If Numbers Can Speak, Who Listens? Creating Engagement and Learning for Effective Uptake of DRR Investment in Developing Countries

Junko Mochizuki, Adriana Keating, Reinhard Mechler, Callahan Egan, Stefan Hochrainer-Stigler
2016 PLOS Currents  
With a renewed emphasis on evidence-based risk sensitive investment promoted under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, technical demands for analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) will likely increase in the foreseeable future. This begs a number of pragmatic questions such as whether or not sophisticated quantitative appraisal tools are effective in raising policy awareness and what alternatives are available. Method: This article briefly
more » ... ews current practices of analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis and identifies issues associated with its applications in small scale community based DRR interventions. Results: The article illustrate that while best scientific knowledge should inform policy and practice in principle, it should not create an unrealistic expectation that the state-of-the art methods must be used in all cases, especially for small scale DRR interventions in developing countries, where data and resource limitations and uncertainty are high, and complex interaction and feedback may exist between DRR investment, community response and longer-term development outcome. Discussion: Alternative and more participatory approaches for DRR appraisals are suggested which includes participatory serious games that are increasingly being used to raise awareness and identify pragmatic strategies for change that are needed to bring about successful uptake of DRR investment and implementation of DRR mainstreaming. Amid the rising costs of natural disasters observed globally, emerging international consensus holds that a primary remedy to the lack of appropriate risk management -and ex-ante disaster risk reduction (DRR) investment in particular -can be found in better communication regarding the cost-effectiveness of DRR investment 1 , 2 . Over the past two decades, natural disasters have affected a total of 4.4 billion people worldwide, causing as much as $2 trillion in economic losses 3 . By 2030, accelerating urbanization, continued asset build-up in hazard-prone areas and other adverse consequences of poorly managed development are expected to double the economic losses from natural disasters globally 4 . To curtail these trends in risk creation, ex-ante quantification, evaluation and the integration of disaster risk into development are increasingly seen as crucial. 'DRR investment saves' has been a major slogan in such discourse, where the lack of awareness and scientific evidence are seen as the major obstacles hindering the rational decision to invest in ex-ante protection of our wellbeing, livelihoods and productive assets 5 . The general premise that improved risk knowledge will lead naturally to enhanced DRR investment is not only theoretically debatable 6 as has been critiqued by numerous behavioural and political economic studies which explain why we continue to underinvest in DRR despite the knowledge of its net benefits 7 , 8 ; it has also created a practical issue in which increasingly sophisticated enquiries -often beyond the capacities of developing country practitioners -are called for to present scientific evidence regarding the costs and benefits of DRR investment 9 . While the concept and use of evidence-based assessments is advocated, the practical challenges of implementing such analyses in developing country contexts are, until today, insufficiently acknowledged. A quantitative method known as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is often considered the state-of-the-art in the appraisal of DRR policies, in which probability distributions relating hazard return periods and loss estimates are calculated 10 . The use of Abstract Introduction: With a renewed emphasis on evidence-based risk sensitive investment promoted under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, technical demands for analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) will likely increase in the foreseeable future. This begs a number of pragmatic questions such as whether or not sophisticated quantitative appraisal tools are effective in raising policy awareness and what alternatives are available. Method: This article briefly reviews current practices of analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis and identifies issues associated with its applications in small scale community based DRR interventions. Results: The article illustrate that while best scientific knowledge should inform policy and practice in principle, it should not create an unrealistic expectation that the state-of-the art methods must be used in all cases, especially for small scale DRR interventions in developing countries, where data and resource limitations and uncertainty are high, and complex interaction and feedback may exist between DRR investment, community response and longer-term development outcome. Discussion: Alternative and more participatory approaches for DRR appraisals are suggested which includes participatory serious games that are increasingly being used to raise awareness and identify pragmatic strategies for change that are needed to bring about successful uptake of DRR investment and implementation of DRR mainstreaming. Abstract Introduction: With a renewed emphasis on evidence-based risk sensitive investment promoted under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, technical demands for analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) will likely increase in the foreseeable future. This begs a number of pragmatic questions such as whether or not sophisticated quantitative appraisal tools are effective in raising policy awareness and what alternatives are available. Method: This article briefly reviews current practices of analytical tools such as probabilistic cost-benefit analysis and identifies issues associated with its applications in small scale community based DRR interventions. Results: The article illustrate that while best scientific knowledge should inform policy and practice in principle, it should not create an unrealistic expectation that the state-of-the art methods must be used in all cases, especially for small scale DRR interventions in developing countries, where data and resource limitations and uncertainty are high, and complex interaction and feedback may exist between DRR investment, community response and longer-term development outcome. Discussion: Alternative and more participatory approaches for DRR appraisals are suggested which includes participatory serious games that are increasingly being used to raise awareness and identify pragmatic strategies for change that are needed to bring about successful uptake of DRR investment and implementation of DRR mainstreaming.
doi:10.1371/currents.dis.ab5922892b54a68f7315e967f6dd3406 pmid:27366584 pmcid:PMC4915768 fatcat:46p6m5lnmvh4toac5mqi4kxh4i