GAR 2015 Main Report

134

Part II - Chapter 7

7.3 Experiencing disaster risk

Gaining risk awareness is a dynamic process which is highly dependent on disaster experience. It therefore differs across time and space.

Risk awareness and understanding would seem to be fundamentally experiential. For example, Japan has the highest level of hazard exposure in the world and has been dealing with repeated

disasters for millennia. Shaped by that experience, risk awareness is high amongst citizens and government authorities alike, research into risk identification and estimation is a priority, and risk knowledge permeates disaster risk management strategies and policies at all levels. Sustainability depends on sound disaster risk management.

In contrast, the disaster risk awareness of households, businesses and governments in countries with low levels of hazard exposure and infrequent disasters is likely to lack that essential experiential quality. Irrespective of public information on hazards, a strong political and economic imperative for disaster risk management is far less likely to emerge in those countries (Neumayer et al., 2012

Neumayer, Eric., Thomas Plümper and Fabian Barthel. 2012,The Political Economy of Natural Disaster Damage, February 2012.. .

At the global level, disaster risk awareness is not systematically assessed, and it is difficult to measure how it has evolved since the adoption of the HFA or the declaration of the IDNDR. However, the number of nationally and internationally reported disasters has shown a strong upward trend since 1990 (Figure 7.2), which could indicate that more people have experienced manifestations of risk first-hand.

Large intensive disasters with major social and economic impacts certainly generate risk awareness, at least in the short term, and may catalyse change. As noted in Chapter 1, the impetus to reform risk governance arrangements often surfaces in the wake of large disasters. This change is not limited to governments. For example, the impact of the 2011 disasters in Japan and Thailand on global supply chains (UNISDR, 2013a

UNISDR. 2013a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: From Shared Risk to Shared Value: the Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. .

) certainly led to raised awareness of and concern with disaster risk in the private sector.

This awareness (Box 7.2) continues to grow, and disaster and climate-related risks now figure

(Source: UNISDR with data from the HFA Monitor.)

Figure 7.1 Progress in risk awareness

HFA progress reports show that countries have made significant progress in this area. However, progress in general is lower than the average across the various priorities for action (Figure 7.1). With notable exceptions, citizens, businesses and other stakeholders in most countries rarely have access to risk information before they make investment decisions or undertake property transactions. As discussed below, there has been explosive growth in the production of risk information and in collaboration between scientific and technical institutions, but too little of this information ends up in the hands of users in a format that can inform decisions (CDKN, 2014

CDKN (Climate and Development Knowledge Network). 2014,Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2, CDKN Guide, April 2014.. .

	134 Part II - Chapter 7 7.3 Experiencing disaster risk Gaining risk awareness is a dynamic process which is highly dependent on disaster experience. It therefore differs across time and space. Risk awareness and understanding would seem to be fundamentally experiential. For example, Japan has the highest level of hazard exposure in the world and has been dealing with repeated disasters for millennia. Shaped by that experience, risk awareness is high amongst citizens and government authorities alike, research into risk identification and estimation is a priority, and risk knowledge permeates disaster risk management strategies and policies at all levels. Sustainability depends on sound disaster risk management. In contrast, the disaster risk awareness of households, businesses and governments in countries with low levels of hazard exposure and infrequent disasters is likely to lack that essential experiential quality. Irrespective of public information on hazards, a strong political and economic imperative for disaster risk management is far less likely to emerge in those countries (Neumayer et al., 2012 x Neumayer, Eric., Thomas Plümper and Fabian Barthel. 2012,The Political Economy of Natural Disaster Damage, February 2012.. . ). At the global level, disaster risk awareness is not systematically assessed, and it is difficult to measure how it has evolved since the adoption of the HFA or the declaration of the IDNDR. However, the number of nationally and internationally reported disasters has shown a strong upward trend since 1990 (Figure 7.2), which could indicate that more people have experienced manifestations of risk first-hand. Large intensive disasters with major social and economic impacts certainly generate risk awareness, at least in the short term, and may catalyse change. As noted in Chapter 1, the impetus to reform risk governance arrangements often surfaces in the wake of large disasters. This change is not limited to governments. For example, the impact of the 2011 disasters in Japan and Thailand on global supply chains (UNISDR, 2013a x UNISDR. 2013a,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: From Shared Risk to Shared Value: the Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. . ) certainly led to raised awareness of and concern with disaster risk in the private sector. This awareness (Box 7.2) continues to grow, and disaster and climate-related risks now figure (Source: UNISDR with data from the HFA Monitor.) Figure 7.1 Progress in risk awareness HFA progress reports show that countries have made significant progress in this area. However, progress in general is lower than the average across the various priorities for action (Figure 7.1). With notable exceptions, citizens, businesses and other stakeholders in most countries rarely have access to risk information before they make investment decisions or undertake property transactions. As discussed below, there has been explosive growth in the production of risk information and in collaboration between scientific and technical institutions, but too little of this information ends up in the hands of users in a format that can inform decisions (CDKN, 2014 x CDKN (Climate and Development Knowledge Network). 2014,Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2, CDKN Guide, April 2014.. . ).	Page 1 Page 10 Page 20 Page 30 Page 40 Page 50 Page 60 Page 70 Page 80 Page 90 Page 100 Page 110 Page 120 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 ->Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 150 Page 160 Page 170 Page 180 Page 190 Page 200 Page 210 Page 220 Page 230 Page 240 Page 250 Page 260 Page 270 Page 280 Page 290 Page 300 Page 310