reduce vulnerability.
Action Sudan between 2012-2015, partnering with local communities and
the state government, won the 2017 Land for Life award for improving Accomplishing these necessarily involve a gradual change in power relations
food security and disaster resilience and reducing community tensions too, a process that can also lead to changing women’s and men’s gender
through sustainable management of dryland areas of North Dafur. Women roles. As a society adapts to social, environmental, political, and economic
were involved in every stage from planning, to training and implementation changes, the gender power dynamics may also shift. Changes to the gender
(Figure 12.2) relationship can occur from within a society (as when women contest gender-
based inequities) or result from external forces. Recognising and rewarding
Natural resource management and rehabilitation of the landscape through
the caring and community roles that women do while being sensitive to social
community forests and planting were an important component that was
relations can help in increased women’s participation that can ultimately
managed by women to support community forestry and household
be empowering. Thus, Eco-DRR/EbA can present a unique opportunity to
agroforestry while re-greening the landscape (Figure 12.3; UNEP 2016).
redefine social norms through a gender and development framework, while
WOMEN AS STEWARDS OF CHANGE: ECO-DRR/EBA AS being in tune with the SDGs 5 and 15, and the Sendai Framework.
A NECESSITY AND OPPORTUNITY SEXUAL AND GENDER MINORITIES AND DISASTER
Given the important involvement many women have in natural resource RISK REDUCTION
management, Eco-DRR/EbA strategies can be seen to provide an While a long way has still to go to ensure inclusiveness of women in DRR
opportunity for women’s groups, planners and policy makers to bring and CCA despite efforts and success stories, mainstreaming other sexual
together goals of SGD 5 (Achieve gender equality and empower all women and gender minorities into DRR and CCA has lagged behind (McSherry et
and girls) and 15 (Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial al. 2014). Yet, studies show that these minorities can be highly vulnerable
ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and to disasters because their needs are not taken into account and they may
halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss), insights of be discriminated against in both unobvious and obvious ways (Gorman-
the GAD framework and expected outcomes of the SFDRR (that also Murray et al. 2014; Gaillard et al. 2016).
mentions the crucial role of gender in DRR, among others in the guilding
principles, stressing that DRR requires an all-of-society engagement and Yet at the same time, these minorities can show great resilience and be an
partnership that includes, among others, gender). Women’s knowledge, asset during disasters (Gorman-Murray et al. 2014, McSherry et al. 2014).
often unrecognized or dismissed as unimportant in policy discussions In Indonesia, warias are males that adopt female features and identity.
and planning processes, can be a powerful tool to deal with environmental During the 2010 eruption of Mt Merapi, many warias chose not to stay
in temporary shelter because of the gender binary prescribed and feared
changes and to prepare for disasters. Some long-term impacts of planning
hostility (Balgos et al. 2012). However, a formalised group of warias, a
for disasters using gender-sensitive Eco-DRR/EbA strategies are as follows:
genders rights advocacy group (PLU) responded to the crisis by providing
Reduced gender-based vulnerability especially to slow-onset climate- free haircuts and make-up in evacuation centers as well as a drag queen
related hazards such as drought, land degradation, sea-level rise etc. contest to raise money for evacuees (Balgos et al. 2012).
Disasters – both slow and rapid onset ones - pose developmental In the Philippines, bakla are male who identify with female identity and
challenges for people and countries. Minimizing the impact of often perform female duties. During disasters, their experience is one
disasters is important for the well-being of a nation’s population and of further discomfort because shelters are usually binary and can face
to reduce the economic impact and social costs of disasters. other discrimination and harassment. A community DRR project in the
Ensuring women’s well-being also ensures the well-being of children Philippines, included bakla to learn of their needs and also their potential
in families and maintains positive social dynamics. roles during evacuation. The focus groups discussions and plans including
youth bakla helped reduce anti-bakla discrimination and harassment in
one village (McSherry et al. 2014).
142 143
GENDER BALANCED ECO-DRR PROJECTS Figure 12.4
To help make gender-responsive, Eco-DRR projects and/or policies that Stakeholders in CBNRRM.
consider the nexus between ecosystem management and DRR, a checklist © S. Sandholz 2013
was developed (see Additional Resources at the end of the chapter). Two
key reasons underlie the development of this check list: a) the current global
policy environment that aims to seriously tackle gender-based disparities,
and b) the lack of sufficiently comparable national/regional-level data sets
that enables policy-makers to frame gender-responsive policies.
Tackling gender-based disparities and advancing gender equality is
a concern reflected in the policy approaches of the United Nations in
every area of its work, such as the CEDAW General Recommendations,
Sustainable Development Goals, the Sendai Framework, the Aichi
Targets, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
etc. Ensuring that Eco-DRR measures are in step with the general policy
environment is timely and appropriate. and risks in a given area. It combines the concept of “co-management”
Literature about disasters and their consequences in various parts of of natural resources (IUCN 2007) with community-based disaster risk
the world are readily available. While these provide anecdotal evidence reduction (Abarquez and Murshed 2004) (Figure 12.4).
about the gendered impact of disasters, there is a lack of qualitative Usually at the community level, managing resources, disaster and climate
and quantitative gender-disaggregated data that is comparable across risks are interlinked and should be interlinked, while at the institutional
countries, over time. As a result, to frame gender-responsive DRR policies level, we continue to insert institutional divides. By linking natural
and programs, reliable indicators gleaned from survey of literature around resources management with risk management and enhancing community
gender is necessary. This checklist hopes to accomplish this task and capacities to link both, we create much stronger approaches.
will be useful for policy makers, project planners, and project level
implementors. However, it is important to ensure that this checklist is But communities can be extremely diverse. The term “community”
used as a guide for projects and not as just a checkbox system to label a generally refers to a group of people sharing a common interest in a
project as gender-sensitive. certain area (i.e., residents of a village, a religious entity, a local civil-
society organization, etc.), who are not necessarily homogenous or
The gender markers used in this checklist draws from UNEP’s Gender conflict-free. Thus, it is critical to CBNRRM to develop dialogues and
Marker Two-Pager series that assesses “how well gender is integrated cooperation schemes within the community and between community and
into a new project document”.4 Explanation for the four criteria used in this other stakeholders. Beside the community itself, other potential actors
checklist can be found in the first document of this series. to be involved in a holistic management scheme include governmental
agencies, the private sector, NGOs, the media and academia. This is
12.2 Communities and natural resource crucial to ensure the long-term sustainability of a project and to avoid
and risk management parallel and potentially incoherent or even conflicting planning.
The Eco-DRR project in Sudan, mentioned above, required establishing
In most planning processes, participatory processes are obligatory,
dialogue with various community actors that had quite different needs
ranging from simple information to complex collaborative decision-making Figure 12.5
(pastoralists and farming communities), which created tension and
schemes. Communities play a crucial role in sustainable land management Sudan Eco-DRR project.
conflict. The project brought together all stakeholders to improve
and DRR. They often have expert knowledge about their environments and Left: Consensus building in Sudan
governance of land and water resources at the community-level in order to
are the most dependent on clean water and locally available resources for on the location and purpose of
enhance community resilience to water hazards and promote sustainable migratory routes.
sustenance. So including their knowledge in planning is beneficial, while
drylands management (Figure 12.5). Right: Resource conflict prevention.
at the same time awareness of the plans, policies and their rights can
enhance their resilience. When a disaster strikes, communities are often © UNEP 2017
isolated and must rely on their own skills and resources to save lives and
livelihoods until outside assistance arrives, if at all. Often communities
are left alone during that phase until help from outside arrives and their
knowledge to maintain the local ecosystem and its goods can save lives.
The management approach that can help sustaining these benefits is called
Community-based Natural Resource and Risk Management (CBNRRM), an
approach that combines the sustainable management of natural resources
4 The Gender Marker series can be found here: https://drive.google.com/drive/

folders/0B-nbHeF2bGUMY2NFTE5KeVZ6YjQ
144 145
This entailed several measures: Gender Marker 1: Context
Establishment of a Water Resource Management Committee that is Does the program present a gender analysis at the international level?
1 Y/N
responsible for the water retention structure, for undertaking early
warning and preparedness for flood and drought, and for ensuring 2 Does the program present a gender analysis at the national level? Y/N
that water is proportionally distributed. The committee also liaises 3 Does the program present a gender analysis at the field- level? Y/N
with wider landscape management programmes and the government
4 Does the program present statistics and examples to supplement or substantiate Y/N
and NGOs. the gender analysis?
Demarcation of the migratory route for pastoralist communities in Does the program have any experts or partner organisations who are specifically
5 Y/N
order to reduce potential conflict over animals entering farmlands, skilled in gender analysis at the field-level?
and farms encroaching into rangelands.
Gender Marker 2: Implementation
CBNRRM creates an environment where people in communal areas
can actively manage their ecosystems and reduce risk by working Design
on preparedness. The following chapter will detail environmental 1 Does the program resonate with international approaches or frameworks to Y/N
management tools that can be used in conjunction with spatial planning addressing gender? (For example: gender mainstreaming, gender and development,
and community approaches. It will also be important that the community gender components of SDGs, Sendai framework, CEDAW General Recommendation
prepares through the installation of early warning and other preparedness No. 37, Aichi Target 14, UNFCCC)
measures, such as having shelters for example. 2 Does the program propose concrete measures to address gender-based inequalities? Y/N
3 Do the proposed measures show a clear causal pathway between activities and Y/N
12.3 Conclusions outputs (results) to close specific gender gaps?
Inclusion of women in DRR and CCA at all levels is important for reducing 4 Does the planned program build on any gender stereotypes? Y/N
the impact of hazards and for sustainable and equitable development.
5 Does the planned program reinforce stereotyped gender expectations? Y/N
Beyond women, it is also important to take into account all gender diversity
as other gender minorities, from LGBTI group for example, can otherwise 6 Does the planned program have any components that challenge existing gender norms? Y/N
be left out of the process and also suffer from the consequences such as 7 Do the planned activities take into account women’s daily routines and responsibilities? Y/N
not being able to access services that require binary gender or that are (For example: training programs planned at times convenient for women)
discriminatory (Gaillard et al. 2016).
8 Can women who work outside the household participate in the planned Y/N
NGOs and international development organisations are more and more program activities?
incorporating gender-sensitive issues in their work, thanks to the advocacy
9 Can women who work within the household participate in the planned Y/N
and work also done on international levels (Aguilar 2015). Empowering program activities?
women and other gender minorities at leadership level is important as still
too few are found at this level. The empowering and engagement in DRR Monitoring and Evaluation
can lead to many successes and reduce impact. Especially in terms of 10 Does the planned program account for differences between women and men Y/N
Eco-DRR/EbA in some countries, women and other minorities can make depending on their class/race/ethnic/caste positions or other relevant
a big difference due to their involvement in natural resource management. identity markers?
Community participation in natural resource and risk management involves 11 Does the program use data collection tools that are gender-responsive (For example: Y/N
more than consultation and active work. It involves communication, questionnaires that account for gender-specific activities, focus group discussions or
stakeholder consultations that involve women and enable meaningful participation
capacity building, making links with different organisations at all levels
of women and men in separate and mixed spaces, interviews with both men and
from community to government and can be challenging. However, women etc.)
working through the process from risk assessment, to planning and
finally management as a community can help foster understanding and 12 Does the program use tools that show gender-disaggregated patterns? Y/N
innovations and finally longevity of the process. (For example: patterns of time use, income earning work, invisible reproductive work,
community work?)
13a Does the planned program have the potential to negatively affect women from any Y/N
community in any way?
13b If yes, does the program include plans for mitigation of backlash or risks that women Y/N
may potentially face?
14 Does the planned program put any additional non-remunerated burden on any group Y/N
of women when compared to men or other women?
Staffing
15 Does the program have gender balance in staffing? Y/N
16 Does the program have women in leadership positions among its staff? Y/N
146 147
Gender Marker 3: Log frame REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
1 Can the program demonstrate/target gender specific outcomes that measure Y/N Abarquez, I. and Murshed, Z. (2004). Community-based Renaud, F.G., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M. (2013). The
women’s participation, influence, shifts in attitudes about women’s capabilities Disaster Risk Management: field practitioners’ handbook. role of ecosystems in disaster risk reduction. Tokyo: United
and leadership in the short term? (Example: creating awareness through gender Bangkok: Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre. http://www. Nations University Press.http://collections.unu.edu/view/
research, training programmes, distribution of pamphlets, creating opportunities and adpc.net/pdr-sea/publications/12handbk.pdf Accessed UNU:1995 Accessed 26 July 2019.
spaces conducive for women’s increased participation, having women in leadership 26 July 2019.
positions in field-level activities etc) Rex, H.C. and Trohanis, Z. (2012). Making women’s voices
Aguilar, L., Granat, M., and Owren, C. (2015). Roots for count: integrating gender issues in disaster risk management:
2 Can the program demonstrate/target gender specific outcomes that measure Y/N the Future: The landscape and Way forward on Gender overview and resources for guidance notes. East Asia and
women’s participation, influence, shifts in attitudes about women’s capabilities and and Climate Change. Washington, DC: IUCN and GGCA. the Pacific Region sustainable development guidance note;
leadership in the medium term? https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/ no. 10. Gender and disaster risk management. Washington,
documents/2015-039.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019. DC: World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
3 Can the program demonstrate/target gender specific outcomes that measure Y/N
en/2012/10/16875436/making-womens-voices-count-
women’s participation, influence, shifts in attitudes about women’s capabilities and Balgos, B., Gaillard, J.C. and Sanz, K. (2012). The warias of
integrating-gender-issues-disaster-risk-management-
leadership outcomes in the long term? Indonesia in disaster risk reduction: the case of the 2010
overview-resources-guidance-notes. Accessed 25 July 2019.
Mt Merapi eruption in Indonesia. Gender and Development,
4 Does the program explicitly show gender-disaggregated results? (For example: Y/N 20(2), 337-348. DOI: 10.1080/13552074.2012.687218. UNEP (2016). Wadi Partners: food security and disaster
questionnaire/survey analysis disaggregated for gender, even when considering resilience through sustainable drylands management in
other vulnerabilities such as class, race, disability, age increased participation of Berkes, F., Kofinas, G. P., and Chapin III, S. F. (2009).
North Dafur, Sudan. Geneva: UNEP.
women in Eco-DRR activities, increased number of women leaders?) Conservation, Community, and Livelihoods: Sustaining,
Renewing, and Adapting Cultural Connections to the Land. UNISDR (2008). Gender perspectives: integrating
5 Does the program have the potential to bring about outcomes that challenge/change Y/N In Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: Resilience-based disaster risk reduction into climate change adaptation.
gendered work patterns at any stage? (example: creating Eco-DRR related jobs for Natural Resource Management in a Changing World. Chapin Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.unisdr.org/files/3391_
women that can be paid, increased participation of women in paid work, sharing III, S. F., Kofinas, G. P., and Folke, C. (eds.). New York: GenderPerspectivesIntegratingDRRCCGood20Practices.pdf
of unpaid work by all members of the household, sharing of caring jobs, sharing or Springer. 129-148. Accessed 25 July 2019.
reduced burden for reproductive work such as collecting water, firewood, Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Pimbert, M., Farvar, M.T., Kothari, A. UNISDR (2012). How To Make Cities More Resilient –
water management) and Renard, Y. (2004). Sharing Power. Learning by doing in A Handbook For Local Government Leaders. Geneva:
Gender Marker 4: Budget co-management of natural resources throughout the world. UNDRR. http://www.unisdr.org/files/26462_
London: IIED, Tehran: IUCN CEESP CMWG. handbookfinalonlineversion.pdf Accessed 5 January 2015.
1 Is the program budget gender-responsive? (Example, through allocation for Y/N
Brink, E., Aalders, T., Ádám, D., Feller, R., Henselek, Y., UNISDR (2014). Gender Responsive Disaster Risk Reduction:
specifically hiring international, national, local gender experts; making loans available
Hoffmann, A., Ibe, K., Matthey-Doret, A., Meyer, M., A contribution by the United Nations to the consultation
for women for empowering individual and group entrepreneurial activities; allocation
Negrut, N.L., Rau, A.-L., Riewerts, B., von Schuckmann, L., leading to the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk
for providing assistance for victims of domestic violence in a post-disaster
Törnros, S., von Wehrden, H., Abson, D.J. and Wamsler, C. Reduction (WCDRR) 2014. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.
scenario etc?)
(2016). Cascades of green: A review of ecosystem-based preventionweb.net/files/40425_gender.pdf Accessed
2 Does the program budget account for expenses for advancing gender equality? Y/N adaptation in urban areas. Global Environmental Change, 5 January 2015.
(Example, holding gender sensitisation training/awareness programs, printing/ 36, 111-123. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.003. UNISDR, UNDP and IUCN (2009). Making Disaster Risk
distribution of pamphlets, distribution of bicycles for girls to go to school, scholarships Gaillard, J. C., Sanz, K., Balgos, B. C., Dalisay, S. N. M., Reduction Gender-Sensitive Policy and Practical Guidelines.
for girls/women to undertake training, childcare etc.) Gorman-Murray, A., Smith, F. and Toelupe, V. (2016). Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.unisdr.org/files/9922_
3 Does the budget reflect any investment in changing gendered expectations from Y/N Beyond men and women: a critical perspective on gender MakingDisasterRiskReductionGenderSe.pdf Accessed 5
women and men and/or their work patterns? (Example: paying women to attend and disaster. Disasters, 41(3), 429–447. DOI: 10.1111/ January 2015.
certain training programs thus valuing their time and effort instead of taking it disa.12209. UNISDR (2015). Women’s leadership in risk-resilient
for granted.) Gorman-Murray, A., Morris, S., Keppel, J., McKinnon, S. development: good practices and lessons learned. Bangkok:
and Dominey-Howes, D. (2014). The LGBTI community in Thammada Press Co., Ltd https://www.unisdr.org/
the 2011 Queensland floods: marginality, vulnerability and files/42882_42882womensleadershipinriskresilien.pdf
resilience. LES Online, 6(1), 4-20. https://ro.uow.edu.au/ Accessed 26 July 2019.
sspapers/3675/. Accessed 26 July 2019. Wiesner, D. (1995). EIA the environmental impact
IUCN (2007). Co-management of natural resources : assessment process: What it is and what it means to you. A
organising, negotiating and learning-by-doing. Gland: IUCN. manual for everyone concerned about the environment and
https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/7839 Accessed decisions made about its development. Dorset: Prism Press.
25 July 2019. World Bank (2003). A User’s Guide to Poverty and
McSherry, A., Manalastas, E.J., Gaillard, J.C. and Dalisay, Social Impact Analysis, Poverty Reduction Group and
S.N.M (2014). From Deviant to Bakla, Strong to Stronger: Social Development Department, Washington, DC:
Mainstreaming Sexual and Gender Minorities into Disaster World Bank. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/
Risk Reduction in the Philippines. Forum for Development INTPSIA/Resources/490023-1121114603600/12685_
Studies, 42(1), 27-40. DOI: 10.1080/08039410.2014.952330. PSIAUsersGuide_Complete.pdf Accessed 25 July 2019.
PEDRR (2011). Demonstrating the Role of Ecosystem-based World Bank (2012). Gender and Disaster Risk Management –
Management for Disaster Risk Reduction. 2011 Global Guidance Notes: Making Women’s Voices Count Addressing
Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. PEDRR. Gender Issues in Disaster Risk management in East Asia
https://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2011/ and the Pacific. World Bank. https://www.preparecenter.org/
en/bgdocs/PEDRR_2010.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019. sites/default/files/gender_and_drm_guidance_note_1.pdf
148 149
Sustainable land and water management tools and approaches for
13.1 Management tools and approaches Tools and approaches
for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction We refer to IWRM or ICZM
and adaptation as management approaches,
or processes to addressing
Chapter 13 This chapter provides an overview of main Eco-DRR/EbA management
tools and approaches for long-term risk reduction. These need to
planning issues related to
water resources or coastal
be integrated with the cross-cutting themes of spatial planning and
Sustainable land and water community-based involvement.
areas. Each management
approach will have a set of
management tools and approaches While the focus will be on Integrated Water Resource Management tools (e.g., GIS, land use and
(IWRM), this chapter will also briefly describe: risk mapping) that it uses to
for ecosystem-based disaster risk Sustainable Land Management (SLM) enable decision-makers or
reduction and adaptation Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)
project managers to make
informed choices between a
Integrated Fire Management (IFM) set of management actions.
Key questions Protected Area Management (PAM)

Most of the approaches and tools presented here are found in the context
What are main management tools and approaches
of natural resources management. They are appropriate and can be very
for Eco-DRR/EbA?
effective for reducing disaster risks and adapting to climate change.
How do such tools work and how can Eco-DRR/EbA However, their link with DRR is not commonly made because disaster
be integrated? managers do not always consider the role of ecosystem in reducing
disaster risk.
Integrated Water Resource Management or IWRM is one of the most
common approaches for Eco-DRR/EbA as water-related disasters are
those which affect most people around the globe. IWRM is a governance
and development process to manage water, land and related resources,
in order to maximize economic and social welfare. Good IWRM means
better policies for improved catchment management, enhanced sanitation
services, reduced pollution, and good governance – all factors which can
help in DRR/CCA practice (Figure 13.1) (Blackwell and Maltby 2006,
Butterworth et al. 2010).
INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

What is it? Governance and development process
to manage water, land and related resources.
Why is it done? Many disasters are result of too
much or too little water.
How is it done? Through a flexible common-sense
approach that creates an enabling environment,
defines an institutional framework, and develops
appropriate management instruments.
REFERENCES:
Global Water Partnership (GWP)
http://www.gwp.org/en/The-Challenge/
What-is-IWRM/
The UN interagency mechanism on all freshwater Figure 13.1
related issues, including sanitation (UN Water) Water reservoir in Morocco.
http://www.unwater.org/ © S. Sandholz
Capacity Development in Sustainable Water

Management (Cap-Net UNDP)
http://www.cap-net.org/
© UNEP 2009
150 151
Sustainable Land Management or SLM includes management practices Integrated Coastal Zone Management or ICZM is a multi-disciplinary
in agriculture and forestry aiming at sustaining ecosystem services approach to manage the coastal zone including planning, resource
and livelihoods. Agroforestry systems combine agricultural and forestry management, information bases, and community involvement. It is a
practices to create productive and at the same time healthy land-use natural resource management approach which is increasingly including
systems. Due to the improvement of soil stability and reduced run- risk considerations by adjusting planning and management of resources
off, disasters such as landslides and flooding can be reduced while at and people to reduce coastal risks.
the same time providing benefits to livelihoods (Figure 13.2) (Sanz et ICZM is of growing importance as a large share of the global population
al. 2017). is living in coastal areas, often at risk from sea level rise or storm surges
(Marfai and King 2008) and many coastal areas comprise of such plan
(cf. Coast Conservation Department 1997). On a local scale, Eco-DRR/
EbA measures like mangrove replantation or protection of sand dunes as
natural buffers are of growing importance (Figure 13.3). Other measures
include managed realignment, where sea protections are moved back to
allow natural ecosystems, such as salt marshes and flooding areas, to
buffer the coast.
Figure 13.2
Agroforestry system in Brazil. © U. Nehren
SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT

What is it? Multi-disciplinary approach combining agriculture
and forestry.
Why is it done? To combine productive agriculture and forestry
systems with sustainable land use. Figure 13.3
Flooded coastline of Java, Indonesia. © S. Sandholz
How is it done? Using soils, water, animals and plants, for the
production of goods to meet changing human needs, while
simultaneously ensuring the long-term productive potential of these INTEGRATED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
resources and the maintenance of their environmental functions. What is it? Multi-disciplinary approach to manage the coastal zone.
REFERENCES: Why is it done? Coastal areas are exposed to multiple hazards and
often highly populated.
World Overview of Conservation Approaches
and Technologies How is it done? Includes planning, resource management,
https://www.wocat.net/ information bases, and community involvement.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) on Adopts a combination of ecosystem-based, engineered and non-
Sustainable Land Management structural measures.
http://www.fao.org/nr/land/sustainable-land-management/en/
REFERENCES:
European Coastal Zone Policy
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/home.htm
World Bank – Projects and Operations: ICZM
http://www.worldbank.org/projects/P097985/integrated-coastal-
zone-management?lang=en
152 153
The aim of Integrated Fire Management or IFM is to balance the A Protected Area or PA is a clearly defined geographical space, recognized,
beneficial and negative effects of fire on the natural environment and dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve
socio-economic circumstances in a given landscape or region, and reduce the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services
risk of wildfire disasters that threaten human life and ecosystem functions and cultural values. Protected areas are increasingly including DRR and
(Figure 13.4) (Bryant 2008, Myers 2006). adaptation goals in their management plans (Figure 13.5) (Murti and
Buyck 2014).
Figure 13.4
Forest fire early warning system in Chile. © U. Nehren Figure 13.5
Community forest in PA buffer zone, Nepal. © S. Sandholz
INTEGRATED FIRE MANAGEMENT

PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT
What is it? Range of technical decisions and actions to prevent,
maintain, control or use fire. What is it? Approach to ensure that protected areas are managed to
preserve values for the future.
Why is it done? To balance the beneficial and negative effects of fire
on the natural environment and socio-economic circumstances in a Why is it done? PAs cover almost 20% of the earth, offer
given landscape. benchmarks for effective long-term management towards resilient
ecosystems globally.
How is it done? Various elements including early warning, capacity
building, and sometimes controlled fires. How is it done? Assessments covering values, threats and
vulnerabilities, recommendations for conservation of ecosystem
REFERENCES: and natural capital.
321 Fire Management:
REFERENCES:
http://www.321fire.co.mz/
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Global Fire Monitoring Center (GFMC)
http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_
http://www.fire.uni-freiburg.de/
capacity2/gpap_bpg/
The Nature Conservancy
IUCN publication on Urban Protected Areas
http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/habitats/forests/howwework/
https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-
integrated-fire-management.xml
022.pdf
Center for Protected Area Management
http://warnercnr.colostate.edu/hdnr-research-outreach/outreach/
center-for-protected-area-management-and-training
Each of the presented approaches aims at a long-term sustainable

management of a given geographic area or ecosystem, depending on the
area’s assets. The tools can potentially be combined, for example when
linking SLM to IFM in a community-based approach (see Chapter 12).
154 155
13.2 An example of integrated water IWRM and risk reduction:
Storage has been a pivotal management option since centuries to mitigate
resource management for disaster risk the impact of climate variability – it helps to control flood peaks and
reduction and adaptation provides a water reserve for drought periods. The way ecosystems are
How do these integrated management approaches work and how can managed within watersheds can be decisive in offering storage solutions
Eco-DRR/EbA be integrated? Let us answer these questions by taking which can be an alternative or addition to building large reservoirs. In any
the example of integrating Eco-DRR/EbA measures in IWRM in order to catchment water is stored naturally in soils, in wetlands and in aquifers.
reduce flood and drought risk. It is possible to use ecosystem functions which help to increase storage
Like many other sector policies, IWRM is the result of realizing that water in different forms in order to cope better with floods and droughts by
resources management is closely related to other sectors like agriculture for example:
and forestry, energy or urban planning and taking an integrated sectoral 1) Managing the landscape through contour trenches or bunds to support
approach (Butterworth et al. 2010, Hey and Heltne 2014). rainwater harvesting (Figure 13.8).
IWRM is typically implemented at the watershed level, such as 2) Managing soils to increase infiltration through mulching; augmenting
the Mississippi River (The Wetlands Initiative 2004). It aims at the soil porosity and soil water storage through increasing soil organic
comprehensive management of the whole water cycle, including matter within the soil (Figure 13.8).
headwaters and coastal areas, surface and groundwater, water quality 3) Managing vegetation to intercept rainwater and to support deep
and quantity, harmonizing water availability with demands from different percolation of water through reforestation or introduction of agroforestry
water users in order to maximize social welfare without compromising systems (Figure 13.8).
the sustainability of vital ecosystems.
IWRM can and should include linkages to Eco-DRR/EbA through links to {C} INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: Figure 13.8
INFILTRATING EXCESS RAINWATER
DRR and CCA policy and implementation, in particular to water-related MANAGE LANDSCAPE TO SUPPORT RAINWATER HARVESTING
Integrated watershed management:
disasters like floods and droughts which are known to be associated with e.g. contour bunds MANAGE SOILS TO INCREASE INFILTRATION
AND IMPROVE SOIL WATER STORAGE
infiltrating excess rainwater
very high losses and damages. REDUCED RUNOFF FOR FLOOD MITIGATION Concept: L. Ribbe; Design: S. Plog
Water cycle link to floods and droughts:

Strong rainfall events create surface runoff causing downstream
VEL
TER LE
ACE WA
...SURF
inundations (Figure 13.6). NORMAL GRO

UNDWATER LEVEL
Figure 13.6
MANAGE VEGETATION TO INTERCEPT RAINWATER
Typical flood situation. AND TO SUPPORT DEEP PERCOLATION OF WATER
{ A } TYPICAL FLOOD SITUATION
Concept: L. Ribbe; Design: S. Plog
4) Other ecosystem-based options to curb inundation risk include

measures which control storage or drainage within the floodplain
including density of riparian vegetation and adjustments of river
FLOOD WATER LEVEL
morphology. These measures combined help to reduce peak surface
runoff and inundation risk (Figure 13.9).
{C} INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT:

Figure 13.9
INFILTRATING EXCESS RAINWATER Integrated watershed management:
MANAGE LANDSCAPE TO SUPPORT RAINWATER HARVESTING
e.g. contour bunds MANAGE SOILS TO INCREASE INFILTRATION
infiltrating excess rainwater
AND IMPROVE SOIL WATER STORAGE
Concept: L. Ribbe; Design: S. Plog
Prolonged droughts diminish water available to agriculture, people and REDUCED RUNOFF FOR FLOOD MITIGATION
ecosystems in soil and groundwater (Figure 13.7).

Figure 13.7
Typical drought situation TER LE
VEL
ACE WA
Concept: L. Ribbe; Design: S. Plog { B } TYPICAL DROUGHT SITUATION ...SURF
SOIL MOISTURE DEFICIT

NORMAL GRO
UNDWATER LEVEL
MANAGE VEGETATION TO INTERCEPT RAINWATER

AQUIFER STORAGE AVAILABLE DURING DROUGHTS AND TO SUPPORT DEEP PERCOLATION OF WATER
156 157
At the same time these measures help to increase stored ground water –
often the last resort for water supply during prolonged droughts.
Adikari, Y. and Yoshitani. J. (2009). Global Trends in Hey, D. L., Montgomery, D. L., Urban, L. S., Prato T., Forbes
Proper IWRM includes Integrated Flood Management and Integrated
Water-Related Disasters: an insight for policymakers. A., Martell M., Pollack J., Steele Y., and Zarwell R. (2004).
Drought Management in which ecosystem-based approaches should play Paris: UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/ Flood Damage Reduction in the Upper Mississippi River
a central role (WMO/GWP Integrated Drought Management Programme pf0000181793 Accessed 24 July 2019. Basin: An Ecological Alternative. URL: Chicago, Illinois:
2014, WWF 2002). Infiltrating rainfall by proper watershed management The Wetlands Initiative. https://www.wetlands-initiative.
Blackwell, M.S.A. and Maltby, E. (eds.) (2006). Ecoflood
practice is an excellent example of how IWRM contributes to mitigate guidelines: how to use floodplains for flood risk
org/images/pdf-docs/pulblications/FLOOD/research/
floods and droughts at the same time. Using hazard maps and future flood_damage_reduction_in_umrb.pdf https://static1.
reduction. Luxembourg: European Commission. https://
projections of climate change ensures targeted measures to reduce squarespace.com/static/567070822399a343227dd9c4/t/
d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/yyccares/pages/20/
568d6213c647ad1e518d2b07/1452106259180/flood_
risk. Planting species that are adequate to current and projected climate, attachments/original/1498666598/EU__Ecoflood_
damage_reduction_in_umrb.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
are diverse, and have root systems and functions required for slope Guidelines__HOW_TO_USE_FLOODPLAINS_FOR_FLOOD_
stabilisation, infiltration and water usage are all important considerations RISK_REDUCTION_compressed.pdf?1498666598 Accessed Johnson, B.L., Richardson, W.B. and Naimo, T.J. (1995).
24 July 2019. Past, present and future concepts in large river ecology.
in Eco-DRR/EbA.
How rivers function and how human activities influence
Butterworth, J., Warner, J., Moriarty, P., Smits, S. and
river processes. BioScience, 3(45), 134-141. DOI:
13.3 Conclusions Batchelor, C. (2010). Finding Practical Approaches
to Integrated Water Resources Management. Water
10.2307/1312552.
The presented tools and approaches are not new and have been the Alternatives, 3(1), 68-81. http://www.water-alternatives. Kay, R. and Alder, J. (1999). Coastal Planning and
mainstay of natural resources management for decades. What is org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol3/v3issue1/77-a3-1-4/file Management. London: CRC Press.
emerging is a greater emphasis on combining risk reduction with natural Kramer, R. A., Richter, D.D., Pattanayak, S. and Sharma,
resources management, increasingly also linked to CCA. Such ecosystem- Bryant, C. (2008). Understanding bushfires: trends in N.P. (1997). Ecological and Economic analysis of
based approaches, combined with more classical DRR actions such as deliberate vegetation fires in Australia. Technical and Watershed Protection in Eastern Madagascar. Journal of
early warning, preparedness and risk mapping are proving more effective background paper. No. 27. Canberra: Australian Institute of Environmental Management, 49(3), 277-295. DOI: 10.1006/
Criminology.http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20 jema.1995.0085.
and sustainable in terms of reducing risks and saving lives.
series/tbp/21-40/tbp027.aspx Accessed 24 July 2019.
Marfai, M.A. and King, L. (2008). Potential vulnerability
IWRM and other integrated approaches provide multiple opportunities
Cap-Net/UNDP, Nile IWRM- Net, UNDRR and UNOCHA (2009). implications of coastal inundation due to sea level rise for
to include Eco-DRR/EbA measures. These measures typically target to Training Manual: Hydro-climatic Disasters in Water Resources the coastal zone of Semarang city, Indonesia. Environmental
improve ecosystem function. In IWRM, these increase water storage Management. Pretoria: Cap-Net/UNDP. https://www.unisdr. Geology, 54(6),1235-1245. DOI: 10.1007/s00254-007-0906-4.
in adequate compartments of the catchment like soils, groundwater org/files/10358_ManualforHydroclimaticDisastersinWa.pdf
Murti, R. and Buyck, C. (eds.) (2014). Safe Havens: Protected
and floodplains in order to reduce the flood peak on one hand and to Accessed 24 July 2019.
Areas for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change
provide stored water for drought periods on the other hand. ICZM aims to Coast Conservation Department (1997). Revised Coastal Adaptation. Gland: IUCN.https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/
comprehensively manage the coastline, sea resources and also all inputs Zone Management Plan, Sri Lanka. Colombo: Coast files/2014-038.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
to the sea, such as river and runoff. When comprehensive, ICZM can take Conservation Department of the Ministry of Fisheries and
Myers, R. L. (2006). Living with Fire— Sustaining Ecosystems
a ridge-to-reef approach. Aquatic Resources Development. https://www.crc.uri.edu/
and Livelihoods Through Integrated Fire Management.
download/SLCZPlan97.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
SLM alleviates land degradation through management of grazing, Tallahassee, Florida: Global Fire Initiative/The Nature
agriculture, forestry and other land uses. IFM can help regulate fires, while Critchley, W. and Siegert, K. (1991). Water Harvesting. A Conservancy. http://www.conservationgateway.org/
Manual for the Design and Construction of Water Harvesting Documents/Integrated_Fire_Management_Myers_2006.pdf
PA management is an approach to effectively manage protected areas,
Schemes for Plant Production. Rome: FAO. http://www.fao. Accessed 24 July 2019.
which can be a big asset for Eco-DRR/EbA because they often contain org/docrep/U3160E/u3160e00.htm#Contents Accessed
relatively undisturbed ecosystems. Plate, E.J. (2002). Flood risk and flood management.
24 July 2019.
Journal of Hydrology, 267(1 and 2), 2-11. DOI: 10.1016/
Ensuring the right use of management techniques is dependent on Dudley, N., Stolton, S., Belokurov, A., Krueger, L., Lopoukhine, S0022-1694(02)00135-X.
the ecosystem, and thus local or indigenous knowledge can be vastly N., MacKinnon, K., Sandwith, T. and Sekhran, N. (eds.)
Sanz, M.J., de Vente, J., Chotte, J.-L., Bernoux, M., Kust,
important. When revegetating, it is important to think about the diversity (2010). Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people
G., Ruiz, I., Almagro, M., Alloza, J.-A., Vallejo, R., Castillo, V.,
and type of species used. The following chapter will elaborate on this. cope with climate change. Gland/ Washington, DC/New
Hebel, A., and Akhtar-Schuster, M. (2017). Sustainable Land
Ecological engineering is sometimes the term used when specifically York: IUCN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World Bank
Management contribution to successful land-based climate
and WWF. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/natural_
using certain species for protection services. change adaptation and mitigation. A Report of the Science-
solutions.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Policy Interface. Bonn: UNCCD. https://www.unccd.int/sites/
Fernando, H.J.S., Mendis, S.G., McCulley, J.L. and Perera, default/files/documents/2017-09/UNCCD_Report_SLM_
K. (2005). Coral poaching worsens tsunami destruction in web_v2.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Sri Lanka. Eos Transactions, American Geophysical Union,
WMO/GWP Integrated Drought Management Programme
86(33), 301-306. DOI: 10.1029/2005EO330002.
(2014). National Drought Management Policy Guidelines –
Hey, D.L. and Heltne, P.G. (2014). Thinking like a river: A A Template for Action (D.A. Wilhite). Geneva/Stockholm:
Riverine National Park for the Upper Mississippi River. WMO/GWP. https://library.wmo.int/pmb_ged/wmo_1164_
Ecological Engineering, 68(8), 8–13. DOI: 10.1016/j. en.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
ecoleng.2013.12.058.
WWF (2002). Managing floods in Europe: the answers
already exist. More intelligent river basin management
using wetlands can alleviate further flooding events. WWF
background briefing paper. WWF, Brussels, Belgium.
158 159
Ecological engineering for disaster risk
reduction and climate change adaptation 14
14.1 Ecological engineering DEFINITION OF GREEN
DRR structural measures most often involve “grey” infrastructure, such as INFRASTRUCTURE
sea walls, dykes and embankments. While their efficacy is proven in many “Green infrastructure is a
cases, these too can fail and provide only a limited set of benefits. Green strategically planned network
and blue infrastructure (GBI) has gained increasing attention in the last of natural and semi-natural
ten years for DRR and CCA. Furthermore, they are also recognized as a areas with other environmental
type of critical infrastructure under Sendai Monitor Targets C and D, that features designed and
can be reported against. managed to deliver a wide
The terms natural and green infrastructure are often used interchangeably range of ecosystem services
although a fine distinction could be made to distinguish various levels of such as water purification, air
natural versus reconstructed infrastructure. Green infrastructure refers quality, space for recreation
to elements in a landscape such as “green belts”, protection forests or and climate mitigation and
revegated river banks. Blue infrastructure refers to water-based areas, adaptation, and management
such as ponds in cities or coral reefs and thus combine both as GBI of wet weather impacts that
(Sebesvari et al. 2019). Da Silva and Wheeler (2017) proposed to use the provides many community
Chapter 14 term green infrastructure over ‘natural’, ‘blue’, or ‘ecological’ infrastructure,

because it is the term most widely used and has been adopted in US
benefits.”
Technical Guidance of the Sendai
and EU policies. In addition, it corresponds to the terminology used in the
Ecological engineering Technical Guidelines of the SFM.
Monitor Framework - UNISDR 2017
for disaster risk reduction Combining engineered (or grey) and ecological/green infrastructures, is
often referred to as hybrid solutions. Ecological engineering combines
and climate change engineered infrastructure for DRR (e.g. dikes, embankments or seawalls)
DEFINITION OF
adaptation with the protective functions of ecosystems, also referred to as natural
infrastructure, or green infrastructure (Dow Chemical Company, Shell, ECOLOGICAL
Swiss Re, Unilever, and TNC 2013). ENGINEERING
“Ecological engineering is
Key questions Engineered infrastructure for DRR is mainly designed for specific functions
the design of sustainable
such as protection from landslides, floods, waves or wind. Sometimes
What is ecological engineering? engineered infrastructure provides additional benefits such as storage for ecosystems that integrate
drinking and irrigation water or generation of hydropower. human society with its
What are its potentials and limitations?
natural environment for the
However, such measures often are very costly and maintenance-intensive. benefit of both. It involves
Furthermore, they are designed for only a limited lifespan. Especially in the the design, construction and
context of CCA, the scale of solutions needed to adapt to increasing weather management of ecosystems
extremes is sometimes hard to predict. Engineered infrastructure may not that have value to both
always be feasible due to the high costs and technological requirements. humans and the environment.
Ecological infrastructure for DRR/CCA, also placed under the umbrella Ecological engineering
term of Eco-DRR/EbA, can be less costly, more locally feasible and provide combines basic and applied
multiple benefits (Jaffe 2010, European Commission 2016), compared science from engineering,
with engineered solutions (Figure 14.1). In many cases, maintaining ecology, economics, and
and restoring natural infrastructure can offer a high benefit to cost-ratio natural sciences for the
compared to engineered infrastructure, when taking into account the full restoration and construction
range of benefits provided by ecosystems. For example, coastal green of aquatic and terrestrial
belts or wetlands as natural buffers are often less expensive to install ecosystems. The field is
and maintain than engineered constructions over time. In addition, they increasing in breadth and
also provide supplementary co-benefits regardless of a disaster event depth as more opportunities
(Narayan et al. 2016, Wamsler et al. 2016). In comparison engineered to design and use ecosystems
infrastructure may fulfill the same main targets and provide more easily as interfaces between
quantifiable disaster prevention and hazard mitigation, which may be why technology and environment
there is often a bias towards engineered solutions, but comparably fewer are explored.”
co-benefits. Ecological Engineering Group
http://www.ecological-engineering.com
© UNEP
160 161
Examples of ecological engineering
Carbon Carbon
sequestration sequestration ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING APPROACH EXAMPLES OF ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING
Biodiversity Biodiversity
conservation Disaster conservation Disaster Active restoration of ecosystems Aeration of lakes
prevention and prevention and Restoration of banks (rivers, canals), wetlands, areas affected by
recovery recovery
Stabilisation Stabilisation opencast mining
of regional of regional Application of defragmentation measures to roads
climate climate
Hazard ENGINEERED Hazard Sustainable use of ecosystem Traditional use of ecosystems
Eco-DRR/EbA mitigation APPROACHES mitigation goods and services Combined agriculture and forestry
Water and soil Water and soil Integrated agri-/fishculture
protection protection Dynamic coastal management by sand supplementation on foreshore
Climate change Climate change Waste processing Composing of organic substances
adaptation adaptation (imitation of natural cycles
Heritage and Heritage and Urine separation in toilet systems for agricultural use
culture culture Sustainable in ecosystems) Use of vegetation for absorption of dust/pollutants
Sustainable
livelihoods livelihoods
Creation of ‘constructed’ Constructed wetlands as biotopes
ecosystems Green roofs as water buffers and plant/animal habitats
Creation and management of gardens, parks, wind belts and wildlife
Figure 14.1 corridors – habitat and corridor functions
Multiple benefits of Eco-DRR/ To be effective, ecological engineering for DRR requires reliable data
EbA as compared to engineered Updated and amended from Van Bohemen (2012)
on hazard frequencies and an expert understanding of the local geo-
infrastructure. hydrological and ecological conditions. Often ecological engineering
Credits: U. Nehren, and S. Sandholz,
Design: S. Plog
may be the most cost-effective and appropriate solution to reducing risk, 14.2 The potentials and limitations of
Valuing urban coastal
as compared to grey infrastructure alone. The issue of cost-benefit of
Eco-DRR/EbA and grey versus green infrastructure is something we will
ecological engineering resilience nature’s role
explore in more detail in chapter 15. Green/blue infrastructure solutions Ecosystems also have limitations. Installing ecological infrastructure Post-Hurricane Sandy, the
can also protect grey infrastructure, thus reducing maintenance costs and can be time-consuming and require additional space. For example, trees Urban Coastal Resilience
enhancing the sustainability of grey infrastructure. need time to grow before the forest can provide effective protection from Project found that nature-
landslides and avalanches. Ecological infrastructure should not replace based features (such as
In recognizing the benefits of Eco-DRR/EbA, one must also be aware of
other critical life-saving DRR measures, such as early warning systems, mussel beds and restored
the limits, which depend on the type and intensity of the hazard, the type
preparedness and adequate contingency planning. marsh) can be successfully
and health of the ecosystem, and the correct application of ecosystem
management. After decades of straightening rivers, building dams and Depending on the circumstance, in particular the type of disaster risk (i.e. used in a dense, urban setting
dykes, the US Army Corps of Engineers has reversed many of its practices expected magnitude of the hazard and density of settlements) natural in combination with “grey”
and realized the importance of building with rather than against nature. infrastructure should be considered as complementary to engineered defences (like sea walls
They have developed useful guidelines for ecological restoration and infrastructure as long as there are no additional environmental impacts. and flood gates) to provide
ecological engineering5. Some regions in Switzerland have also embarked It is critical to involve environmental experts together with disaster risk efficient and cost-effective
on a river renaturalisation project spanning over more than 10 years to experts, to do site- and context-specific planning and to consider future protection from sea level
reduce flooding by returning the rivers in their natural state (Département climate scenarios. Ecological infrastructure can fail as well, for example rise, storm surge and coastal
du territoire 2009). when long-term maintenance is not guaranteed, or inappropriate species flooding. The study found
are selected. In some cases, natural buffers are not feasible due to that combining natural and
biological limitations, space constraints, incompatibility with priority land grey defences holds the most
uses, or prohibitive costs (Figure 14.2). benefits. Analysis shows that
a hybrid alternative could
result in avoided losses in
one neighborhood of up to
$244 million from the current
1-in-100-year storm event.
TNC 2015
ECOLOGICAL
ENGINEERING
CAN ADDRESS MULTIPLE HAZARDS
RECOGNIZES LIMITATIONS OF
NATURAL AND ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS
COSTLY OFTEN REQUIRED IN DENSELY POPULATED TIME-CONSUMING
AREAS WHERE LAND IS SCARCE
MAINTENANCE-INTENSIVE DOES NOT REPLACE OTHER
RECOGNIZES SHORT AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION MEASURES
LIMITED LIFESPAN LONG TERM PRIORITIES SPACE-INTENSIVE
COST-EFFICIENT Figure 14.2
5 see USACE publications: https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/USACE- COMMON Potential of ecological engineering.
Publications/Engineer-Manuals/ Accessed 30 August 2019. Credit: S. Sandholz, Layout S. Plog
162 163
Evaluation of green versus grey solutions more ecosystem-based structures that can also be used for recreation,
may be possible. The city of Munich restored an artificial canal bed to What is Ecosystem
EVALUATION GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE GREY INFRASTRUCTURE a more natural shape and function in order to improve flood control, Restoration?
CRITERIA biodiversity and recreational opportunities, using a combination of Ecosystem Restoration is
Engineering - Green solutions require a custom-made, location, + Traditional engineering solutions enable approaches (Arzet and Joven n/a). the “process of assisting the
approach specific design and do not easily lend themselves standardization and replication which can
Another example, mangrove belts can be used hand-in-hand with recovery of an ecosystem
to standardization and replication significantly reduce project costs and that has been degraded,
delivery times
engineered coastal defences, where appropriate for coastal dynamics.
Similarly, wetlands can be used to reduce wave action to protect human- damaged or destroyed”.
Physical - A large physical footprint is often required + Usually, only a small physical footprint is built levees, increasing their effectiveness and lifespan. The need for Society for Ecological Restoration
footprint due to low energy density required due to high energy density International Science and Policy
combined solutions using engineering options also depends on the
Environmental + Often reduced environmental footprint - Often increased environmental footprint due local context (Figure 14.3). For instance, forests may stabilize snow on Working Group 2004.
footprint due to green solutions being nature-based to material and energy intensive processes avalanche-prone slopes but depending on the magnitude and strength
and self-regenerating (manufacturing, distribution, operation) of the forest, it will not be able to stop an avalanche once it has started.
Speed of - Green solutions may take time (years) to grow + Traditional engineering solutions provide
delivering the to provide a certain service and capacity a certain service and capacity from day 1
functionality of operation
Susceptibility - Green solutions are susceptible to extreme weather - Grey infrastructure is susceptible to power
to external conditions, seasonal changes in temperature or loss, mechanical failure of industrial
factors rainfall and disease, although natural systems will equipment and price volatility
regenerate naturally after a disaster
Operational and + Often significantly lower as only - Operating costs are often significantly higher
maintenance monitoring and feedback is required due to power consumption, operational and
costs maintenance requirements
Need for + Recapitalization during the life of the green - Grey solutions are depreciating assets
recapitalization solution is usually not significant. The end of with a finite performance capacity and
life replacement/ decommissioning will vary usually require significant replacement/
greatly depending on the technology selected but decommissioning at end of life
is usually not necessary as solutions are self-
sustaining and do not depreciate
Amended from Joint Industry White Paper, TNC 2013
There are many opportunities for ecological engineering, which is itself

only beginning to emerge as a growing field. Especially in urban areas,
land is scarce and there may not be enough space for green infrastructure
without major relocations. At the same time, urban areas are currently
at the forefront of much innovation when it comes to urban greening
whether with green roof tops, replacing impervious surfaces with plant
boxes to promote drainage, permeable pavements, creating artificial
wetlands for storm water treatment and planting more trees to promote
cooler cities. Many cities and regions are introducing green solutions. For
instance, Bogotá, Columbia is pursuing upstream landscape conservation
and restoration as an alternative to more conventional water treatment Combining natural and engineered measures makes sense, because: Figure 14.3
technologies. Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam restored mangroves instead of Top left: hybrid avalanche protection
A combined approach can benefit from the potentials of both types of
building dikes in order to protect shorelines from storm damage (Talberth with snow fence and forest, Austria
measures and address multiple hazards, for example protection from (Credit: S. Sandholz). Top right:
et al. 2012).
flooding and landslides. river renaturation, Germany (Credit:
Another example is the European Union that has adopted a Green Zumbroich Consulting). Bottom left:
Combined natural and engineered solutions can complement each
Infrastructure Strategy to promote its development in EU’s urban and hybrid coastal protection, Sri Lanka
other and minimize limitations. However, it is important that the
rural areas. This strategy is considered as cross-cutting because its goals (Credit: B. McAdoo). Bottom right:
engineered measures do not severely damage the ecosystem and
support – among others – the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Roadmap hybrid landslide protection with
natural processes in an unsustainable manner. geotextile, Brazil (Credit: W. Lange).
on a Resource Efficient Europe (European Commission 2016).
Hybrid solutions are often required in densely populated areas where
Riverine cities are usually built just up to the waterfront, without any
land is scarce and can also address both, short- and long-term priorities.
retention areas. Such cases require cooperating on a river basin or
watershed scale to create room for natural water retention further
upstream, and also in certain city areas, redesigning the landscape to
include both engineered structures such as flood protection walls and
164 165
The cost-efficiency of hybrid solutions has been proven by a growing plants. The preliminary results indicate that investment in a package of
number of case studies. Take the example from New York City which these green infrastructure options could represent a cost savings of $68 EXAMPLE:
launched its green infrastructure plan in 2010 (Figure 14.4). million or 51%, relative to the grey infrastructure option in the low-cost WATER-RELATED
scenario (Talberth et al. 2012). AGRO-ENVIRONMENTAL
At the time, the grey infrastructure of the sewer system was in urgent
MEASURES
need for upgrading with estimated costs of 6.8 billion US$. Instead, the The EU undertook a study on how green infrastructure can mitigate flood
city decided to invest in a «green infrastructure» plan which cost 5.3 billion risk as well as their financial, economic and social impacts. An analysis of In the village of Sint-Truiden
US$. The plan includes green roof tops, green sidewalks, upstream and 363 floods recorded between 2002 and 2013 in the EU estimated that total in Belgium, measures were
urban wetlands, and ponds for cooling the city, aesthetics and for storm damages amounted to €150 billion. Concerning the potentials of green taken for soil erosion and
water retention, serving not only for DRR but also for CCA. In addition to infrastructure, it found that “investment in flood protection typically returns mud floods protection,
its initial lower cost, over time the benefits of green infrastructure accrue benefits 6-8 times the costs, with green infrastructure projects potentially including grassed
while grey infrastructure requires renewed investment after 10-15 years delivering significant environmental benefits as well as cost savings.” waterways, grassed buffer
(NYC 2013). Green infrastructure projects were found to require significant upfront strips and retention ponds
investment but at the same time a high potential to deliver significantly in the catchment area.
greater environmental benefits alongside reduction in flood damages The total cost of these
and, potentially savings from reduced costs compared with traditional measures was low (126€/
NYC GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME ha/20 years) compared to
defenses (Udo et al. 2014).
COSTS BENEFITS OVER TIME damage remediation and
SEWER SYSTEM
clean-up costs caused by
must be renewed after 10-15 years 14.3 Conclusions muddy floods (54€/ha/
GREY
6.8 BILLION US$ INFRASTRUCTURE Ecological engineering is a no-regrets strategy, and it has already proven to year). Secondary benefits
5.3 BILLION US$ GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE GREEN ROOF TOPS be effective (Dudley et al. 2010, Trzyna 2014, UNEP et al. 2014, Narayan et include better downstream
GREEN SIDEWALKS al. 2016). Where the ecological system is not critically damaged, grey and water quality; lower
UPSTREAM AND URBAN WETLANDS
PONDS green approaches can be complementary and combined. Furthermore, downstream dredging
with the inclusion of green infrastructure in the Sendai Monitor, the global costs; less psychological
Figure 14.4 DRR community is encouraging investments in resilient infrastructure, stress for inhabitants and
Potential of ecological engineering including green and blue infrastructure. The indicators under Target C5 greater biodiversity. Greater
and cost benefit of grey versus
focus on direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed biodiversity and better
green infrastructure. The early results of the program monitoring indicate that:
Credit: NYC 2010. Design: S. Plog
critical infrastructure attributed to disasters and Target D4 on the number landscape quality created
All green infrastructure practices have provided benefits for storms of other destroyed or damaged critical infrastructure units and facilities new agro- and eco-tourism
greater than one inch; attributed to disasters. For these two indicators, a footnote in the Sendai opportunities.
Green infrastructure retains substantial runoff volumes, supporting Monitor directly suggests that green infrastructure can be reported
European Commission 2016
more effective stormwater control; against (Sebesvari et al. 2019).
Growth and establishment of plants improve the infiltration and Knowledge on ecological engineering exists thanks to work undertaken in a
evapotranspiration of stormwater runoff. few countries and guidelines written for example ´Engineering with Nature´
(Bridges et al. 2018) and EcoShape (2014). However, implementation may
In addition, the following co-benefits were highlighted: be locally specific depending on local climate conditions and protection
Carbon sequestration by vegetation is helping NYC to meet its needs. Fortunately, there are a growing number of case studies from
greenhouse gas reduction goals; various countries, scales and settings that prove its efficiency, also in
Shading and improved insulation from green infrastructure reduces economic terms. However, both ecological and engineered infrastructure
the energy demand; for DRR, have their limits and opportunities, their pros and cons. For an
engineer who is usually trained in engineering solutions, it is certainly
Green infrastructure offers opportunities for improved soil health and worth considering hybrid solutions for reducing disaster risk and adapting
urban habitat that supports pollinators and other wildlife; to climate change impacts. The same is true for environmental managers,
Vegetation is supporting an improved air quality; trained to think in terms of green solutions. There are few engineering
Vegetation is supporting human well-being; programmes that offer specialisations in ecological engineering but
growing interest in this topic should pave the way for new opportunities
Green infrastructure offers potential for the establishment of green in this innovative field.
jobs (as amended from NYC 2013).
The World Resources Institute conducted a study on two major watersheds
in Maine and North Carolina, USA, in support of emerging payments for
watershed services (PWS) programs. For water utilities, PWS that protect
“green” infrastructure like forests and riparian buffers can be a far more
cost-effective approach for meeting water quality standards than building
new “grey” infrastructure, such as filtration and wastewater treatment
166 167
Arzet, K. and Joven, S. (n/a). The Isar experience: Urban Ecological Engineering Group (n/a). Definition of Ecological Society for Ecological Restoration International Science and UNEP, UNEP-DHI, IUCN, TNC and WRI (2014). Green
river restoration in Munich. https://www.wwa-m.bayern. Engineering. http://www.ecological-engineering.com/defs. Policy Working Group. (2004). The SER International Primer Infrastructure Guide for Water Management: Ecosystem-
de/fluesse_seen/massnahmen/isarplan/doc/the_isar_ html Accessed 24 July 2019. on Ecological Restoration. Tucson: Society for Ecological based management approaches for water-related
experience.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. Restoration International. https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www. infrastructure projects. Geneva: UNEP. http://www.UNEPdhi.
Ecoshape (n/a). Building with Nature. https://www.
ser.org/resource/resmgr/custompages/publications/SER_ org/-/media/microsite_UNEPdhi/publications/documents/
Bridges, T. S., Bourne, E.M., King, J.K., Kuzmitski, H.K., ecoshape.org/en/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
Primer/ser_primer.pdf Accessed 26 July 2019. UNEP/web-UNEP-dhigroup-green-infrastructure-guide-
Moynihan, E.B. and Suedel, B.C. (2018). Engineering
European Commission (2016). Supporting the en-20140814.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
With Nature: an Atlas. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Talberth, J., Gray, E., Branosky, E., and Gartner, T. (2012).
Implementation of Green Infrastructure – Final Report.
Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Insights from the Field: Forests for Water. Washington: World UNISDR (2017). Technical Guidance for Monitoring and
Luxembourg: European Commission. https://publications.
DOI:10.21079/11681/27929. Resources Institute. http://pdf.wri.org/insights_from_the_ Reporting on Progress in Achieving the Global Targets of
europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9756febd-
field_forests_for_water.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva:
Da Silva, J. M. C. and Wheeler, E. (2017). Ecosystems as 41ac-11e6-af30-01aa75ed71a1/language-en Accessed
UNDRR https://www.preventionweb.net/files/54970_
infrastructure. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 24 July 2019. Talberth, J., Gray, E., Branosky, E., and Gartner, T. (2012).
techguidancefdigitalhr.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
15(1),32–35. DOI: 0.1016/j.pecon.2016.11.005. Insights from the Field: Forests for Water. Washington: World
Jaffe, M. (2010). Reflections on Green Infrastructure
Resources Institute. http://pdf.wri.org/insights_from_the_ van Bohemen, H. (2012). (Eco)System Thinking: Ecological
Département du territoire (2009). Renaturation des cours Economics. Environmental Practice, 12(14), 357-365. DOI:
field_forests_for_water.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. Principles for Buildings, Roads and Industrial and Urban
d’eau du canton de Genève, bilan de 10 ans d’actions. 10.1017/S1466046610000475.
Areas. In Sustainable Urban Environments. Van Bueren, E.M.,
Genève: Office cantonal de l’eau. https://www.ge.ch/ TNC (2013). The case for green infrastructure. Joint-Industry
Narayan, S., Beck, M.W., Reguero, B.G., Losada, I.J., van van Bohemen, H., Itard, L., Visscher, H. (eds.). Dordrecht:
document/renaturation-rivieres-genevoises-bilan-10-ans- White Paper. https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/
Wesenbeeck, B., Pontee, N., Sanchirico, J.N., Ingram, Springer. 15-70. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-1294-2_2.
actions-1998-2008 Accessed 24 July 2019. nature/en/documents/the-case-for-green-infrastructure.pdf
J.C., Lange, G.-M. and Burks-Copes, K.A. (2016). The
Accessed 26 July 2019. Wamsler, C., Niven, L., Beery, T.H., Bramryd, T., Ekelund,
Dow Chemical Company, Shell, Swiss Re, Unilever, and TNC Effectiveness, Costs and Coastal Protection Benefits of
N., Jönsson, K.I., Osmani, A., Palo, T. and Stålhammar, S.
(2013). The Case of Green Infrastructure. Joint-Industry Natural and Nature-Based Defenses. PLoS ONE, 11(5). DOI: TNC (2015). Urban costal resilience: valuing nature’s role.
(2016). Operationalizing ecosystem-based adaptation:
White Paper. https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/ 10.1371/journal.pone.0154735. Case Study: Howards beach, Queens, New York. TNC.
harnessing ecosystem services to buffer communities
nature/en/documents/the-case-for-green-infrastructure.pdf https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/
New York City (2013). NYC Green Infrastructure. 2013 against climate change. Ecology and Society, 21(1), 31. DOI:
Accessed 24 July 2019. documents/urban-coastal-resilience.pdf Accessed
Annual Report. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_ 10.5751/ES-08266-210131.
26 July 2019.
Downing, J., Blumber, L. and Hallstein, E. (2014). infrastructure/gi_annual_report_2014.pdf Accessed
Reducing Climate Risks with Natural Infrastructure. San 24 July 2019. Trzyna, T. (2014). Urban Protected Areas: Profiles and Best
Francisco: TNC. https://www.conservationgateway.org/ Practice Guidelines. Gland: IUCN. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/
New York City (2010). Green Infrastructure Plan, A
ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/ downloads/bpg_urban_protected_areas.pdf Accessed
Sustainable Plan for Green Waterways. New York: City
california/Documents/Reducing%20Climate%20Risks%20 24 July 2019.
of New York.http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/green_
w%20Natural%20Infrastructure.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
infrastructure/NYCGreenInfrastructurePlan_LowRes.pdf Udo J., Garrett L., Daly E., Elding C., Fleet D., Fenn T.,
Dudley, N., Stolton, S., Belokurov, A., Krueger, L., Lopoukhine, Accessed 24 July 2019. Hartman M. (2014). Study on Economic and Social Benefits
N., MacKinnon, K., Sandwith, T. and Sekhran, N. (eds.) of Environmental Protection and Resource Efficiency
Sebesvari, Z., Woelki, J., Walz, Y., Sudmeier-Rieux, K.,
(2010). Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people Related to the European Semester. Luxembourg: European
Sandholz, S., Tol, S., Ruíz García, V. and Renaud, F.
cope with climate change. Gland/ Washington, DC/New Commission, HKV and RPA. https://publications.europa.eu/
(2019). Opportunities for Green Infrastructure and
York: IUCN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World Bank en/publication-detail/-/publication/ef0c52c7-ed27-4b86-
Ecosystems in the Sendai Framework Monitor. Progress
and WWF. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/natural_ a4c3-e34d1bab4d1c Accessed 24 July 2019.
in Disaster Science, 2(2019), 100021 DOI: 10.1016/j.
solutions.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
pdisas.2019.100021.
168 169
Economic tools for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and adaptation
15
15.1 Main economic tools used for decision-
making on disaster risk reduction
Decisions on how to reduce disaster risks are often made based on a
variety of economic tools and at various scales from the international
down to the local levels. Decision-making on DRR at the macro level by
governments will differ from decision-making by local stakeholders. Yet
the principle is very similar: we want to have the best protection against
hazard events, if possible with the least amount of investments and costs
over a certain time period. There are also certain constraints that affect
decision-making on investments in DRR and adaptation. These include
limited financial resources, time frames and the expertise available. In
developing countries especially, financial resources are scarce and the
budget available for DRR and adaptation must be subdivided in technical,
ecological, and socio-economic measures.
In many cases, major financial decisions and implementation of DRR are
taken following a disaster. Disasters cause economic losses which are
more readily absorbed by larger economies and may actually stimulate
growth but overall are setbacks for developing countries which may take
years to recover. After a disaster, a Post Disaster Needs Assessment
(PDNA) is a suitable tool to assess losses and where to place effort and
investment in a holistic cross-sectoral approach. It is often at this stage
that ecosystem-based management and other preventative measures are
considered and implemented with part of the influx of calamity funds now
Chapter 15 available to a country.

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is one of the most common economic tools
Economic tools for to guide decision-making, multi-criteria evaluations is another. This
chapter will focus on cost benefit analysis as it is the most common
ecosystem-based disaster economic tool for decision-making and thus relevant for Eco-DRR/EbA.
However, it is also important to understand ecosystem valuation. We
risk reduction and adaptation usually consider investments in DRR as either structural or non-structural
measures: examples of structural measures include retrofitting buildings
or investments in engineered (grey) or ecological (green) infrastructure.
Key questions Non-structural measures include emergency training, early warning
systems or spatial planning (Figure 15.1).
What economic tools are used by
governments, project managers and
communities for decision-making on DRR? Figure 15.1
Disaster Risk Reduction Structural and non-structural
How do we conduct a cost-benefit analysis Measures to reduce disaster risk of systems and people measures for reducing disaster risk.
in the context of Eco-DRR/EbA? Design: L. Rharade. Redrawn by
L. Monk
What are Payments for Ecosystem
Services and how could they be applied
to Eco-DRR/EbA? Structural Non structural
Mitigating damages Preparedness
Retrofitting buildings Emergency training
Engineered and Early warning systems
natural infrastructure Evacuation drills
Response plans
Spatial planning
Economics support decision making about which

measures to undertake
170 171
15
Unfortunately, many governments do not often consider investments in
ecosystems, or green infrastructure as part of the range of possible DRR
15.2 Post-disaster needs assessments ESTIMATED DAMAGE,
measures. However, CBAs have shown that investments in ecosystem- Disasters cause not only devastation to people and cities but they also LOSSES AND NEEDS:
based measures can be cost-effective in the long run and have additional have large economic consequences. The following table shows economic Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng
benefits which technical measures cannot offer. Over the long-run, green consequences of disasters similar to the typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in on the Philipinnes caused
infrastructure benefits often accrue while grey investments require renewal the Philippines in 2009. substantial damage and
or high maintenance costs. Figure 15.2 shows the strength of structures losses, equivalent to about
of civil engineering measures (i.e. gabion walls) as compared to soil bio- DISASTER COUNTRY YEAR TOTAL EFFECTS MAGNITUDE 2.7% of GDP.
engineering/green infrastructure measures (i.e. a re-vegetated slope, (US$ million) (% of GDP) Damages:
where appropriate). After some years, the wall will need to be replaced The storms hit regions of the
Earthquake Pakistan 2005 2,876 0.4
while the vegetation on the slope will continue to grow and strengthen country that account for over
the slope (e.g. the New York City Green Infrastructure Programme in East Asia Tsunami (Aceh) Indonesia 2005 4,452 1.6
60% of the GDP (including
Chapter 14). Cyclone Sidr Bangladesh 2007 1,640 2.8 the National Capital Region,
Cyclone Season Madagascar 2008 333 4.0 which accounts for about 38%
Figure 15.2 of the total GDP). The PDNA
Civil engineering versus green Cyclone Nargis Myanmar 2008 4,060 19.7
100 found that damage to physical
CIVIL ENGI GINEERING
infrastructure (in this case, soil NEER O-EN
RELATIVE STRENGTH OF STRUCTURE (%)
ING BI Storm and Floods Yemen 2008 1,638 6.0 assets in the affected areas
bio-engineering) for strength of IL
SO amounts to an estimated
structures over time. Typhoons Ketsana Philippines 2009 4,383 2.7
Source: modified from CESVI 2013. and Parma Php 68.2 billion, equivalent to
Design: S. Plog US$1.45 billion.
Table 15.1
50 Losses:
Damage, losses and magnitude of similar disasters to the tyhoons Ondoy and
Pepeng. Source: modified from the World Bank Post-Disaster Needs Assessment
The adverse impacts on
on the Philippines typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng. Design: L. Rharade the productive sectors were
largely due to damaged or lost
inventories, raw materials and
The PDNA methodology is an important tool for assessing post-disaster
crops. In addition, business
costs. The main goal is to assess the full extent of a disaster’s impact,
0 15 30 operations were interrupted by
define the needs for recovery, and, in so doing, serve as the basis for
TIME (YEARS) power and water shortages,
designing a recovery strategy and guide donors’ funding. A PDNA
damaged machinery, and
looks ahead to restoring damaged infrastructure, houses, livelihoods,
absent employees, which
As discussed in Chapter 14, it is of course possible and often necessary to services, governance and social systems, and includes an emphasis on
contributed to an overall
combine grey and green infrastructure to optimize protection as long as reducing future disaster risks and building resilience. As it usually covers
reduction in production
civil engineering structures do not create unsustainable ecological harm. infrastructure, agriculture, social and DRR sectors (among others), it has
capacity. While the destruction
a huge potential for mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA in “build back better”
or damage to assets occurred
approaches (Hinzpeter and Sandholz 2018).
at the time of the storms,
the associated changes in
WHAT IS A POST-DISASTER NEEDS ASSESSMENT (PDNA)? economic flows lasted beyond
Guiding Principles: - incorporates risk reduction impact and needs. Together, the (in flows of goods and services, includes analysis of primary data the present calendar year.
A Post-Disaster Needs measures and financing analyses of damages, losses and income, costs) that arise due from household or other units of In some sectors and cases,
Assessment (PDNA) is a plans; needs are used to develop the to the temporary absence of analysis and provides insight into the effects were felt in 2010
government-led exercise based Recovery Framework. the destroyed assets. The the recovery and reconstruction and 2011 depending on the
-p
rovides a systemic link into speed and efficiency of the
on a guideline developed by sustainable development. The DALA is quantitative in nature DALA highlights the possible from the viewpoint of the
the UN Development Group, consequences on the growth affected community. post-disaster recovery and
Methodology: and is used to value damages reconstruction activities.
the World Bank and the arising from a hazardous event, of the national economy, the The Recovery Framework
European Union. It: The PDNA is comprised of a external sector and the fiscal Needs:
‘Damage and Loss Assessment’ and the subsequent economic summarizes the recovery
- provides a platform for the losses caused by the event. balances, as well as the impact recommendations from the A total of US$ 942.9 million
(DALA), a ‘Human Recovery due to decline of income and was required to meet recovery
international community This methodology, developed sectorial assessments within
Needs Assessment’ (HRNA) and livelihoods of households needs, and a total of US$ 3.48
to assist the affected by the United Nations Economic the PDNA. It outlines the short,
a ‘Recovery Framework’. or individuals. billion was required for the
Government in recovery and Commission for Latin America medium and longer term
reconstruction; In prior PDNAs, the World (ECLAC) in the 1970s, provides The HRNA focuses on the social priorities for the country’s reconstruction efforts over
Bank and IFIs have focused a standardized tool for the impact of disasters, analyzing recovery. the short term (2009-10) to
- provides a coordinated and medium term (2011-12).
on the damage and loss valuation of disaster damage how disasters affect local
credible basis for recovery Global Facility for Disaster Risk
assessment, the UN agencies (in physical assets, capital stock, patterns of life, social structures (Teves and Hofman 2011)
and reconstruction planning; Reduction and recovery PDNA
on the identification of human material goods) and losses and institutions. A HRNA
172 173
15
The PDNA carried out in the aftermath of typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in Figure 15.4
the Philippines provided a quantification of the damage and losses to the
REPLANT MANGROVES $ 1,781 $ 3,016 Cost of adaptation options
economy, the social and economic impacts of the disaster, as well as a REPLANT STREAM BUFFER $ 935 $ 1,584 for Lami Town, Fiji.
Source: modified from: Rao et al.,
recovery and reconstruction strategy to address these (World Bank 2011). MONITORING & ENFORCEMENT $ 89 $ 155
2013. Design: S. Plog
ADAPTATION OPTIONS
The 2011 National Greening Program was created in the Philippines in REDUCE UPLAND LOGGING $ 65 $ 114
the aftermath of Hurricane Haiyan. It seeked to grow 1.5 billion trees in REDUCE CORAL EXTRACTION $ 44 $ 78
1.5 million hectares nationwide within a period of six years, from 2011 to
2016 to improve the resilience of the area. Thus, Eco-DRR/EbA measures BUILD SEA WALLS$ 12,377 $ 15,188
can be planned within the PDNA. REINFORCE RIVERS $ 1,975 $ 2,424
Kerala’s PDNA report after the floods in 2018, has incorporated Eco-DRR/ INCREASE DRAINAGE $ 1,348 $ 1,655
EbA by suggesting to build back better to a green and resilient state,
including 1) Integrated Water Resource Management, 2) an eco-sensitive 10-YEARS 20-YEARS COST (1000 FJD)
and risk-informed approach to land use, 3) inclusive and people centered, ENGINEERING ACTION
and 4) Knowledge, innovation and technology (Kerala PDNA 2018).

ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION ACTION
15.3 Cost benefit analysis in the context Based on the Lami, Fiji study, here are steps for developing scenarios
of ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction for decision-making on green, grey/green or grey investments in DRR/
adaptation (Figure 15.5).
and adaptation 1. Identify possible grey and green DRR/CCA measures and the type
CI, the SPREP, UNEP and UN Habitat for the town of Lami, Fiji, carried out a cost- of hazard or threat. You can use a vulnerability and capacity analysis
benefit analysis to assess adaptation options for the city (Figure 15.3). (VCA) to identify the greatest threats and hazards.
They compared green solutions such as planting mangroves and
2. Estimate the costs of implementing each measure. What are the
replanting stream buffers with engineering measures such as building
costs for installation, maintenance, labour and opportunity costs for
seawalls and increased drainage.
each measure?
3. Estimate the costs of inaction. Inaction can be expressed as expected
Figure 15.3 COST OVER 10 YEARS COST OVER 20 YEARS
damage losses, which can be estimated either by using existing data on
Adaptation options, Lami Town, Fiji. REDUCE CORAL EXTRACTION
$ previous losses to infrastructure, households and businesses, the cost of
Source: modified from: Rao et al., REDUCE UPLAND LOGGING LOW COST
2013. Design: S. Plog repairs, provision of relief supplies, health and education costs. However,
MONITORING & ENFORCEMENT
when action is taken, then we expect some proportion of storm damages
REPLANT STREAM BUFFER $$ to be reduced. These benefits are considered “avoided costs”.
ADAPTATION OPTIONS
INCREASE DRAINAGE
MEDIUM 4. Develop scenarios. These can range from completely green to grey/
REINFORCE RIVERS green to completely grey engineering measures for a given hazard or
REPLANT MANGROVES multi-hazard situation. Consider that climate change is creating more
BUILD SEA WALLS HIGH $$$ uncertainty so your scenarios will need to include the possibility of
TOTAL COST more extreme events.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
[ 1000 FJD ]
5. Perform a cost-benefit analysis for each scenario and consider the
ENGINEERING ACTION
avoided damages. You must include a net present value (NPV), an
ECOSYSTEM-BASED ADAPTATION ACTION annualized net present value and a benefit-cost ratio. NPV analysis
estimates the difference in the present value of the benefits (accrued
revenues or monetary savings from a proposed investment) minus
The study concluded that ecosystem-based measures yielded a greater the present value of the costs (accrued expenditures from a proposed
benefit to cost ratio, as compared to engineering actions (Figure 15.4). investment). The annualized NPV (ANPV) is the average yearly net
Nonetheless, the study also revealed that in terms of avoided (flood) return over the lifetime of the suite of adaptation options, that is, the
damage, engineered measures provided 15-25% greater protection than annualized cash flow (Rao et al. 2013).
ecosystem-based measures, thus recommending that a hybrid between
6. Estimate the value of the ecosystem services to development,
green and grey infrastructure be used as part of the city’s coastal defence
livelihoods, environmental quality, and carbon sequestration that you
and adaptation strategy.
may be able to value, and some that cannot be valued monetarily.
You can do this by using a combination of global and local economic
valuation studies that you can find in the reference materials. Also see
the section below for more details on valuing ecosystem benefits.
7. Communicate the co-benefits of ecosystem services as both direct and
indirect values, carefully documenting and justifying your approach.
174 175
15
8. Consider non-structural measures for reducing disaster risks, such
as capacity building, early warning systems, legal, policy or regulatory TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE OF ECOSYSTEMS
actions. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) series is one
9. Discuss the different scenarios for structural and non-structural of the most comprehensive studies of ecosystem values and led
measures. The results can be presented to the stakeholder group as a greater awareness about ecosystem valuation. Other studies have
basis for your discussions. Consider who will benefit from the various assessed the economic value of ecosystems (e.g. Costanza et al.
options and what could be other hidden social or environmental costs 1997, Daily 1997) and the concept of Total Economic Value (TEV)
linked to the various scenarios. (Figure 15.6) has become a widely used framework for looking at
the utilitarian value of ecosystems). This framework typically splits
Note: Be transparent about the limitations of your scenarios and suggest TEV into two categories: use values and non-use values (Emerton
ways to improve the method for next time. 1998, de Groot et al. 2010).
Use values are composed of three elements: direct and indirect
use and option values. Direct use values encompass goods which
can be extracted, consumed or enjoyed directly. Indirect use values
1 7
Figure 15.5
Steps identifying for green,
grey/green or grey scenarios.
Identify possible
structural measures 6 Estimate
ecosystem values
Communicate
co-benefits
are the services the environment provides such as air and water
purification and pollination. Option values are those related to
Inspired by Rao et al. 2013. maintaining the option use an ecosystem good or value in the future
Design: K. Sudmeier (de Groot et al. 2010).
2 Estimate the costs

of each measure 5 Perform CBAs
8 Consider non-
structural measures
Non-use values consider the benefits the environment may provide
without direct or indirect use. Oftentimes, this relates to ethical
values such as protection of endangered species. Finally, bequest
values are those related to the willingness to pass on values to
future generations. Although this distinction between values is
3 Estimate the
cost of inaction 4 Develop scenarios
9 Discuss with
stakeholders extremely useful as it helps to value such things that cannot
easily be monetized, often decision-makers unfortunately only
consider mainly direct use values or possible indirect use values of
ecosystem services (de Groot et al. 2010).
15.4 Ecosystem valuation Figure 15.6

The Total Economic
In economics, money is usually the common denominator for attributing Value Framework.
value to ecosystem services. These can fall into three basic types: direct TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE © L. Emerton (1998)
market valuation; indirect market valuation; and survey-based valuation
(i.e. contingent valuation and group valuation) (de Groot et al. 2010). If
data are lacking, economists often use “replacement or avoided costs”.
This refers to the cost that would be incurred if an ecosystem (i.e. coral
USE VALUE NON-USE VALUE
reefs) is destroyed and has to be replaced by an engineered structure
(i.e. seawalls). Replacement costs also refer to the cost of having to
rebuild infrastructure (i.e. roads, housing) that are no longer protected by
ecosystems (i.e. forests on mountain slopes). Emerton (2009) estimated
that along the coast of Indonesia, the cost of replacing roads and houses
in the event of strong waves is estimated at US$50,000/km, and the
cost of maintaining sandy beaches for tourism is US$1 million/km, both
are protected and maintained naturally by coral reefs (Emerton 2009),
saving society large sums of money. Considering the case of Lami, Fiji, DIRECT USE INDIRECT USE OPTION BEQUEST EXISTENCE
VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE
the replacement cost would include the cost to build a sea wall and most
likely also frequent beach replenishment. And this does not include many Resources Resources Our future Future generation Right of
used directly used indirectly possible use possible use existence
other values such as water filtration, tourism or aesthetics provided by
Provisioning Regulating ALL services ALL services Supporting
the ecosystems. Therefore, we observe that valuing ecosystems as part services services (including (including services
of cost-benefit analysis is limited as such economic tools do not take into (ex. water, fish) (ex. flood supporting supporting (ex. panda,
account the total value of ecosystems. Cultural and prevention, water services) services) blue whales,
amenity services purification) wild eagle)
(ex. recreation)
176 177
15
THE VEOLIA WATER CASE STUDY WATERSHED CASE STUDY
Another study of ecosystem services was conducted by the World Figure 15.7 illustrates how forested watersheds can reduce the cost of
Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) in one of water treatment significantly by comparing the percentage of watershed
Veolia Water’s (a large French water utility) sites. The water catchment cover and water treatment costs. This case study demonstrates that a
of Crepieux Charmy is located in the northeast of Lyon (France) and well-functioning ecosystem can deliver the equivalent water availability
represents the largest water catchment in Europe, supplying water to and filtration as a major physical infrastructure project flood control and
90% of the Grand Lyon population (about 1.3 million people). It is also a shoreline protection. Therefore, natural infrastructure, in many cases, can
unique site in terms of its biodiversity with 500 plant species and broad provide the same services and benefits as man-made infrastructure and
range of animals. Veolia has developed an ecological management at a lower cost.
plan in order to preserve water quality and biodiversity of this site. The Nevertheless, one of the main gaps in current DRR and CCA practices is
objective of the study was to investigate the hidden benefits arising from the need for more cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem-based approaches
the ecological management of the site. The study was carried out by as measured against physical infrastructure.
the Corporate Social Responsibility Department of Veolia Water with the
help of Ecowhat, an environmental consultancy. The approach adopted 120 Figure 15.7
115
followed the recommendations established by the Guide to Corporate Forested watersheds
Ecosystem Valuation (CEV) published by WBCSD in 2011. reduce the cost of water
100
93 treatment significantly.
Two main benefits were evaluated: water purification and carbon
Source: Modified from The Trust
sequestration:
(US$ per million gallons)

80 Public Land and American Water
Water treatment cost

73
Water purification is provided by the alluvium of the Rhone River and the Works Association (2004). Design:
grassland and wetland habitats on the Crepieux Charmy islands. It has 58 L. Rharade and H. Van Rossum.
60
been assessed using an “avoided cost/replacement cost method” because Redrawn by L. Monk
46
without the protection of the Crepieux Charmy management regime, it is 40 37
likely that a traditional water treatment plan would be needed to guarantee
an appropriate level of water quality. The carbon sequestration function
20
is provided by the soil and grasslands on the islands. It is therefore stored
by the soil, the forest and the lawns of the Crepieux Charmy islands. This
continual carbon sequestration can be seen as a positive externality of 50
10 20 30 40 50 60
the activities that maintain it. The financial benefit (i.e. internal company Percentage of watershed that is forested (%)
benefit), corresponding to the avoided water treatment costs, represents
an amount equivalent to 80% of the total annual costs of water production
at the site and up to 16 times the ecological management costs of the 15.5 Payments for ecosystem services
site. The economic benefit (i.e. external benefits accruing to society)
which includes the natural heritage and carbon sequestration values of the Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) is an incentive-based mechanism
site, represent two times the total annual costs of water production and to support sound ecosystem management. The basic idea is that
up to 45 times the ecological management costs. The ecosystem service ecosystems provide a variety of services which support human well-being.
benefits generated through the ecological management regime represent To protect and efficiently use these services, landowners and farmers
an amount equivalent to 29% of the drinking water part (excluding taxes receive payments to manage their land properly to avoid costs that are
and fees) of the water bill paid annually to Veolia Water (site manager) and related to unsustainable land use, such as water contamination and soil
Grand Lyon (site owner) to have clean tap water at any time. degradation. PES can therefore be described as a financial transaction
between providers and beneficiaries of ecosystem services.
Overall, the study confirms the positive impact of Veolia water in
maintaining the ecosystem services at the site. It also highlights the To give an example, Figure 15.8 shows ecosystem services provided by
modest cost of the ecological management with regards to the amount coastal dunes based on case studies in Central Chile, Central Vietnam,
of economic benefits associated with it (WBCSD 2012). and Java island, Indonesia. Apart from hazard protection and mitigation of
coastal erosion and salinization, coastal dunes provide a variety of other
ecosystem services. For example, dunes protect coastal aquifers, provide
important habitats for plants and animals, and offer several cultural
services such as tourism and recreation. Some of these services have a
direct economic value for humans such as sand and minerals, while others
indirectly support livelihoods, for instance by storing and purifying water,
supporting fisheries, or having a cultural value for the local communities.
178 179
15
Figure 15.8 Only when direct and indirect ecosystem values are taken into account,
Ecosystem services (ES) Protection from natural hazards Food
can we for instance comprehensively estimate costs and benefits of
of coastal dunes. Prevention from coastal erosion Living space
and salinization conservation and restoration measures for DRR and CCA and compare
Source: Nehren et al. 2016. Regrowing raw materials
Water storage and purification them to technical measures for coastal defence. However, particularly in
Redrawn by L. Monk Mineral raw materials
Carbon storage and data-poor regions monetization of ecosystem services has its limitations.
Fresh water
sequestration
Medicinal resources
Therefore, we have to work with comparable data from other regions, use
Local climate and rapid assessments, and develop semi-quantitative indicators and models.
air quality
Regulating Provisioning
Pollination
Biological control
ES ES 15.6 Conclusions
Disasters cause economic losses which are more readily absorbed by
Habitat, larger economies and may actually stimulate growth but overall are
bio- and Cultural setbacks for developing countries which may take years to recover.
geodiversity, ES
supporting
Calamity funds may be the best opportunity for funding preventive DRR
ES activities, including Eco-DRR. The PDNA is the first step in recognizing
Habitats for plant
Tourism and recreation
loss and damage to ecosystems and also for recommending investment
and animal speciies
Aesthetic appreciation and inspiration
in restoration/conservation.
Bio- and geodiversity
for science, education, culture and art Making decisions for reconstruction and DRR is often based on money
Supporting services such as
Spiritual experience and local identity
primary production, nutrient cycling, and economic valuation and decision-tools are often at the forefront
soil formation Archeological/hisorical heritage
to help decision-making. It is important to include ecosystem-based
approaches in such analyses. However, first it can be a challenge to value
ecosystems and their services. Yet including them in cost-benefit analysis
The PES approach is based on the concept of ecosystem services. Among allows better comparison with engineered approaches.
the 24 ecosystem services which have been assessed in the Millennium
It is also important to remember that structural and non-structural
Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005), in most cases only three are being
measures for reducing disaster risks and adaptation have diverse
applied for PESs: carbon sequestration for climate change mitigation,
time horizons. For example, structural measures (which include grey/
watershed services, and biodiversity conservation. PES schemes in many
green infrastructure) are usually designed for 15-20 years, while green
countries address these three services, and few include other services
infrastructure benefits generally accrue over time. Non-structural
such as preserving the landscape beauty, which is for instance included
measures such as the effectiveness of training may be long lasting.
in PES schemes in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Most PES schemes are
However, it is not easy, or possible to monetarily value all ecosystem
initiated and funded by governments and often involves NGOs, but there
benefits, including those related to disaster risk reduction. In addition,
are also several examples where the private sector is involved. This is for
future benefits have high uncertainty characteristics due to temporal
example the case where a private water supplier pays upstream users not
changes of overall contexts. Thus, the probability of future hazards must
to use pesticides.
be considered, in particular when hazard-related measures are prioritised.
DRR and CCA are usually not directly addressed in PES schemes. However,
Finally, ecosystems need to be considered as an integral part of DRR and
measures such as reforestation and forest management that aim at
development. Grey and green infrastructure can be mutually compatible,
carbon sequestration, watershed protection and biodiversity conservation
when properly designed, as both may be needed to deliver essential
often also contribute to DRR and CCA, for instance by reducing the risks
protection and livelihoods support for human security.
of floods, droughts, and landslides. Among the few examples where DRR
is directly addressed are protection forests in Switzerland, where the
national government pays land owners not to cut down protection forest
trees that prevent from avalanches, landslides, and rockfall.
Within the last few years, PES approaches and the work of The Economics
of Ecosystems & Biodiversity (TEEB) (2010, 2011, 2013, 2014), which is
globally assessing economic benefits of ecosystems and biodiversity,
have received much attention. Therefore, we expect that PES schemes
that directly or indirectly address DRR and CCA will also become
increasingly important. In the case of coastal dunes it would for instance
be important to consider the value of protection services for DRR and
CCA and convince decision makers of their importance. It is therefore
recommended to evaluate and where possible monetize the ecosystem
services provided by these ecosystems.
180 181
15
CESVI (2013). Soil Bio-engineering techniques for slope de Groot, R. S., Kumar, P., van der Ploeg, S., et al. (2010). MA (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state TEEB. (2013). The Economics of Ecosystems and
protection and stabilisation, Natural Resources management Estimates of Monetary Values of Ecosystem Services. In and trends: Findings of the Condition and Trends Working Biodiversity (TEEB) for Water and Wetlands. The Economics
Hand Book, Kujand, Tajikistan. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological Group. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. of Ecosystems & Biodiversity. Earthscan: London. http://
and Economic Foundations. Kumar, P. (ed.). Earthscan: www.teebweb.org/publication/the-economics-of-
Costanza, R. and Daly, H.E. (1992). Natural Capital and Nehren, U., Hoang, H.D.T., Marfai, M.A., Raedig, C.,
London. 367-401. ecosystems-and-biodiversity-teeb-for-water-and-wetlands/
Sustainable Development. Conservation Biology 6(1), 37-46. Alfonso de Nehren, S., Sartohadi, J. and Castro, C. (2016).
DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x Emerton, L. (1998). Economic Tools for Valuing Wetlands Ecosystem Services of Coastal Dune Systems for Hazard
in Eastern Africa.Nairobi: IUCN., http://www.mekonginfo. Mitigation: Case studies from Vietnam, Indonesia, and Chile. TEEB. (2014). The Economics of Ecosystems and
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M.,
org/assets/midocs/0001620-society-economic-tools-for- In Ecosystem-based Disaster Risk Reduction and Adaptation Biodiversity (TEEB) Challenges and Responses. The
Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo,
valuing-wetlands-in-eastern-africa.pdf Accessed in Practice. Renaud, F.G., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, M., Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity. Earthscan,
J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P. and van den Belt, M. (1997). The
24 July 2019. and Nehren, U. (eds.). Springer Series: Advances in Natural London. http://www.teebweb.org/publication/teeb-
value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital.
and Technological Hazards Research 42, 401-434. Berlin: challenges-responses-publ/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
Nature, 387, 253-260. DOI:10.1038/387253a0. Accessed Emerton, L. (2009). Investing in Natural Infrastructure: the
Springer Nature.
24 July 2019. Economic Value of Indonesia’s Marine Protected Areas. Bali: Teves, M.B. and Hofman, B. (2011). Philippines - Typhoons
TNC. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2420.3844. Rao, N.S., Carruthers, T.J.B., Anderson, P., Sivo, L., Saxby, Ondoy And Pepeng: Post-Disaster Needs Assessment - Main
Costanza, R., Pérez-Maqueo, O.M., Martínez, M.L., Sutton, P.,
T., Durbin, T., Jungblut, V., Hills, T. and Chape, S. (2013). Report. World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/
Anderson, S.J. and Mulder, K. (2008). The Value of Coastal Emerton, L. (2013). Using valuation to make the case
An economic analysis of ecosystem-based adaptation and handle/10986/2776 Accessed 24 July 2019.
Wetlands for Hurricane Protection. AMBIO: A Journal of the for economic incentives: promoting investments in
engineering options for climate change adaptation in Lami
Human Environment, 37(4), 241-248. https://bioone.org/ marine and coastal ecosystems as development WBCSD Water – Veolia Environment (2012). Veolia water-
Town, Republic of the Fiji Islands. Technical Report. Apia:
journals/AMBIO-A-Journal-of-the-Human-Environment/ infrastructure. In Economic Incentives for Marine and Crepieux Charmy study.
SPREP. http://ian.umces.edu/pdfs/ian_report_392.pdf
volume-37/issue-4/0044-7447(2008)37[241:TVOCWF] Coastal Conservation: Prospects, Challenges and Policy
Accessed 24 July 2019. World Bank. (2010). Haiti earthquake PDNA Assessment
2.0.CO;2/The-Value-of-Coastal-Wetlands-for-Hurricane- Implications. Essam, M. (ed.). London: Earthscan. 17-38.
of damage, losses, general and sectoral needs. Annex to
Protection/10.1579/0044-7447(2008)37[241:TVOCWF]2.0. DOI: 10.4324/9780203728345. TEEB. (2010). Ecological and Economic Foundations.
the Action Plan for National Recovery and Development
CO;2.short Accessed 24 July 2019. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity.
Hinzpeter, K. and Sandholz, S. (2018). Squaring the circle? of Haïti, Washington.http://www-wds.worldbank.org/
Earthscan: London.
Daily, G.C. (ed.) (1997). Nature’s Services: Societal Integrating environment, infrastructure and risk reduction external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/201
Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press: in Post Disaster Needs Assessments. International Journal TEEB. (2011). TEEB Manual for Cities: Ecosystem Services 2/06/19/000333038_20120619012320/Rendered/
Washington, DC. of Disaster Risk Reduction, 32,113-124. DOI: 10.1016/j. in Urban Management. The Economics of Ecosystems & PDF/701020ESW0P1190R0Haiti0PDNA020100EN.pdf
ijdrr.2018.05.016. Biodiversity. Earthscan: London. http://www.teebweb.org/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
Daily, G.C. and Matson, P. A. (2008). Ecosystem services:
publication/teeb-manual-for-cities-ecosystem-services-in-
From theory to implementation. Proceedings of National Kerala PDNA (2018) Kerala post-disaster needs assessment.
urban-management/ Accessed 24 July 2019.
Academy of Sciences, 105(28), 9455-9456. DOI: 10.1073/ Floods and landslides 2018.\https://www.undp.org/
pnas.0804960105. content/dam/undp/library/Climate%20and%20Disaster%20
Resilience/PDNA/PDNA_Kerala_India.pdf Accessed
25 July 2019.
182 183
Principles of mainstreaming ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
adaptation into national policies, strategies, plans and projects 16
16.1 Key entry points for integrating ecosystem- KEY INFO: The GAR
based disaster risk reduction and adaptation in The Global Assessment
policies, programmes and projects Reports on Disaster Risk
Reduction (GAR) are biannual
Mainstreaming is about integrating a less common concept or approach reports released by the United
into a more common approach. In this case, we are referring to integrating Nations International Strategy
ecosystem management into DRR and CCA to achieve sustainable and for Disaster Reduction
resilient development (Figure 16.1). There are several ways this can be (UNDRR, formerly UNISDR)
done at various scales, which we will describe in this chapter. since 2009. The GAR is
Mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA in development has multiple entry points published every two years.
and benefits. It helps protect development gains, reduce underlying Learn more about the GAR
vulnerabilities to future disasters, and increases access to sectoral and the previous reports by
resources and budget that can support such ecosystem-based activities. clicking on:
https://www.preventionweb.
net/sendai-framework/gar
DRR
ECO-DRR Figure 16.1

Mainstreaming Eco-DRR in DRR and
sustainable development.
Design: S. Plog
Chapter 16 The first entry point is at the global and national policy level, where
organizations such as PEDRR, a global alliance of currently 23 organizations
including the CBD, are working with national governments to include Eco-
Principles of mainstreaming DRR/EbA into key international agreements, such as the SFDRR, Climate
ecosystem-based disaster risk Change agreements, SDGs, and the CBD.
At the international level, the Global Risk Assessment (GAR) is a key
reduction and adaptation into document for information to policy makers. The GAR 15, published in
national policies, strategies, 2015, focused on strengthening the governance of disaster risk, while
the previous ones, with different themes, addressed the underlying risk
plans and projects drivers of disaster risk. GAR15 included ecosystem-based approaches
and emphasizes new approaches blending grey and green infrastructure
to maximize ecosystem services (UNISDR 2015). Thus, the GAR 15 is an
Key questions example of a key report which has to a certain extent mainstreamed Eco-
DRR and EbA. The GAR 17 provided an atlas of risk. The latest GAR report
What are the key entry points for integrating Eco-DRR/EbA was launched at the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in 2019.
in policies, programmes and projects? The GAR 19 moves beyond disaster risk to consider the pluralistic nature
What financial resources are available for mainstreaming of risk: in multiple dimensions, at multiple scales and with multiple impacts.
Eco-DRR/EbA? It highlights environmental degradation as a key aspect in creating risk
and promotes systems-thinking and calls for urgent action (UNDRR 2019).
What are the challenges for mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA?
The second entry point is national plans and strategies, such as National
Development Strategies and Plans, National Poverty Reduction
Strategies, Land use plans and sectoral development policies and plans.
These may include national environmental policies, and climate change
© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UNEP adaptation plans.
184 185
For example, the Maldives illustrates an interesting example of ENT CYCLE *
Figure 16.3
mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA into its Seventh National Development Plan. GEM Project management cycle.
A 1 INITIAL ASSESSMENT Design: S. Plog
The Maldives is an island nation in the Indian Ocean formed by a double
AN
PROJECT M
chain of twenty-six atolls. With an average ground level of 1.5 meters PROBLEM/STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 2
above sea level, it is the planet’s lowest country. Its specific characteristics
3 PROJECT DESIGN
render the Maldives particularly vulnerable to flooding, storm surges,
tropical storms and tsunamis as well as general sea-level rise. The Indian IMPLEMENTATION 4
Ocean tsunami in 2004 caused considerable damage to the atolls. 5 MONITORING
The Seventh National Development Plan (2006-2010) incorporated several
EVALUATION/LESSONS LEARNED 6
Eco-DRR/EbA aspects. These include:
Multiple benefits of natural systems, ‘soft engineering’
for coastal protection; Enabling factors for mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA:
Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) for flood protection; Allocating resources, scaling up pilot projects, capacity development, and
Water resource management; integrated structures and platforms can all act as enabling factors for
mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA. In addition, incentives for individual and
Environmental governance (e.g. EIA process);
multi-stakeholder participation are important incentives for people to take
Land-use plans for safety and sustainable development. on these approaches (Figure 16.4).
The Maldives’ Safe Island Program is an example of risk-sensitive land
use plans. It provides safe havens for people who are forced to migrate INTER-GOVERNMENTAL GROUPS ALLOCATING RESOURCES Figure 16.4
before or after disasters caused by natural hazards. Several larger islands Enabling factors for mainstreaming.
are designated to provide environmental protection zones, ecologically MULTI-STAKEHOLDER © UNEP. Design: S. Plog
safe zones and structures to mitigate the impact of events such as storm PARTICIPATION
surges, tidal swells and tsunamis. In addition, elevated areas and buildings
are provided to enable vertical evacuation. Figure 16.2 illustrates what MAIN-
such a scenario may look like. SCALE-ABLE
PILOT PROJECTS
HFA
STREAMING
SOME OF THE
KEY ACTORS:
Figure 16.2 Government
MEAN SEA LEVEL
DRAINAGE
EPZ
ELEVATED ZONE
ELEVATED ZONE
Cross section of an island HARBOUR

CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
Communities
with proposed enhanced
mitigation features. International development
Modified from Government of agencies (donors)
INTEGRATED STRUCTURES AND PLATFORMS
Maldives (2007) Design: S. Plog NGOs
Therefore, mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA requires not only balancing Community-based
+1.3 m +1.4 m
+/-0 between economic and environmental interests but also between organizations
+2.4 m stakeholders’ competing interests. These challenges are beyond the Academia and research
OUTER REEF
capacity of any group or institution to address single handedly. Promoting institutions

effective participation by all stakeholders requires approaches that are
Media
CROSS SECTION OF AN ISLAND WITH multi-sectoral. Mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA in development should
ENHANCED MITIGATION FEATURES
therefore be pursued at different levels, involving different actors and Private sector
sectors (Figure 16.5).
Another example is the 2012 Government of Colombia Risk
Management law, act 1523; entitled the National System for Disaster Figure 16.5
Risk Management, the law directly associates risk management with Mainstreaming is a balancing act.
HUMAN SECURITY Design: S. Plog
sustainable environmental management (Article 1). This includes not
only the improvement of disaster response mechanisms, but also disaster + SILO MENTALITY + LONG TERM PLANNING
preparedness, risk knowledge and new territorial funds for both prevention
+ SHORT TERM ECONOMIC GAINS + ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
and post disaster. The act mentions environmental sustainability as one of
{
its general principles (Article 3) and it encourages environmental territorial
planning that combines ecosystem services and risk mapping.
A third entry point for Eco-DRR/EbA are development projects and
all phases of a project cycle, from initial assessments, problem and
stakeholder analysis, to project design and implementation, monitoring
and evaluation (Figure 16.3).
186 187
16.2 Financial resources available for 16.3 The challenges of mainstreaming
mainstreaming ecosystem-based disaster risk ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
reduction and adaptation and adaptation
There are various national budgets that could be tapped into for Eco-DRR/ Having a dedicated national DRR budget is still uncommon. What is
EbA. These include DRR budgets, calamity funds, national environment more common is to use the large influx of post-disaster funds to finance
funds, climate change funds and risk transfer instruments. Here are some prevention projects, including Eco-DRR/EbA. In terms of funding, we
examples: should note that although there are different national budgets that could
The 2011 National Greening Program was created in the Philippines in technically be used for Eco-DRR/EbA there are also many challenges of
the aftermath of Hurricane Haiyan. It seeked to grow 1.5 billion trees in tapping into these sources. These include:
1.5 million hectares nationwide within a period of six years, from 2011 Competing priorities
to 2016 (Figure 16.6). The goal was to mitigate climate change, reduce Long-return investments vs. short-term election cycles
poverty and protect communities and coastal ecosystems from strong
waves and soil erosion. Difficulty in measuring impacts of DRR
Figure 16.6
Mangrove replanting in Tacloban, Sectoral budgets, which are not DRR specific (i.e. agriculture, forestry and No specific budgets for Eco-DRR/EbA measures.
Philippines, by communities and
water resources), could also be used for Eco-DRR/EbA. For example, Eco- Other challenges include lack of political will, limited expertise and
Partners for Resilience to support
them in rebuilding their lives after DRR/EbA measures could be included by taking into account the cost of resources on Eco-DRR/EbA and constrained institutional mandates of
Typhoon Haiyan in 2013. ‘disaster proofing’ measures that make them more environmentally and institutions to address cross-sectoral approaches such as Eco-DRR/EbA.
© Nicola Ward/Climate Centre economically sustainable in the long-run. Finally, there is often a preference for engineering, or grey infrastructure,
Finally international resources for Eco-DRR/EbA could include multilateral approaches (Gupta and Nair 2013).
climate funds such as the Adaptation Fund or the Green Climate Fund Nevertheless, some progress has been made in mainstreaming Eco-DRR/
(GCF), which aims to respond to climate change by investing in low- EbA. For instance, EIAs are gradually incorporating DRR components as
emission and climate-resilient development. GCF was established to discussed earlier. In the Cook Islands, EIAs are made compulsory for
provide funds to limit or reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in any developmental infrastructural project in several sectors such as
developing countries, and to help vulnerable societies adapt to the tourism, fisheries and agriculture. In Germany, a broad range of projects
unavoidable impacts of climate change. Other climate change related and activities are covered under Germany’s Environmental Impact
funds have and can be used for DRR and mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA. Assessment Act (2001), which indicates the extent to which disaster risk
Development aid is another avenue that has invested in DRR albeit more and vulnerability factors could be addressed in EIAs. Moldova has also
on post- rather than pre-disaster (Kellett and Caravani 2013). merged DRR into its agricultural policies, environmental policies with
protected areas legislation, PES, EIA and CCA projects and programs.
Finally, in the framework China’s law on EIAs (2003), information on
natural hazards and technological or chemical risks must be incorporated.
Colombia:
As illustrated in these examples, disaster risk analyses can be incorporated
A national fund for disaster risk reduction which is subdivided
into the EIA process by utilizing data generated through the EIA process
in five accounts: knowledge, reduction, disaster management,
itself. Information generated by EIAs can help improve early warning
recovery and financial protection.
because the EIA process can provide data for risk mapping and scenario
Each department and municipality should have its own local fund building in relation to the potential impacts of projects. Hence, EIAs can
(Art. 54) be applied to assess hazard conditions and patterns of vulnerability in the
http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=47141 context of the developmental planning process. EIA reports also include
an environmental monitoring plan. Monitoring parameters usually cover
Bangladesh early signals of potential disasters. EIAs applied in the disaster prevention
Local disaster risk reduction fund that enables communities to and mitigation phase can help inform planning for DRR, for instance by
invest in vulnerability reduction providing guidance on choices mitigation methods (Gupta and Yunus
Mexico 2004), technology investments and site locations for activities. In a post-
disaster context, conducting a rapid environmental impact assessment
FONDEN (Mexico’s Natural Disaster Fund) was established (REA) helps to ensure that sustainability concerns are factored into the
to ensure adequate funding of reconstruction after relief, reconstruction and recovery planning stages (Gupta 2002 et al,
national calamities Hauer and Kelly 2018). The REA does not replace an EIA but fills a gap in
0.4% of national budget is allocated to reconstruction which an emergency context until EIA can be appropriately conducted.
emphasizes public infrastructure, low income housing and In parallel to these EIAs and REAs, greater emphasis has also been placed
natural environment on incorporating hazards and disaster risk analysis into the environmental
Another fund FOPREDEN is smaller but dedicated to prevention assessment process itself. ProVention Consortium and the Caribbean
activities at all levels of government. Development Bank published Tools for mainstreaming DRR, which include
188 189
a guidance note on “Environmental Assessments” (Benson and Twigg
2007). This important publication focused on environmental assessment
as the natural starting point in the design of a project to address natural Benson, C. and Twigg, J. (2007). Tools for Mainstreaming Gupta, A.K. and Yunus, M. (2004). India and WSSD (Rio +10)
hazards and related risk. It provides guidance on analysing disaster risk Disaster Risk Reduction: Guidance Notes for Development Johannesburg: Issues of National Concern and International
Organisations. Geneva: ProVentium Consortium Strategies. Current Science, 87(1), 37-43. http://www.iisc.
related consequences of developmental activities as a result of their
Secretariat. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/1066_ ernet.in/~currsci/jul102004/37.pdf. Accessed
environmental impacts, as well as the potential threat posed by natural
toolsformainstreamingDRR.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019. 26 July 2019.
hazards to the projects. Environmental assessments are now expected
to measure the risk reduction benefits of proposed environmental impact Caribbean Development Bank and CARICOM Secretariat. Hauer, M., and Kelly, C. (2018). Guidelines for Rapid
(2004). Sourcebook on the Integration of Natural Environmental Impact Assessment in Disasters. US Agency
mitigation measures within the proposed development project (Carribean
Hazards into Environmental Impact Assessment for International Development. https://reliefweb.int/sites/
Development Bank and CARICOM Secretariat 2004). Process. NHIA-EIA Sourcebook. Bridgetown: Caribbean reliefweb.int/files/resources/REA_2018_final.pdf Accessed
Development Bank. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/ 24 July 2019.
16.4 Conclusions handle/20.500.11822/8516/Source_Book_Natural_hazards.
Kellett, J. and Caravani, A. (2013). Financing Disaster Risk
pdf?sequence=3&amp%3BisAllowed= Accessed
Integrating ecosystem management into DRR and CCA strategies requires Reduction. 20 year story of international aid. ODI and GFDRR.
24 July 2019.
not only a balance between the interests of society, the economy and https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/
Government of Maldives, Ministry of Planning and National publications-opinion-files/8574.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
the environment, but also between the diverse interests of different
Development (2007). Seventh National Development Plan,
stakeholders within a community or country. This requires promoting 2006-2010. Creating New Opportunities.
UNISDR (2015). Global Assessment Report: Making
effective participation by all stakeholders and multi-sectoral approaches. Development Sustainable: The Future Of Disaster Risk
Gupta, A.K., Kumar, A., Misra, J, and Yunus, M. (2002). Management. Geneva: UNDRR. https://www.preventionweb.
Mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA in development should therefore be pursued
Environmental Impact Assessment and Disaster net/english/hyogo/gar/2015/en/gar-pdf/GAR2015_EN.pdf
at different levels, involving different actors and sectors. Accessed 24 July 2019.
Management: Emerging Disciplines of Higher Education
The key issues for mainstreaming are 1) cross-sectoral integration, 2) and Practice. In Environmental Education. Srivastava, P. and
enabling conditions or incentives to facilitate mainstreaming of Eco-DRR/ Singh, D.P. (eds.). New Delhi: Anmol Publishers. 7- 23.
EbA into sustainable development policies and practices and 3) capacity DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32500.55682.
building and awareness, which are all essential. Gupta, A. and Nair, S. (2013). Applying environmental impact 24 July 2019.
assessments and strategic environmental assessments in
Eco-DRR and EbA are becoming more mainstreamed into influential World Bank (2011). Philippines - Typhoons Ondoy and
disaster management. In The Role of Ecosystems in Disaster
policies and scientific reports such as the GAR or IPCC reports. Indeed, Risk Reduction. Renaud F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella,
Pepeng: post-disaster needs assessment: Executive
several international framework agreements, e.g. the SFDRR, the SDGs, summary. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
M. (2013). Tokyo: UNU Press. 416-436. http://collections.
the Paris Agreement, the CBD and the Ramsar Convention, have all en/551271468296967206/Executive-summary Accessed
unu.edu/view/UNU:1995. Accessed 26 July 2019.
24 July 2019.
included various decisions, targets and goals with various components
recommending that governments and other stakeholders consider how
to implement and mainstream Eco-DRR/EbA. The question now is how
to do this in an integrated manner – this will take time, political will and
evidence-based guidance.
190 191
Approaches for operationalizing resilience for
17.1 Project development DEFINITIONS
In the previous chapters, the importance of Eco-DRR/EbA, its principles “Passive resilience”
and tools were described. Implementing Eco-DRR/EbA to create resilience encompasses interventions
requires thinking through project development within a learning framework in an emergency situation
to enable adjustment, or adaptive management. Designing a successful where relief is the main
project requires thinking through the following five questions (Figure 17.1): intervention and there is
1. What are my project objectives? resistance to change, while
With resilience as a goal, it is important to think through the distinction “Transformational resilience”
between “bouncing back” resilience or what we call “passive resilience” refers to a high degree of
and transformative “bouncing forward” resilience (see chapter 8). You flexibility to change, including
need to know the type of resilience you are expected to increase, and what interventions that address
other project objectives you have, also depending on what your budget risk factors, i.e. ecosystem
will allow. management, risk sensitive
land use planning, women
2. What is the system that your project is targeting?
leadership programs to
Here you need to know the scale at which your system is operating,
reduce structural vulnerability
the major internal components of the system, and the larger social and
and risk.
ecological environment in which it occurs. Who and what do you want to
make resilient? (Sudmeier-Rieux 2014).
3. Define resilience to which type of disturbance? In ecology, relating to natural

It is important to know to what you want to increase resilience to, as that disturbance of ecosystems,
will change the set of interventions. For example, a population may be resilience is considered
resilient to earthquakes, but not to epidemics, which requires a different as: the ability of a system
set of measures. to adapt to and either
maintain its pre-disturbance
4. How you will make the project sustainable?
equilibrium or its ability to
In other words, how will you ensure that project activities continue after
transform to a different state
the project ends? This is a challenge with all projects but it is especially a
as a consequence of stress or
Chapter 17 concern for building resilience, which requires long-term measures and
commitment by both the project implementers and local partners.
shock, or “adaptive capacity”.
(Folke 2006, Holling 1973).
5. How will you monitor your project and what constitutes a successful
Approaches for operationalising resilience building project? General resilience capacity
resilience for ecosystem-based Will your project achieve resilience outcomes or put into place mechanisms
for resilience-building?
of all parts of the system
to cope with all kinds of
disaster risk reduction shocks and disturbances,
and so be able to avoid
and adaptation crossing thresholds, known
DEFINE SYSTEM, BOUNDARIES & STAKEHOLDERS
or unknown, to alternate
2 *TARGET UNIT regimes or systems. It is
Key questions DEFINE OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS
1
/ SYSTEM
sometimes referred to as
What are the top five questions you should be PROJECT * “coping capacity” and in this
OBJECTIVES report is used synonymously
asking about resilience before getting started? *
3 RESILIENCE TO WHAT ? with adaptive capacity.
What are the five steps you should consider * ANALYSIS SUCCESSFUL
PROJECT ASSESS RISKS, THREATS AND UNCERTAINTIES
PROJECT DESIGN (O’ Connell 2019).
when designing a project on resilience?
What are the five factors of success of a project MONITORING AND *SUSTAINABILITY Figure 17.1
4
on resilience? EVALUATION * DECIDE ON MEASURES AND INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS Questions to guide project
5
development.
DEFINE SUCCESS INDICATORS WITH STAKEHOLDERS © K. Sudmeier-Rieux and
S. Sandholz. Design: S. Plog.
© UNEP
192 193
This next section details these five steps for operationalizing resilience for TRANSFORMATIONAL RESILIENCE
Focus is short term bounce Focus turns to livelihoods
an Eco-DRR/EbA project: back and recovery Improved
Some root causes of vulnerability livelihoods,
1. Project objectives External assistance dominates and risk addressed well-being,
Vulnerability and risks sustainability
As with any project, you should first clearly define your objectives and not addressed and risk
expectations. Some practitioners may prefer to start with analyzing the reduction
system, its components, its boundaries and the dynamic interactions
between components before defining the objectives.
Focus is livelihoods and risk Focus is long term
Consider these three types of more specific resilience (O’Connell et reduction through prevention reduced risk and resilience
al. 2015): physical resilience of infrastructure to a hazard event, social Focus is still recovery
Higher level of self-organisation,
livelihood improvement
through prevention
Root causes of vulnerability,
resilience to disasters and ecological resilience to a changing climate. Better access to knowledge and resources Investments in risk reduction risks are reduced and power
Physical resilience may refer mainly to ensuring that infrastructure, such External assistance dominates include ecosystem management relations addressed
as the electricity grid, resists a shock. This is often the perspective of PASSIVE RESILIENCE
engineers. Social resilience most often refers to improving livelihoods,
reducing vulnerabilities and increasing adaptive capacities due to
natural hazards. This is often the perspective of development agencies. Unfortunately, in many cases however, without additional resources or Figure 17.2
improved governance, disasters may continue to undermine development Resilience ladder: from passive
Ecological resilience considers how an ecosystem can remain functional to transformational resilience.
considering human-nature interactions and pressures. This is often the efforts with little possibility of transformation. Here passive resilience, or
Design: K. Sudmeier-Rieux. Redrawn
perspective of ecologists. An Eco-DRR/EbA project is at the forefront returning to the post-disaster phase, may be the only realistic option.
by L. Monk
of innovation as it seeks to combine aspects of all types of resilience: Consider what are the actual measures required for passive versus
physical – you may need to build a seawall if necessary; social – of course transformational resilience? How will the project objectives and on-the-
we need to consider how to improve livelihoods and adaptive capacities; ground actions differ in order to achieve these different types of resilience?
and ecological – as most societies are dependent on natural resources 2.2. Define your system, its boundaries and dynamic linkages between
for their protection, well-being and livelihoods. the systems main factors and external forces. Identify the stakeholders
2. Target of the project and the relationships between stakeholders. Are there conflicts or
2.1 Define the scope. Are you mainly targeting passive resilience (i.e. areas of contention between them or are there areas for opportunities?
increasing coping capacities to enable them to bounce back after a There are a variety of different tools that you can use, from more simple
shock, or recovery) or are you able to tackle transformative resilience vulnerability and capacity analysis (VCA), a participatory Venn diagram
(i.e. a more long-term comprehensive approach, which also tackles risk showing interlinkages, to participatory risk mapping. Or consider more
reduction and improved livelihoods consideration)? Consider that the two sophisticated modelling of systems dynamics such as a resilience
(bouncing back and bouncing forward) can be compatible. A population assessment to assess risks and uncertainties in socio-ecological systems,
that is affected by a disaster may first need the time to bounce back to the the Resilience, Adaptation Pathways and Transformation Approach
‘normal state’ and recover before being able to move forward. The shock (RAPTA) (O’Connell et al. 2019) (Figure 17.3).
may be an impetus for a process leading to transformative resilience. One
example might be the notion of ‘building back better’ after a disaster. A
Effective Figure 17.3
population first needs to recover, learn from the disaster and understand engagement Resilience, Adaptation Pathways
how they can better protect themselves from the next hazard and then and legitimacy and Transformation Approach
adapt, restructure and hopefully rebuild in a safer location in a safer way (RAPTA) (version 2).
in order to reduce risks. Source: O’Connell et al. 2019
The answer to this question about scope will most likely depend on Imagining
change
Describing
the system
the available time, resources and your organization’s mission (i.e.

Stakeholder
humanitarian or development-related). Figure 17.2 illustrates a resilience mapping & PEOPLE:
Exploring
scenarios
engagement
ladder from passive to transformational where the focus gradually shifts DIALOGUE, SYSTEMS
VALUES, ANALYSIS
from bouncing back and recovery towards livelihood improvement, VISIONS
investments in risk reduction and ecosystem management to address RESILIENCE
vulnerability and power relations. Scoping & ADAPTATION Analysing
goalsetting the system
The goal of transformational resilience is improved livelihoods, well- TRANSFORMATION

being, sustainability and risk reduction. Perhaps this may seem utopic,
but disasters can be the impetus toward the type of socio-political Systems
OPTIONS &
transformation that may be needed for a community or society to shift to PATHWAYS understanding
an improved state with the right conditions. This may be the case of the TO ACTION
Tested
Generating
Philippines, post-Haiyan, thanks to several large international and national pathways Implementing
pathways options
programmes, including the Philippines National Greening Programme. for action

Sequencing
pathways
194 195
Consider the tipping points or thresholds of the system: these mark the 5. Monitoring and evaluation
The RAPTA framework boundaries between different possible states of a system or ‘system 5.1 Work with stakeholders to define your indicators of success.
Resilience, Adaptation regime’ (Renaud et al. 2010, O’Connell et al. 2019). A system that is healthy Indicators of resilience will depend on whether you assess resilience as
Pathways and Transformation and resourceful will be more flexible and dynamic to self-organise in order a dynamic process with such as ‘ability to learn’, ‘ability to self-organise’,
Approach (RAPTA) consists to stay within its system boundaries, than one that is unhealthy, damaged ‘capacity to recover’, or progress or results indicators, which may be
of three modules: or frail. If confronted with a shock, such as a hazard event, the healthy likened to a snapshot of a system state at the beginning of a project as
1: People – Dialogue, Values system is more likely to recover quickly, while the frail one may cross compared with the same variables during and at the end of the project. In
and Vision a threshold to a different state and perhaps ‘lower state’. Let’s take the other words, results indicators measure whether tangible results are being
example of a forest along a heavily polluted mountain road. The forest achieved (e.g. new roads have mitigation measures). Process indicators
2: Systems Analysis may be less healthy and less able to withstand shock, such as a strong however, convey the state of a dynamic process (e.g., stakeholder
3: Options and Pathways wind storms. It may cross a threshold to a new state which is no longer dialogue, capacity building training). The difference between the two may
to Action able to function in the same manner as before (i.e. less water retention, be time dependent. For example, a capacity-building training workshop on
“The modules are supported soil stabilisation, biodiversity, etc.). It is of course also possible for a state landslide mitigation may lead to attitude changes among participants and
by two continuous to cross a threshold to an improved state but this may require additional a process toward new measures may be undertaken.
processes (Active Learning time and resources (i.e. reducing pollution along the road, replanting trees 5.2. Develop indicators. Depending on your project, you should consider
– establishing learning or encouraging regeneration). developing both types of indicators based on primary system components
practices that build capacity We may find similar examples of thresholds or tipping points for human and the interactions between them. The process of developing indicators
for responding to rapid, systems that are subject to shocks. Consider the state of New Orleans often involves identifying key stakeholders or experts, in particular, women
unprecedented change; post-Katrina, which lost a large proportion of its population as a result of and women’s groups, asking them what indicators they propose, then
and Adaptive Governance – the hurricane. In the weeks, months and perhaps years after Hurricane weighing these against available data, or the possibility of collecting
coordinating iterative, flexible Katrina, we can most definitely say that the city changed states. Time and these data. In a field situation, you are mostly likely first to be confronted
and responsive interactions resources were needed to rebuild the city yet many years later, it has still with the reality and cost of collecting sound data (whether quantitative or
between the modules when not returned to the pre-Katrina state and there is debate whether this new qualitative) versus the need to be scientifically rigorous. Well-established
designing the intervention state is an improvement ‘transformative’. participatory tools for developing qualitative and quantitative indicators
and for its implementation 3. Assess current risks, threats and uncertainties include: wealth ranking, preference ranking, matrix ranking and matrix
and evaluation). A risk assessment can be done as a formal risk mapping exercise, or a scoring and participatory numbers (Chambers 2007, Mayoux and
This leads to achieving community-based analysis of risks. Consider a simple SWOT [Strengths, Chambers 2005). Such methods are well tested and very commonly used
specific sustainability Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats] analysis and consider which among researchers and practitioners studying livelihoods, vulnerability,
goals underpinned by measures would be appropriate for reducing which threats and which hazards, natural resource management, etc. Depending on your scope
Resilience, Adaptation and/ risks. Assess stakeholders’ main concerns. You may find that the everyday and resources, consider also the RATA framework presented above
or Transformation pathways risks: mainly livelihoods, education, employment or access to roads - are for determining system dynamics, primary drivers of change and their
depending on the systems often more pressing than concerns about landslides or flooding. Again, impacts in that system.
assessment.” consider using the above mentioned RATA framework. Since there is no set of pre-existing indicators of resilience, ensure that
O’Connell et al. 2019: 4 4. Build sustainability into your project the intended purposes are clearly and explicitly stated, and check that
This is where you need to decide which measures you will undertake to the indicators are fit for these purposes. Ensure that the indicators are
address risks and build resilience and how you involve stakeholders in consistent with the underlying theory and behaviour about the systems
carrying through proposed measures even after your project has ended. the indicators are intended to provide information. It is also important
Stakeholder engagement is one aspect of sustainability: local self- to check the feasibility of implementation of project activities, including
sufficiency must be taken in account too, i.e., the community’s capacity data availability, replicability, potential for operator bias and level of skill
to continue developing without project support. Capacity building is a very required, among other factors.
important part of this step. It can involve “learning while doing” and/or
more formal training processes.
If your aim is transformative resilience through Eco-DRR/EbA, consider
investing in measures that will both reduce disaster risks and address
livelihoods’ needs. One example could be involving stakeholders in
establishing a watershed management council so that upstream and
downstream users are connected and can equally benefit. Or planting
fruit trees alongside vegetation with deep roots for erosion control and
including a local school in monitoring and maintaining the vegetation.
196 197
Examples of some commonly quoted process indicators
of mainly social resilience:
NATURAL RESOURCES
Diversification (e.g. multiple sources of income, back-up power INDICATORS
systems, or redundancy) Forest quality
Water quality
Time and cost effectiveness (e.g. short recovery period after SOCIAL RESOURCES Soil productivity
a crisis, or rapidity) INDICATORS Ground/air pollution HUMAN RESOURCES
Community leadership Erosion INDICATORS
Access to resources (e.g. savings, family ties, power, natural NGO assistance Awareness of DRR measures Population density
resources, education, information, or resourcefulness) Government assistance Management of land for... Education level
Women’s groups Forest management practices
Buffering capacity of a social or natural system to absorb shock Vocational skills
CFUGs Grazing management practices Access to information
(e.g. due to natural, physical or economic protection measures, Mutual assistance Access righs to forest resources Previous disaster experience
or robustness) Extra kinship ties Organizational skills
Self-organization, preparedness, planning and readiness Disaster management committee Household status
Ever warning system/monitoring Natural (health/disabled persons)
(e.g. early warning, protection measures and first aid) Evacuation plans Capital Ethnic group status
Ability to learn and improve after an event (e.g. preparedness Female headed household
Ration working adults: dependents
increases after every crisis)
Effective governance/institutions/control mechanisms (e.g. civil PHYSICAL RESOURCES
INDICATORS
protection, zoning enforcement to reduce exposure) Social SUSTAINABLE Human
Emergency water supply ECONOMIC RESOURCES
Capital Capital
Community involvement and inclusion of local knowledge in Sanitation LIVELIHOOD ASSETS INDICATORS
Telephone/mobile Food stocks
planning (e.g. local risk maps and evacuation plans)
Electricity
AND Employment
Critical thresholds are identified and monitored to improve Emergency health care RELATED Remittance income
recovery (e.g. e-coli bacteria amounts in drinking water are Safe houses, schools and shelters INDICATORS Savings
monitored and addressed before critical level is reached) Access to road Crop diversification
Means of evacuation Access to markets
Flexibility (e.g. within organizations, livelihood systems, Search and rescue equipment House ownership
economic systems, water management systems) Structural hazard protection Physical Financial Land ownership
Capital Capital
Source: Bahadur et al. (2010); Moench and Dixit (2007)
The following indicators are a mix of progress and results indicators that Therefore, consider drawing upon results and progress indicators as well Figure 17.4
were developed to assess resilience of mountain populations in Nepal as physical, socio-economic, and environmental indicators. Be aware that Results indicators of resilience
(Sudmeier-Rieux et al. 2013; Figure 17.4). They are problematic because resilience is not always a term that is easy to convey or translate into local developed for assessing landslide
affected communities in Nepal.
not all are SMART indicators, they can be difficult to assess and are at languages and that different stakeholders may have even contradictory
Source: K. Sudmeier-Rieux (2013);
times overlapping. However, they may provide some ideas for indicators visions, addressing different types of resilience. Thus, it is important that Design: S. Sandholz. Redrawn by
of resilience, combined with some of the above-mentioned process you carefully define how you will define and assess resilience from the L. Monk
indicators. The figure shows the difficulty in developing a global set of project outset.
indicators as these may often be locally specific.
Indicators for Eco-DRR

For indicators on Eco-DRR, please refer to the “Environmental
Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction” Sudmeier-Rieux et al
(2013) https://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_
resources/cem_ems/?uPubsID=4888
198 199
10 THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT RESILIENCE, ADAPTATION, TRANSFORMABILITY: 17.2 The five factors of success of an
Resilience is about complex, dynamic, linked Many losses in resilience are unintended ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
social-ecological systems (SESs, of which consequences of narrowly focused optimization adaptation resilience-building project
agro-ecosystems are one example), not the and ‘efficiency’ drives that remove currently
separate dynamics of social, economic and ‘unused’ reserves and ‘redundant’ functional We wrap up this chapter with what we consider to be five factors of
environmental systems. capacities. success of a resilience-building project (Figure 17.5).
Resilience is about how linked SESs self-organize Resilience is NOT about reducing variability or not 1. The project has clearly defined project objectives and defines resilience
in response to shocks/disturbances – their changing. Trying to prevent disturbance and keep as either passive, transformational or somewhere in between.
resilience determines the limits a system constant reduces its resilience. Probing Transformative resilience will most likely include aspects of social,
to that capacity. the boundaries of resilience is necessary for ecological and physical resilience.
Resilience, adaptation and transformation are maintaining and building resilience, including the 2. Project boundaries and stakeholders are clearly defined. Natural and
neutral system properties when used in a technical capacity for adaptation and transformation. human system components and their interlinkages are identified. You
sense. They are neither ‘good’ nor ‘bad’. It is the Adaptation and transformation are complementary have considered undertaking a resilience assessment.
system, or the state of the system, or the broader processes – managers often need to transform 3. Current risks and threats have been identified, assessed in terms of
sustainability goal which defines a ‘desirable’ or a lower scale of system in order that a higher their severity or impact and prioritized in terms of possible measures
‘undesirable’ system or goal. Desirability is a value scale can remain resilient (e.g. portions of the to reduce these risks and threats.
judgement that will vary according to the world catchment might change the enterprise in order
4. To ensure sustainability, or local capacity to continue with project
views of the stakeholders in a system. Restoration that the broader catchment remains viable). When
activities after the project is over, your project is designed to address
of degraded systems can be difficult and may an undesirable regime shift has happened or is
stakeholder concerns and turn over ownership. Inclusiveness has been
be impossible at least within the time frame of inevitable it calls for intentional transformational
considered and specific gender concerns have been included in the
development project or a person’s lifetime. change. The capacity to achieve this is
project design.
Making a system resilient in one way can cause it called transformability. Figure 17.5
5. Interventions are chosen that have considered various aspects of Factors of a successful
to lose resilience in other ways or at other scales – An adaptation pathways approach helps inform
ecological, social and/or physical resilience – and would naturally “resilience-building” project.
there are trade-offs in resilience building projects. the sequencing of decisions within long decision
include the concept of Eco-DRR/EbA. Concept: K. Sudmeier-Rieux.
Understanding and managing resilience requires time frames and incorporates flexibility to enable Design: S. Plog
consideration of ‘specified’ and ‘general’ resilience, social learning, co-creation, experimentation
adaptation and transformation: – specified and iteration, scenario planning and livelihood
resilience describes the resilience of particular innovation. It provides an appropriate framework DEFINE SYSTEM, BOUNDARIES & STAKEHOLDERS
*TARGET UNIT
CLEARLY DEFINED BOUNDARIES & STAKEHOLDER
parts of a system to particular kinds of disturbance in situations where goals are ambiguous, decision- 2
– general resilience is the capacity of a system to making is contested, social-ecological systems are
complex and highly dynamic and trajectories
DEFINE OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTATIONS / SYSTEM
absorb disturbances of any kind, including novel TRANSFORMATIVE RESILIENCE APPROACH
and unforeseen ones; it is related to adaptive are unpredictable. 1
capacity (adaptability) – the capacity of the O’Connell et al. 2019 PROJECT *

system to manage specified resilience; either stop OBJECTIVES
it crossing a threshold, or engineer crossing into a
desired regime. 3
* RESILIENCE TO WHAT ?
No system can be understood or managed at a
* ANALYSIS
PROJECT DESIGN
SUCCESSFUL
PROJECT ASSESS RISKS, THREATS AND UNCERTAINTIES
RISKS ARE IDENTIFIED AND PRIORITIZED
single scale – all systems function at multiple IMPLEMENTATION
(nested) scales, and interactions across scales
affect resilience at any particular scale, and
therefore the set of interacting scales. MONITORING AND 4 *SUSTAINABILITY
EVALUATION * DECIDE ON MEASURES AND INVOLVE STAKEHOLDERS
5 STAKEHOLDER OWNERSHIP
DEFINE SUCCESS INDICATORS WITH STAKEHOLDERS
ECOLOGICAL, SOCIAL AND PHYSICAL RESILIENCE INTERVENTIONS
200 201
Although this chapter attempts to present some simple and practical Bahadur, A., Ibrahim, M. and Tanner, T. (2010). The resilience O’Connell, D., Maru, Y., Grigg, N., Walker, B., Abel, N.,
guidance as to how to operationalize resilience at the project level, in renaissance? Unpacking of resilience for tackling climate Wise, R., Cowie, A., Butler, J., Stone-Jovicich, S., Stafford-
reality we are often confronted with complex, dynamic situations and change and disasters. Brighton: Institute of Development Smith, M., Ruhweza, A., Belay, M., Duron, G., Pearson, L.,
Studies. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/ and Meharg, S. (2019). Resilience, Adaptation Pathways
interactions between social, economic, political and ecological realities. As
handle/123456789/2368/The%20resilience%20 and Transformation Approach. A guide for designing,
a project manager in charge of increasing resilience in a certain location,
renaissance.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Accessed implementing and assessing interventions for sustainable
you will find that the variables that make systems resilient are constantly 24 July 2019. futures (version 2), CSIRO. https://research.csiro.au/eap/
changing as a consequence of project interventions, interactions between rapta/ Accessed 30 August 2019.
Chambers R. (2006). Vulnerability, Coping and Policy. IDS
socio-ecological system components and the occurrence of disasters.
Bulletin, (37)4, 33-40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1759-5436.1989. Renaud, F.G., Birkmann, J., Damm, M. and Gallopin, J.C.
Monitoring the outcome of project interventions and key drivers of change mp20002001.x. (2010). Understanding multiple thresholds of coupled
so that people can learn how change works in their system is one of the social-ecological systems exposed to natural hazards as
more important aspects of resilience building projects. Chambers, R. (2007): Who Counts? The Quiet Revolution
external shocks. Natural Hazards, 55(3), 749-763. DOI:
of Participation and Numbers. Working Papers. Brighton:
There is no simple way of increasing, managing or measuring resilience 10.1007/s11069-010-9505-x.
Institute of Development Studies.
as there are many ways of interpreting this concept, depending on your Resilience Alliance. (2007). Assessing Resilience in Social-
Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a
project scope, your background and perhaps what your boss wants you to perspective for social–ecological systems analyses.
Ecological Systems, a Workbook for Scientists, Version 1.1.
accomplish. However, the goal of this chapter was intended to provide some http://library.uniteddiversity.coop/Transition_Relocalisation_
Global Environmental Change,16, 253-267. DOI:/10.1016/j.
Resilience/resilience_workbook_for_scientists.pdf Accessed
steps and tools for defining and operationalizing resilience in quantitative gloenvcha.2006.04.002.
24 July 2019.
and qualitative terms. In the additional reading resources for these chapters,
Gaillard, J.C. (2010). Vulnerability, Capacity, and Resilience:
we have listed several documents for those who would like a much more Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Ash, N., and Murti, R. (2013).
Perspectives for Climate and Development Policy. Journal
thorough academic analysis of resilience and transformability. Remember Environmental Guidance Note to Disaster Risk Reduction,
of International Development, 22, 218–32. DOI: 10.1002/
Revised. Gland: IUCN. https://www.iucn.org/about/
that resilience should not be considered a normative term (O’Connell et jid.1675.
union/commissions/cem/cem_resources/cem_
al. 2015). ‘Passive resilience’ (or recovery to the pre-disaster state) may ems/?uPubsID=4888. Accessed 27 July 2019
Gaillard, J.C. and Maceda, E.A. (2009). Participatory
be the most appropriate objective, at least in the short-term, immediately three-dimensional mapping for disaster risk reduction.
after a disaster and depending on the time frame and available resources, Sudmeier-Rieux K., M. Jaboyedoff and Jaquet, S. (2013).
Participatory Learning and Action, 60, 109–118. https://
Operationalizing “resilience” for disaster risk reduction in
especially if it acts as a springboard for more transformative resilience. pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G02818.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
mountainous Nepal. Disaster Prevention and Management,
Hence, transformative resilience is more compatible with long term risk Gaillard, J.C. and Pangilinan, M.L. (2010). Participatory 22(4), 366-377. DOI: 10.1108/DPM-02-2013-0028.
reduction and improved livelihood conditions. Mapping for Raising Disaster Risk Awareness Among the
Sudmeier-Rieux, K. (2014). Resilience – an Emerging
Youth. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management,
Paradigm of Danger or of Hope? Disaster Prevention and
18(3), 175–9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2010.00614.x.
Management, 23(1), 67-80. DOI: 10.1108/DPM-12-2012-0143.
Gaillard, J.C., Pangilinan, M., Cadag, J. and Le Masson, V.
Twigg, J. (2007). Characteristics of a Disaster-
(2008). Living with increasing floods: insights from a rural
Resilient-Community: A Guidance Note. Benfield:
Philippine community. Disaster Prevention and Management,
Disaster Risk Reduction Interagency Coordination
17(3), 383– 395. DOI: 10.1108/09653560810887301.
Group. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/2310_
Holling, C.S. (1973) Resilience and Stability of Ecological Characteristicsdisasterhighres.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4,
Twigg, J. (2009). Identifying Partnership Needs and
1-23. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096802 Accessed
Opportunities. Disaster Studies Working Paper 18. Aon
30 August 2019.
Benfield UCL Hazard Research Centre, https://www.ucl.
Mayoux, L. and Chambers, R. (2005). Reversing the ac.uk/hazard-centre/sites/hazard-centre/files/wp18.pdf
paradigm: quantification, participatory methods and Accessed 24 July 2019.
pro-poor impact assessment. Journal of International
Development, 17, 271-298. DOI: 10.1002/jid.1214.
Moench, M. and Dixit A. (2007). Working with the Winds
of Change: Towards Strategies for Responding to the
Risks Associated with Climate Change and Other Hazards.
Kathmandu: ISET. https://www.preventionweb.net/
files/2652_windsofchange.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
202 203
Conclusions – challenges and opportunities for
The importance of ecosystems and their management for DRR and
CCA is gaining traction on the international scene, with mention and/
or mandates in different international agreements, such as the three
Rio Conventions (UNFCCC, CBD and UNCCD) and the SFDRR as well as
in many national policies, whether within their national climate change
plans (e.g. National Adaptation Plan of Action or Nationally Determined
Contributions) or other development or DRR plans. Yet, ecosystem-
based approaches are far from being mainstream. Grey infrastructure
and non-structural approaches, such as early warning systems, remain
the norm. Furthermore, post-disaster relief and reconstruction rather than
prevention is still the prevailing paradigm in use despite the knowledge
of the importance of DRR and adaptation. Moving beyond a reactive and
coping approach to a proactive and transformative approach is feasible
and necessary especially with global challenges such as CCA and increase
in disaster risks due to climate change.
Benefits of Eco-DRR/EbA
One of the main components that distinguishes Eco-DRR/EbA from
engineering measures are the multiple co-benefits that ecosystems
provide: support to livelihoods, poverty reduction, protection of
culture and identity, of water and soil resources, stabilisation of the
regional climate, biodiversity conservation as well as carbon storage
and sequestration. Eco-DRR and EbA are thus no-regrets strategies,
which was also clearly stated in the 2014 IPCC AR5 and reflected in
the SFDRR.
More and more examples are demonstrating that over 15 to 20 years,
green, or nature-based solutions to reducing disaster and climate risks
are the most cost-effective compared to solely grey infrastructure.
However, sometimes the hybrid green-grey solutions are the most
appropriate, especially in densely populated areas, as long as they do
not cause unsustainable ecological damage.
Last but not least, ecosystem management is one of the few
Chapter 18 approaches that address all three components of the risk equation.
This is logical considering that environmental degradation and people
Conclusions – challenges living in exposed places are two of the most important drivers of
disaster risk.
and opportunties for ecosystem- Ecosystems can prevent or mitigate hazards;
based disaster risk reduction Ecosystems can reduce exposure by functioning as natural
buffers;
and adaptation Ecosystems can reduce vulnerability by supporting livelihoods
before, during and after disasters.
Clearly, ecosystem-based approaches are not the silver bullet to either

DRR or CCA, since the issues underlying these run much deeper. Yet,
gender-sensitive Eco-DRR/EbA is an important step in the direction of
transformative resilience. Despite growing awareness of Eco-DRR/EbA
and gender sensitive approaches, there are still gaps and challenges in
mainstreaming them.
© UNEP
204 205
GAPS AND CHALLENGES Other gaps are tipping points of ecosystems and the related socio-
ecological system, the effect of ecosystems in reducing creeping,
Mainstreaming and scaling up from locally successful projects
or slow on-set disasters such as drought; the effect of disasters on
There have been a number of Eco-DRR/EbA projects implemented
ecosystem health and resilience, and time taken for their protection to be
successfully at the project scale. Mainstreaming and scaling up from
effective and services to be provided. Furthermore, climate change will
those to more nationally derived programmes is challenging depending
impact ecosystems too and while there is much research on impacts on
on the situation of each country. It is feasible, however, and Switzerland
biodiversity, making sense of this to operationalise natural infrastructure is
is probably a good case. Indeed, forests are a main component of its
not easy given the uncertainty of climate change in itself. This is one of the
disaster risk reduction program in the Alps to protect critical infrastructure
reasons why it has been seen as easier to fall back on grey infrastructure,
from frequent disaster such as rock fall, avalanches or shallow landslides.
for which knowledge is easier to derive within laboratory settings and
Furthermore, within some of its cantons, large scale renaturation of rivers
simulations. Yet more and more studies show how green infrastructure
is taking place to reduce flooding risk, while at the same time protecting
and hybrid solutions, combining green/grey approaches can be effective,
biodiversity and providing recreation areas. But this example, is of a
cost-wise and protection-wise, while bringing a number of benefits that
country where management of the land is fully under government control
can address underlying issues within a community such as livelihoods and
and it has the means to do so. In other situations, more community-
water availability. Continuing research in this area is necessary. However,
led approaches may be necessary. However, in these cases, it is vital
more than that, applying an adaptive management or learning approach to
to show-case the benefits of environmental management and include
implementation of Eco-DRR/EbA is the only way forward under uncertain
livelihood and community concerns within any plans. Indeed, even when
conditions. This requires monitoring and evaluation not being neglected
communities are not directly implicated in land management, community
or seen as of secondary importance or only to fulfill donor requirements.
consultations and involvement are necessary because it can cause
miscontent when land is used in a certain way. For example, managed Developing indicators for Eco-DRR/EbA and monitoring green/blue
realignment, where land is “sacrificed” for flooding to reduce sea/ocean infrastructure
wave power, can cause some landowners or land users to be upset if they Socio-ecological factors which create disaster risks are complex complex
do not understand or have their needs heard. as are notions of resilience. These complexities make for difficulties to
measure and monitor Eco-DRR/EbA and their outcomes, especially when
While progress has been made with regards to gender and inclusiveness
outcomes may not be seen for decades, as in the case for CCA. Fortunately,
in DRR/CCA, ensuring gender sensitive involvement in DRR/CCA is still an
there are many initiatives working to improve on developing indicators
issue that must not lag behind. Understanding the impact on and the role
and monitoring for both resilience and ecosystem-based approaches,
of women and other minorities in disasters and Eco-DRR/EbA still needs
including in the SFDRR. The first step towards this is identifying and
more research and effort to ensure equality and equity.
providing baseline information on ecosystems, their services, their status
How to up-scale successful local level Eco-DRR/EbA projects whether and risks. Creating a set of indicators that are process and result based
they emanate from the private or public sectors remains a challenge; may be necessary to cover all aspects. Finally, setting up a monitoring and
another is how to translate global policies into national and local-level evaluation scheme that is sustainable can be challenging but creatively
policies and legal frameworks that facilitate further mainstreaming and possible when perhaps tapping into existing (sub)national reporting
upscaling of Eco-DRR/EbA (Estrella et al. 2016). mechanisms or using some form of community-based approach.
Knowledge Despite these gaps and challenges, we hope that this book, which
There rests much which is still unknown. Although there is solid empirical provides general guidelines for Eco-DRR/EbA, places us one step further
evidence that Eco-DRR/EbA works in many contexts, another challenge by providing the background and impetus to overcome some of these
for Eco-DRR/EbA is in providing sufficient and scalable data about the role gaps and challenges.
of ecosystems in DRR. As ecosystem protective functions can be locally
specific, for example it has been difficult to establish standard ecological OPPORTUNITIES
engineering guidelines for various types of ecosystems and hazards. The preceding chapters outlined many opportunities for Eco-DRR/EbA,
This can make it difficult to replicate and upscale the same measures although we also need to be realistic about the limits to ecosystems in
in other locations and achieve the same results which can increase reducing disaster risks. Eco-DRR/EbA should not be considered as stand-
uncertainties when planning and implementing Eco-DRR/EbA projects. alone strategies but ones that often need to be combined with other risk
This also includes data about the cost effectiveness of ecosystems due reduction strategies, including hybrid solutions, early warning and other
to difficulties in conducting ecosystem valuation (Chapter 15). disaster prevention and preparedness measures.
As seen in Chapter 3, new opportunities have been created for Eco-DRR/
EbA thanks to the inclusion of ecosystem approaches in the SFDRR, the
Paris Agreement, the SDGs and recognition of the need to link ecosystems
with DRR in the CBD and the Ramsar Convention. At the local level, there
is also an increase in the number of Eco-DRR/EbA field projects (Doswald
and Estrella 2015).
206 207
As we pointed out in Chapter 16, in order for Eco-DRR/EbA to be truly WAY FORWARD
effective in addressing disaster risk, it needs to be fully integrated in
One of the main issues is the need to mainstream and upscale Eco-DRR/
development planning and financial decisions at national and local
EbA in development planning. This becomes a challenge given the multi-
levels. As called for in the SFDRR, mainstreaming Eco-DRR/EbA needs
disciplinary and multi-sectoral nature of Eco-DRR/EbA, whereas most
to be more directly addressed in national environmental policies and
existing legal and institutional frameworks do not necessarily support
legislative frameworks, as well as in environmental strategies and
nor encourage such integrated approaches, including overlapping, unclear
programming, such as environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and
institutional mandates and legal frameworks that are not enforceable.
strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) (Estrella et al. 2016).
However, it may be possible to overcome such challenges by working
Programmes that offer especially promising entry points for Eco-DRR/EbA
through development planning and initiatives that serve as an ‘umbrella’
include protected area management and IWRM, with several examples of
framework for multi-sectoral engagement (Estrella et al. 2016).
successful Eco-DRR/EbA were demonstrated in Chapter 13.
Finally, improving the inclusion of women and other minorities in Eco-DRR/
Another range of emerging opportunities are new financial instruments
EbA is vital because reducing marginalisation and improving equality and
that encourage investments in ecosystem management and restoration
equity will increase resilience of communities as a whole. Furthermore,
for DRR amongst other goals. These include Payment for Ecosystem
due to a number of social and cultural reasons, women are often key
Services (PES) (Chapter 15) and co-financing of Eco-DRR/EbA projects
stewards of natural resources (Figure 18.1) and as such, are important
between local governments communities or as public-private projects.
allies to a greener and more resilient world.
Although not discussed in detail in this book, there are promising private
sector initiatives in promoting natural infrastructure for waste water
treatment, air purification flood protection and land restoration (WBCSD Figure 18.1
2016). The insurance sector is also increasingly becoming more active Women as key actors of change
in seeking ways to reduce insured losses while exploring new business for Eco-DRR/EbA in Nepal.
Credit: K. Sudmeier-Rieux
opportunities from implementing Eco-DRR/EbA measures (UNEP 2014).
To conclude, we hope that this volume provided an overview of the

foundations of Eco-DRR/EbA, with examples for implementation, some
challenges and many opportunities for new emerging fields of study for
students and researchers on the various ecological, political and economic
possibilities of Eco-DRR/EbA.
208 209
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING Murti, R. and Buyck, C. (2014). Safe Havens: Protected ADDITIONAL WEBSITE RESOURCES
Areas for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change
Chelleri, L., Waters J.J., Olazabal, M. and G. Minucci (2015). Environment and Gender Index, IUCN: http:// IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management – Disaster
Adaptation. Gland: IUCN. https://www.iucn.org/about/union/
Resilience trade-offs: addressing multi-scale and temporal genderandenvironment.org/egi/ Risk Reduction https://www.iucn.org/about/union/
commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_drr/?uPubsID=5082
aspects of urban resilience to climate and environmental commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_drr/
Accessed 24 July 2019. Gender and Environment, UNEP http://www.UNEP.org/
changes. Environment and Urbanization, 27 (1), 181-198.
gender/data/AboutUs/tabid/54765/Default.aspx Wetlands International – Reducing disaster risks - http://
DOI: 10.1177/0956247814550780. National Institute of Disaster Management (n/a).
www.wetlands.org/OurWork/DisasterRiskReduction/
Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction In Environment Global Gender and Climate Alliance: http://gender-climate.org/
Doswald, N. and Estrella, M. (2015). Promoting ecosystems tabid/2752/Default.aspx
Sector Guidelines And Tools. Ministry of Home Affairs, Gov’t
for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: Partnership for Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction,
of India. Available online at: http://nidm.gov.in/pdf/pubs/ UNEP- Disasters and Conflicts
Opportunities for Integration. Geneva: United Nations UNEP: http://pedrr.org
DRR-environment.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Environment Programme. http://pedrr.org/pedrr/wp- http://www.UNEP.org/disastersandconflicts/
UN Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction,
content/uploads/2013/11/Discussion_paper_FINAL_web. Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Estrella, M. (2013). The
Sendai (Japan) 2015: http://www.wcdrr.org/home
pdf Accessed 24 July 2019 Role of Ecosystems for Disaster Risk Reduction. Tokyo:
UNU-Press. http://unu.edu/publications/books/the-role-
Dudley, N., Stolton, S., Belokurov, A., Krueger, L., Lopoukhine,
of-ecosystems-in-disaster-risk-reduction.html#overview
N., MacKinnon, K., Sandwith T. and N. Sekhran (eds) (2010).
Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people cope with
climate change. Gland, Switzerland, Washington DC and Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Estrella, M. and Nehren,
New York, USA: IUCN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World U. (2016). Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction and
Bank and WWF. https://www.iucn.org/downloads/natural_ adaptation in practice. Warren: Springer International
solutions.pdf Accessed: 24 July 2019 Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-43633-3.
Dudley, N, Buyck, C. Furuta, N. Pedrot, C., Renaud, F. and Sudmeier-Rieux, K., H. Masundire, A. Rizvi and Rietbergen, S.
K. Sudmeier-Rieux (2015). Protected Areas as Tools for (2006). Ecosystems, Livelihoods and Disasters: An integrated
Disaster Risk Reduction, A Handbook for Practitioners. Tokyo approach to disaster risk management. Gland/Cambridge:
and Gland, Switzerland: MOEJ and IUCN. https://portals. IUCN. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/568_10050.pdf
iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2015-001.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Accessed: 24 July 2019
Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Ash, N. and Murti, R. (2013).
Estrella, M., Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and Nehren, Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction:
U. (2016). Defining new pathways for ecosystem-based Healthy Ecosystems for Human Security and Climate Change
disaster risk reduction and adaptation in the post-2015 Adaptation. =2013 edition. Gland: IUCN. https://portals.iucn.
sustainable development agenda, In Ecosystem-based org/library/sites/library/files/documents/CEM-008-2013.
disaster risk reduction and adaptation: linking science, policy pdf Accessed 24 July 2019
and practice. Renaud, F., Sudmeier-Rieux, K. Estrella, M. and
UNEP (2014). Building disaster-resilient communities
U. Nehren (eds). Cham: Springer International Publishing
and economies. Geneva: UNEP-FI. https://www.unepfi.
AG. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-43633-3.
org/fileadmin/documents/building_disaster-resilient_
Laddey, R., Kumamoto, M. and Treichel, P. UNDP. (2011). communities_economies_01.pdf Accessed 24 July 2019.
Africa Adaptation Programme Experiences Gender and
UNISDR, UNDP and IUCN (2009). Making Disaster Risk
Climate Change: Advancing Development through An
Reduction Gender-Sensitive Policy and Practical Guidelines.
Integrated Gender Perspective. New York: UNDP. Available
Geneva: UNDRR/UNDP/IUCN. https://www.unisdr.org/
online at: http://www.africa.undp.org/content/dam/rba/
files/9922_MakingDisasterRiskReductionGenderSe.pdf
docs/Reports/AAP%20Discussion%20Paper%20En.pdf
210 211
212
View publication stats

Eco Drrsourcebookfinalsep2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eco Drrsourcebookfinalsep2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eco Drrsourcebookfinalsep2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Disasters and Ecosystems, Resilience in a Changing Climate - Source Book

Book · October 2019

Udo Michael Nehren Simone Sandholz

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR)

and respective accounting methodology

Figure 1.2 is a striking illustration of the different levels of vegetation cover

1.2 Structure of the book

climate change Call for international assistance.

DISASTER TRENDS AND STATISTICS

Underlying THE RISK-POVERTY NEXUS

Figure 2.5 Number of Deaths (thousand) Number of Deaths per event

Total number of deaths compared

According to UNDRR (UNISDR 2015), absolute economic losses due to

due to inaccessible evacuation, response (including shelters, camps, and 1

Uppe r- middle-income countries

Figure 2.11 compares the exposure of the population in different

Figure 2.13 Social inequalities, Lack of evacuation

pa and coping capacities, is an important avenue to tackle vulnerability

dams, and raising houses to (UNISDR 2015a).

CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION

Chapter 3 Figure 3.1

Key questions Sensitivity

In 2009, a group of scientists led by Johan Rockström from the Stockholm

1 Dolidon et al. (2009), Peduzzi (2010), Norris et al. (2008).

6.2 Core elements of ecosystem-based disaster

1. ECOSYSTEMS PROVIDE MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS AND

Figure 6.2 Figure 6.3 Figure 6.4

In economics, resilience refers to the inherent ability and adaptive

© Bhushan Thimla, UNEP

Inappropriate location of temporary settlements and lack of sanitation Figure 9.5

© Karen Sudmeier-Rieux/UN Environment

LOW Many types of vulnerabilities arise from conditions linked to ecosystems

10.2 Common approaches to assessing Figure 10.3

EXAMPLES FOR COMMUNITY RISK AND VULNERABILITY

10-3 (by Tearfund) analyses risks posed by climate change and

and adaptation ecosystem status. Formal process such as environmental impact

For more information about

ecological consequences of projects. This trend has been driven partly

4 The Gender Marker series can be found here: https://drive.google.com/drive/

Key questions Protected Area Management (PAM)

INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Capacity Development in Sustainable Water

SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT

INTEGRATED FIRE MANAGEMENT

Each of the presented approaches aims at a long-term sustainable

Water cycle link to floods and droughts:

inundations (Figure 13.6). NORMAL GRO

4) Other ecosystem-based options to curb inundation risk include

{C} INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT:

ecosystems in soil and groundwater (Figure 13.7).

SOIL MOISTURE DEFICIT

MANAGE VEGETATION TO INTERCEPT RAINWATER

Chapter 14 term green infrastructure over ‘natural’, ‘blue’, or ‘ecological’ infrastructure,

There are many opportunities for ecological engineering, which is itself

Chapter 15 available to a country.

Economics support decision making about which

and 4) Knowledge, innovation and technology (Kerala PDNA 2018).