INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT (IJDRM)
UDC: 504
614.8.069
ISSN (printed edition) 2620-2662
ISSN (electronic edition) 2620-2786
SCIENTIFIC-PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY FOR DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT, BELGRADE, THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT (IJDRM)
Vol. 1 • № 1
Belgrade, 2019
PUBLISHER
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management, Belgrade, the Republic of Serbia
E-mail: disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com Website - www.upravljanje-rizicima.com
EDITORIAL BOARD
Editor-in-Chief
Assist. Prof. Vladimir M. Cvetković, PhD, vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia
International editorial board
Professor Rajib Shaw, PhD
Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Cam- pus (SFC), Japan, shaw@sfc.keio.ac.jp.
Professor Kevin Ronan, PhD
Clinical Psychology School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, CQUniversity, Rockhampton, Australia, k.ronan@cqu.edu.au.
Professor & Director, Naim Kapucu, PhD
School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida, 4364 Scorpius Street, USA, kapucu@ucf.edu.
Full professor Eric Noji, MD, MPH, DTM&H(Lon), PhD
Distinguished University Professor and Senior Consultant in Emergency Medicine, King Saud University Hospitals and College of Medicine, Washington, D.C., USA, eric@eknoji.com.
Full Professor Igor Khripunov, PhD
Center for International Trade and Security School of Public and International Af- faires University of Georgia in Athens (UGA) 120 Academic Building, Athens, GA 30602, USA, igokhrip@uga.edu.
Damon P. Coppola,
Disaster Management Specialist, Pacific Disaster Center, and Principal, Shoreline Risk, Hawaii, USA, dcoppola@shorelinerisk.com.
Prof. Dr. Eng. Alexandru Ozunu, PhD
Dean of the Faculty of Environmental Science and Engineering, “Babeş-Bolyai” Uni- versity, Romania, alexandru.ozunu@gmail.com.
Prof. Dr. Dimitar Dimitrov, PhD
Head of National and Regional Security Department, Dean of Faculty ‘Economics of Infrastructure’ at University of National and World Economy (UNWE), Sofia, Bulgaria, dimdim@unwe.bg.
Assoc. Prof. Rositsa Velichkova, PhD
Department Hydroaerodynamics and Hydraulic machines,Technical university of Sofia, 1000 Sofia, 8 Kl. Ohridski Ave, Bulgaria, rositsavelichkova@abv.bg.
Full Prof. Miroslav Vesković, PhD
European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Inter-institutional, International Re- lations and Outreach, Brussels/Belgium, Miroslav.VESKOVIC@ec.europa.eu.
Assoc. Prof. Rita Mano, PhD
Department of Human Services, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa 31995, Israel, ritamano@research.haifa.ac.il.
Assoc. Prof. Igal M. Shohet, PhD
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Structural Engineering, Beer- sheba, Israel, igals@bgu.ac.il.
Assist. Prof. Blaz Komac, PhD
Head of the Department of natural hazards, Anton Melik Geographical Institute ZRC SAZU, Slovenia, blaz@zrc-sazu.si.
Prof. Caroline Brassard, PhD
Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore, dr.cbrassard@gmail.com.
Prof. Lamiaa A Fiala, Mbbch, MPH, DrPH, MSc.Edu, PhD
Public Health & Preventive Medicine Community Medicine Dept. Faculty of Medi- cine, Suez Canal University Ismailia, Egypt, lamiaafiala@yahoo.com.
Giulia Roder, PhD
Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, University of Padova, Agripolis, viale dell’Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Italy, giu.roder@gmail.com.
Assoc. Prof. Adem Ocal, PhD
Independent researcher, Ankara, 06500, Turkey, ocadem@gmail.com.
Assoc. Prof. Aleksandar Ivanov, PhD
Faculty of Security-Skopje, University of Bitola , Macedonia, akademec@gmail.com.
Juel RanaKutub
Faujdarhat Cadet College Faujdarhat, Sitakundu, Chittagong 4616, Bangladesh, juel- rana63@yahoo.com.
Full Prof. Slavoljub Dragićević, PhD
University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski Trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia sasa@gef.bg.ac.rs.
Assist. Prof. Ivan Novković, PhD
University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski Trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia novkovic.ivan@gmail.com.
Full Prof. Stanimir Kostadinov, PhD
University of Belgrade Faculty of Forest, Kneza Viseslava 1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia,
stanimir.kostadinov@sfb.bg.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Vladimir Jakovljević, PhD
University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel- grade, Serbia vjakov@fb.bg.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Marija Jevtic, MD, PhD
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Public Health of Vojvodina, Serbia, marija.jevtic@uns.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Boban Milojković, PhD
Academy of Criminalistic and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade, Serbia boban.milojkovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Želimir Kešetović, PhD
Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel- grade, Serbia, zelimir.kesetovic@gmail.com.
Assoc. Prof. Jasmina Gačić, PhD
University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia jgacic@orion.rs.
Assoc. Prof. Jovana Nikolov, PhD
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Phyiscs, Faculty of Sci- ences University of Novi Sad, Serbia, jovana.nikolov@df.uns.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Srđan Milašinović, PhD
University of Criminal Investigation and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade, Serbia, srdjan.milasinovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Dragan Mlađan, PhD
University of Criminal Investigation and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade, Serbia, dragana.mladjan@kpa.edu.rs.
Prof. Dejan Bošković, PhD
University of Criminal Investigation and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade, Serbia, dejan.boskovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Aleksandra Ljuština, PhD
University of Criminal Investigation and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade, Serbia, dejan.boskovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Ana M. Petrović
Research Associate of the Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“ of the Serbian Acad- emy of Sciences and Arts
Marina Filipović, PhD candidate
University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel- grade, Serbia fmarina@fb.bg.ac.rs.
Editorial secretary
Katarina Andrić
English Language Editor and Proof-Reader
Petar Marković
Printed by
Neven, Belgrade
Ordering:
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management Belgrade, Serbia
Fax/faks: +381 (0)1 425 77 94
E-mail: disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com
PDF version of the journal
www.upravljanje-rizicima.com
Published twice a year
TABLE OF CONTENS
XUESONG GUO, NAIM CAPUCU
Examining Stakeholder Participation in Social Stability Risk Assessment for Mega Projects using Network Analysis 1
ALEKSANDRINA V. MAVRODIEVA, DYAH S. BUDIARTI, ZHOU YU, FEDERICO A. PASHA, RAJIB SHAW
Governmental Incentivization for SMEs’ Engagement in Disaster Resilience
in Southeast Asia 32
ADEM OCAL
Natural Disasters in Turkey: Social and Economic Perspective 51
KUMIKO FUJITA, RAJIB SHAW
Preparing International Joint Project: use of Japanese flood hazard map in Bangladesh 62
VLADIMIR M. CVETKOVIĆ
Risk Perception of Building Fires in Belgrade 81
Research article
UDC: 005.35:005.334
005.311:519.852
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.1
Examining Stakeholder Participation in Social Stability Risk Assessment for Mega Projects using Network Analysis
Xuesong Guo 1, Naim Kapucu 2,*
1 School of Public Policy and Administration, Xi’an Jiaotong University Xi’an, Shaanxi, P.R.China; guoxues1@163.com
2 School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida, USA; kapucu@ucf.edu
* Correspondence: kapucu@ucf.edu
Received: 22 October 2018; Accepted: 3 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: The paper examines stakeholder participation of social stability risk assessment for mega projects in China from a network perspective, with participatory decision-mak- ing in a political system discussed. From this analysis, we developed and tested hypoth- eses on stakeholder participation in social stability risk assessment. Using data obtained through content analysis, we established network on each compulsory procedure in so- cial stability risk assessment to test the hypotheses. Additional impactful factors were discussed using singular value decomposition method in the study. We also provided practical implications and suggestions for policy and practice in the article.
Keywords: stakeholder participation; social stability risk assessment; affiliation networks; network analysis.
Introduction
Stakeholder participation is a fundamental and critical stage of decisoion-mak- ing for mega projects (Erkul et al., 2016). In China, various mega projects have been carried out (Liu et al., 2016b), and many conflicts occurred due to ineffec- tive stakeholder engagement (Liu et al., 2016a; Moore & Warren, 2006). Recent examples include Nu River Dam, Yuanmingyuan Lake Drainage scheme, and Dalian Paraxylene Projects (Liu et al., 2016a; Moore & Warren, 2006). Chinese government began implementing Social Stability Risk Assessment (SSRA) on mega project to provide a framework within which more stakeholder participa- tion can take place (Dong, 2011; Li et al., 2012b, c; Shen, 2014; Zhang & Tong, 2015). However, controversies on effectiveness of stakeholder participation exist (Ma & Du, 2014). Some public representatives note limited opportunities to get involved in SSRA (Liu, 2016) and some critics state the assessment processes are
subject to manipulation by powerful government enterprises, giving grassroots representatives little or no voice (Liao & Liu, 2016; Lu, 2016; Xu, 2013).
The purpose of this research is to examine stakeholder participation in SSRA, building on and contributing to participatory decision making scholar- ship. Although the issues on this topic have been discussed extensively (Black- stock et al., 2007; Lawrence, 2006; Reed, 2008; Tatenhove & Leroy, 2003), stake- holder participation in SSRA has not been analyzed until relatively recently (Liu
& Li, 2013; Liu et al., 2016b). Specially, stakeholder participation in China might be different from that developed within the context of western democracies. In this study, we test the hypotheses on stakeholder participation in SSRA through network analysis, as it provides substantial contribution to methodology of stake- holder participation assessment.
Literature Review & Background
Although benefits of stakeholder participation on conflicts identification, mitiga- tion, and resolution (Brunsting et al., 2011; Li et al., 2012a; Poetz, 2011; Yang & Pandey, 2011) are confirmed (Reed, 2007; Reed et al., 2007), effective stakehold- er participation is still challenging, especially in a political seting in a develop- ing-nation (Bryson et al., 2015; Fazey et al., 2010; Thabrew & Ries, 2009). Some attempts were made to discuss the effectiveness of stakeholder participation in policy and decision making (Bardach, 1998; Beierle, 2002; Blackstock et al., 2007; Brody, 2003), with some evaluation methods proposed (Beierle, 2002; Rowe & Frewer, 2000). Chess and Purcell (1999) evaluated the extent to which ‘‘process’’ and ‘‘outcome’’ goals were achieved. Blackstock et al. (2007) argued that the eval- uation should be participatory with stakeholders selecting and applying the eval- uation criteria. Koontz (2005) evaluated the extent to which stakeholder partic- ipation influenced the local farm preservation policy. Sultana and Abeyasekera (2008) claimed participation led to greater uptake of conservation measures and fewer conflicts. Beierle (2002) concluded that more intensive participatory pro- cesses are more likely to yield higher quality decisions. Scholars also stated that the criteria should be satisfied for effective stakeholder participation (Fiorino, 1990; Smith et al., 1997), and developed various evaluation criteria (Brody, 2003; Chase et al., 2004). Criteria-based evaluation is undoubtedly valuable (Rowe & Frewer, 2004a), but challenges still exist. Most of the criteria are procedural rath- er than substantive (Middendorf & Busch, 1997) in that they relate to what makes for effective processes rather than how to measure effective outcomes.
On the other hand, networks have been used as an alternative perspective for stakeholder analysis and organizational coordination (Aaltonen et al., 2010; Abbasi & Kapucu, 2016; Cameron et al., 2008; Prell et al., 2009). From this per-
spective, Gattringer et al. (2014) discussed collaboration among stakeholders. Pira et al. (2016) presented an Agent-Based Model to mimic participatory de- cision-making process where stakeholders, linked by social network, exchange opinions in order to find a shared and transitive collective decision.
Theoretical Insights and Hypotheses
In the research, stakeholder participation is defined as a process where stakehold- ers (individuals, groups, and organizations) take active roles in making decisions affecting them (Rowe & Frewer, 2004b; Wandersman, 1981). Since stakeholders have different perceptions on the problem definition, policy outcmes, and poten- tial solutions (Kapucu, & Garayev, 2011; Koppenjan & Klijn, 2010), collabora- tions and coordinations are required, leading to the need for stakeholders to op- erate in the context of networks (Marin & Mayntz, 1991; Marsh & Rhodes, 1992). In Chinese governance structure , decision-making on mega project also re- quires coordination among various stakeholders (agencies dispersed over various government levels and sectors, state-owned companies, private business, citizens, and activists) in interactive processes (Li et al., 2012b, c; Mertha, 2009; Weber & Khademian, 2008). Network is defi ed as “structures of interdependence involving multiple organizations or parts therof” (O’Toole, 1997). Network analysis can be ap- plied in examining the stakeholder participation in decision making as a theoretical framework as well as a method (Kapucu et al., 2014; Koppenjan & Klijn, 2010). The network perspective, despite cultural and institutional differences, was applied in this study as a framework (Liu et al., 2016a; Zheng et al., 2010). Social Network Analysis (SNA) was applied as method for stakeholder engagement analysis (Borgatti et al., 2012; Harshaw & Tindall, 2005) in the context of SSRA, as this method can test the
hypotheses and facilitate discussions on improving stakeholder participation.
According to the guidance released by central authorities (General Office of Chinese Communist Party Central Committee, 2015), the procedures for stake- holder participation in SSRA can be structured in early program development and late implementation stages. The early stage includes the following three pro- cedures:
Organization and Coordination: Stakeholders (or their representatives) pre- pare the propsals (issues) for discussion, determine the agenda and involved rep- resentatives collaboratively.
Collaborative Decision: Stakeholders (or their representatives) determine the level of social stability risk and make decision (the mega project can be ap- proved or not) accordingly.
Supervision and Guidance: Stakeholders (or their representatives) super- vise and guide the participatory processes to ensure the assessment is conducted
legitimately.
The one procedure included in late stage is Accountability. Accountability is used as a feedback procedure, stakeholders (or their representatives) observe outcomes of the decisions, learn lessons and identify the organizations or indi- viduals who should be held accountable in case of wrong decision (see Figure 1).
Input
Political System
Output
Supervision and Guidance
Demands
Support
Organization and Coordination
Decisioons Policies
Collaborative Decision
Feedback
Accountability
Figure 1. Process of Stakeholder Participation in SSRA
In the figure above, we view the successive procedures as political system. According to Easton (1979), the system should manage to maintain a steady flow of support. The demands and supports are transformed into issues through Or- ganization and Coordination. Then the issues are discussed through specific proce- dures (Collaborative Decision, Supervision and Guidance) to form authoritative deci- sions. More importantly, dynamic decision-making tasks arise during project life circle and a sequential decisions are required to make. Each decision affects the circumstances or state in which later decisions are made (Mackinnon & Wearing, 1985). Therefore, the decision tasks have the following characteristics: (a) they require a series of decisions rather than a single decision, (b) these decisions are interdependent and (c) the environment changes as a consequence of both the decision-makers actions as well as other external factors (Edwards, 1962; Erkul et al., 2016). So, such tasks involve ‘‘circular causality’’ (Diehl & Sterman, 1995). Therefore, a feedback loop is involved and play important role, ensuring that the decision can be adjusted to adapt with “environment” (Easton, 1957).
To achieve effective and efficient feedbacks, stakeholder participation in SSRA should be holistic and continual throughout the whole participatory process (Reed et al., 2006; Stewart et al., 1984). So, stakeholder participation is required to be integrated with the project circle (Sequeira, 2010). Aside from engagement in early stage (Mazmanian & Nienaber, 1979; Reed et al., 2006; Stewart et al.,
1984), stakeholders may also be involved in monitoring and evaluating outcomes of decisions (Estrella & Gaventa, 2000). We propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Stakeholders participation varies in different procedures, in- cluding Organization and Coordination, Collaborative Decision, Supervision and Guidance, Accountability.
Since a long-term participatory process (Gunderson & Holling, 2002) is in- volved in SSRA, iterative and two-way learning between participants is critical (Chase et al., 2004; Johnson et al., 2004). Stakeholders involved in different stages may differ and the real outcomes of decisions will emerge after some time, so the stakeholders / decision makers must respond appropriately to the policy results of preceding procedures (Kleinmuntz, 1985; Kleinmuntz & Schkade, 1993). In practical terms, it is critical for stakeholders of high participation levels to be active from early to late stage. Hence, stakeholders/decision makers must occupy core positions in early stage and understand the importance of participation in late stages. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: Compared to stakeholders at peripheral positions, stakeholders at core positions in early stage might not hold high participation level in late stage (i.e., accountability).
Additionally, we discuss issues of SSRA in the context of Chinese polit- ical system (Lawrence & Martin, 2012). Grassroots organizations have limited voice in Chinese traditional hierarchical governance structure (Mertha, 2009). This may make it challenging to motivate grassroots representatives to engage in SSRA, especially when they are asked to respond to proposals they perceive are finalized (Zhu et al., 2014). Given this background, we examine whether the high-level grassroots participation in decision-making on mega project has been achieved in SSRA, as seen in the following proposed hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3: High-level grassroots participation in decision-making on mega projects has been observed in SSRA.
The Chinese governance structure is still characterized as hierarchical and cen- tralized (Bruce et al., 2009; Larson & Soto, 2008). Following a top-down mode (Lar- son et al., 2007), higher level governments may have adequate authority and mobili- zation capacities to achieve more intensive participatory decision (Pohlner, 2016). On the other hand, the gradual opening of spaces for participation from the bottom up has emerged and challenges the traditional mode (Tan & Zhou, 2015), and may lead to active grassroots participation (Blomquist et al., 2010; Larson & Soto, 2008). Given this context and our research interests in SSRA, we examined whether higher level governments can achieve more intensive stakeholder participation than grassroots governments in SSRA with the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: Compared to local levels, higher levels governments can achieve more intensive stakeholder participation in SSRA.
Design
Using “actor” to denote stakeholder (or representative), we applied affiliation network method for network establishment (Borgatti & Everett, 1997; Hu et al., 2014). A link between two actors was identified if they were engaged in identi- cal procedure of an SSRA event. Then, we established four networks based on the four successive compulsory procedures, including Organization and Coordi- nation Network (OC-N), Collaborative Decision Network (CD-N), Supervision and Guidance Network (SG-N), and Accountability Network (AC-N).
First, we calculated index on each network, including density, average geo- desic distances, compactness and the number of ties, to achieve comparisons on activeness of the networks (Hypothesis 1) with some powerful and important ac- tors discussed using centrality measures. Second, we measured actors’ partici- pation levels in different procedures, indicated by different networks, through core/periphery structure analyses. Selecting the actors occupying core positions as ones with high participation levels in each network, we compared their partici- pation levels in different stages (Hypothesis 2). Following similar methods, we also discussed grassroots participation level (Hypothesis 3). Third, we analyzed core/ periphery structures of SSRA events in the networks and SSRA events occupying core positions were identified as the ones with more intensive stakeholder par- ticipation. Considering the levels (higher level or local level) of governments in charge, we compared intensiveness of stakeholder participations achieved by gov- ernments of different levels (Hypothesis 4). We also discussed active network using Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) method with influential factors concluded. UCINET was the software used for network analysis (Borgatti et al., 2012).
Data Collection
Focusing on SSRA events (Appendix 1) in the city of Xi’an, a metropolis in the central area of China, we conducted content analyses based on Report on SS- RA(R-SSRA). As archived official document, R-SSRA records the complete and detailed information on each SSRA event, e.g., all the involved stakeholders (or their representatives). Reviewing R-SSRA, we identified the stakeholders involved in each procedure of every SSRA event. To exemplify the format of collected data, we show the data on a SSRA event (Land Requisition Project Mega for Hua Neng Power Plant Construction) in Table 1.
Table 1. Data on Land Requisition Project Mega for Hua Neng Power Plant Construction
Procedure Involved Stakeholders Organization and Coordination PDR, MDI, JUB, COC
Collaborative Decision PDR, MDI, EPA, MPA, HCA, DRA, SMA,
HRA, APS, PDT, JBU, RAC
Supervision and Guidance HCA, SMA, JBU, COC Accountability SBC, SMA, JBU
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations.
The applied method can be seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Method Applied in the Research
Results and Discussions
Four networks, including OC-N, CD-N, SG-N, and AC-N, are shown in Figure 3.
OC-N
CD-N
SG-N
AC-N
Figure 3. Networks on procedures in SSRA
Note: see Appendix 1 and 2 for codes and abbreviations
Index on each network are shown in Table 2. The results indicate that CD-N is much more active than other ones in terms of the highest density, shortest av- erage geodesic distances, highest compactness and the most number of ties. It is hard to say that stakeholder participations in different stages are equally active; therefore, Hypothesis 1was supported.
Table 2. The Index on Networks
Network | Density | Average Geodesic Distance | Compactness | Number of Ties |
OC-N | 0.2320 | 1.450 | 0.775 | 116 |
CD-N | 0.4538 | 1.055 | 0.972 | 236 |
SG-N | 0.2688 | 1.221 | 0.815 | 129 |
AC-N | 0.2406 | 1.467 | 0.790 | 77 |
Subsequently, we used centrality measures to identify powerful and important actors, as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Centrality of Networks
Actor | OC-N | CD-N | SG-N | AC-N |
PDR | 0.300 | 0.300 | 0.200 | N/A |
RDI | 0.300 | 0.300 | 0.100 | N/A |
MCI | 0.500 | 0.500 | 0.200 | N/A |
AAA | 0.100 | 0.200 | 0.150 | 0.100 |
FAA | 0.050 | 0.150 | 0.100 | 0.150 |
EPA | 0.100 | 0.550 | 0.300 | N/A |
MPA | 0.100 | 0.550 | 0.250 | 0.050 |
HCA | 0.450 | 0.650 | 0.400 | 0.250 |
DRA | 0.800 | 1.000 | 0.250 | 0.200 |
SMA | 0.300 | 0.750 | 0.600 | 0.150 |
PCD | 0.150 | 0.350 | 0.250 | N/A |
HRA | 0.450 | 0.450 | 0.200 | N/A |
DLR | 0.500 | 0.900 | 0.650 | 0.250 |
APS | 0.150 | 0.600 | 0.300 | 0.250 |
DER | 0.100 | 0.100 | N/A | N/A |
EAA | 0.100 | 0.100 | 0.100 | N/A |
PDT | 0.250 | 0.650 | 0.200 | 0.250 |
JBU | 0.200 | 0.400 | 0.350 | 0.400 |
LAO | 0.100 | 0.300 | 0.300 | 0.300 |
WRA | 0.100 | 0.150 | 0.150 | 0.050 |
DET | 0.050 | 0.100 | N/A | 0.100 |
SBU | 0.050 | 0.050 | N/A | N/A |
SBC | 0.200 | 0.500 | 0.400 | 0.500 |
CAA | 0.150 | 0.520 | 0.350 | 0.250 |
COC | 0.250 | 0.650 | 0.650 | 0.600 |
RAC | N/A | 1.000 | N/A | N/A |
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations. The top ten actors identified according
to their degree of centrality measures in each network are marked as grey.
We notice that HCA and DLR possessing land resources are the most influ- ential actors in all the networks. As an authoritative coordinating agency, COC also plays an important role in all the networks. COC is as not only an agency in charge of public resources coordination, but also the main issuer of official docu-
ments on mega project approval and regulation. Therefore, authorities’ coordina- tion, supports and approvals are critical besides for physical resources. Further- more, we examined the extent to which stakeholders get involved in SSRA events through core/periphery structure analyses (Borgatti & Everett, 2000, p. 375), as shown in Figure 4. Based on the results, we can clarify positions of actors in each network, as shown in Table 4.
(a) OC-N (b) CD-N
(c) SG-N (d) AC-N
Figure 4. Core/Periphery Structures of Networks
Note: see Appendix 1 and 2 for codes and abbreviations
Table 4. Positions of Actors in Networks
Actor | OC-N | CD-N | SG-N | AC-N |
PDR | × | √ | × | N/A |
RDI | × | √ | × | N/A |
MCI | √ | √ | × | N/A |
AAA | × | × | × | × |
FAA | × | × | × | × |
EPA | × | √ | × | N/A |
MPA | × | √ | × | × |
HCA | √ | √ | √ | × |
DRA | √ | √ | × | N/A |
SMA | × | √ | √ | × |
PCD | × | √ | × | N/A |
HRA | √ | √ | × | × |
DLR | √ | √ | √ | × |
APS | × | √ | × | × |
DER | × | × | N/A | N/A |
EAA | × | × | × | N/A |
PDT | × | √ | × | × |
JBU | × | √ | √ | √ |
LAO | × | × | × | × |
WRA | × | × | × | × |
DET | × | × | N/A | × |
SBU | × | × | N/A | N/A |
SBC | × | √ | × | √ |
CAA | × | √ | × | × |
COC | × | √ | √ | √ |
RAC | N/A | √ | N/A | N/A |
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations. √indicates that the actor is in core posi-
tion and ×indicates that the actor is in periphery position.
HCA and DLR occupy core positions in OC-N, CD-N and SG-N, while JBU and COC occupy core positions in CD-N, SG-N and AC-N. The fact that HCA and DLR play central roles in OC-N, CD-N and SG-N suggest the two actors play central roles in assessing social stability risk. Yet, JBU and COC are core actors in AC-N whereas HCA and DLR occupy peripheral positions. This suggests that it is difficult for the actors at core positions in early stage to hold high participation level in late stage. So, Hypothesis 2 was supported, revealing fragmentation or gaps (Zhu, 2012) existing in the feedback loop. Some actors (e.g., HCA and DLR) playing important roles in early stage occupy peripheral positions in the late stage. And it is difficult for them to see the real outcomes of the decisions and respond to the environment appropriately.
MCI, DRA, SMA, HRA and SBC are also important actors, because they occupy core positions in two networks. RAC, representing grassroots represen- tatives, has the highest centrality scores and occupies core position in CD-N (see details in Table 3 and 4). But grassroots representatives only get involved in one network (CD-N) and cannot be engaged in any other important or core work, e.g., agenda setting. This suggests their involvements are limited. Al- though grassroots representatives have chances to get involved in collaborative decision, their absences in other networks reduce the participation level. There- fore, hypothesis 3 was partially supported.
Moreover, core/periphery structures on SSRA events are also demonstrated, as shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Positions of SSRA Events in Networks
SSRA Event | OC-N | CD-N | SG-N | AC-N |
A | √ | √ | √ | √ |
B | √ | × | × | √ |
C | × | × | × | × |
D | √ | × | × | √ |
E | √ | × | √ | √ |
F | √ | √ | √ | √ |
G | √ | × | √ | √ |
H | √ | √ | √ | √ |
I | × | × | √ | √ |
J | √ | × | √ | √ |
K | √ | × | × | √ |
L | × | × | √ | × |
M | √ | × | √ | √ |
N | √ | √ | √ | √ |
O | × | × | × | √ |
P | × | × | × | × |
Q | × | × | √ | × |
R | × | √ | × | × |
S | √ | × | √ | √ |
T √ × √ ×
Note: see Appendix 1 for codes. √indicates that the event is in core position and
×indicates that the event is in periphery position.
We observed that A, F, H and N occupy core positions in all the networks. It suggests that more intensive stakeholder participations were achieved in the four SSRA events. Meanwhile, C and P are in periphery positions in all the networks indicating stakeholder participations in the two SSRA events were the least in- tensive. A, F, H and N are in the charge of higher-level governments (typically ministries in central government or departments in provincial governments), while C and P are in the charge of county governments. Higher-level govern- ments have more authority, and can mobilize enough resources to achieve more intensive stakeholder participation. So, hypothesis 4 was supported. Since mega
projects can promote local economic development and employement, grassroots governments may actively apply for the projects and compete with other ones. In terms of grassroots governments, the economic benefits of mega peojetcs usually outweigh SSRA, which aims at social conflicts resolution rather than economic development, in the current government performance evaluation. In practical terms, the chosen representatives seldom truly represent the affected communi- ties. And the end results are usually that decisions can’t meet the demands of the affected people, casuing local oppositions to mega projects.
Accordingly, we show the results of hypotheses testing in Table 6.
Table 6. Results of Hypotheses Testing
Hypothesis Result
Hypothesis 1 Supported
Hypothesis 2 Supported
Hypothesis 3 Partially Supported
Hypothesis 4 Supported
Since CD-N is the most active network, in which grassroots representatives get involved, we conducted further discussions based on it. We explored the fac- tors contributing to collaborative decision though SVD with the singular values shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Singular Values Derived in CD-N
Factor | Value | Percent | CUM % | Ratio | PRE | CUM PRE |
1 | 12.204 | 26.0 | 26.0 | 3.171 | 0.325 | 0.325 |
2 | 3.848 | 8.2 | 34.2 | 1.068 | 0.115 | 0.440 |
3 | 3.602 | 7.7 | 41.9 | 1.106 | 0.101 | 0.541 |
4 | 3.257 | 6.9 | 48.8 | 1.107 | 0.082 | 0.623 |
5 | 2.942 | 6.3 | 55.1 | 1.007 | 0.067 | 0.690 |
6 | 2.922 | 6.2 | 61.3 | 1.111 | 0.066 | 0.756 |
7 | 2.630 | 5.6 | 66.9 | 1.099 | 0.054 | 0.810 |
8 | 2.394 | 5.1 | 72.0 | 1.093 | 0.044 | 0.854 |
9 | 2.191 | 4.7 | 76.6 | 1.150 | 0.037 | 0.891 |
10 | 1.905 | 4.1 | 80.7 | 1.081 | 0.028 | 0.919 |
11 | 1.762 | 3.8 | 84.5 | 1.269 | 0.024 | 0.943 |
12 | 1.388 | 3.0 | 87.4 | 1.115 | 0.015 | 0.958 |
13 | 1.245 | 2.7 | 90.1 | 1.150 | 0.012 | 0.970 |
14 | 1.083 | 2.3 | 92.4 | 1.092 | 0.009 | 0.980 |
15 | 0.992 | 2.1 | 94.5 | 1.170 | 0.008 | 0.987 |
16 | 0.848 | 1.8 | 96.3 | 1.290 | 0.006 | 0.993 |
17 | 0.657 | 1.4 | 97.7 | 1.144 | 0.003 | 0.996 |
18 | 0.574 | 1.2 | 98.9 | 1.425 | 0.003 | 0.999 |
19 | 0.403 | 0.9 | 99.8 | 3.831 | 0.001 | 1.000 |
20 | 0.105 | 0.2 | 100.0 | N/A | 0.000 | 1.000 |
Note: CUM % represents Accumulative Percent, PRE represents Percent of Re- duced Error and CUM PRE represents Accumulative Percent of Reduced Error.
The accumulative percent of reduced error (54.1%) suggests the top three factors can be selected as main ones, which are summarized and discussed based on varimax loadings (see details in Table 8).
Table 8. The Loadings for the Top Three Factors
Actor in CD-N | Factor 1 | Factor 2 | Factor 3 |
PDR | 0.129 | 0.147 | 0.081 |
RDI | 0.105 | 0.412 | -0.441 |
MCI | 0.187 | 0.429 | 0.263 |
AAA | 0.081 | 0.069 | 0.030 |
FAA | 0.059 | -0.020 | -0.055 |
EPA | 0.202 | -0.090 | 0.531 |
MPA | 0.204 | 0.141 | -0.179 |
HCA | 0.241 | 0.345 | 0.433 |
DRA | 0.362 | -0.012 | -0.042 |
SMA | 0.277 | 0.238 | -0.219 |
PCD | 0.123 | 0.245 | 0.215 |
HRA | 0.169 | 0.112 | 0.408 |
DLR | 0.330 | -0.131 | -0.018 |
APS | 0.225 | -0.325 | -0.071 |
DER | 0.044 | 0.153 | 0.058 |
EAA | 0.044 | 0.153 | 0.058 |
PDT | 0.240 | -0.343 | -0.010 |
JBU | 0.154 | -0.200 | 0.058 |
LAO | 0.115 | 0.034 | 0.158 |
WRA | 0.058 | 0.135 | 0.177 |
DET | 0.045 | 0.040 | 0.103 |
SBU | 0.024 | 0.086 | -0.043 |
SBC | 0.190 | 0.309 | 0.115 |
CAA | 0.211 | 0.029 | 0.033 |
COC | 0.245 | -0.124 | 0.165 |
RAC | 0.362 | -0.012 | -0.042 |
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations.
In terms of factor 1, HCA (0.241), RAC (0.362), SMA (0.277), DLR (0.330)
and PDT (0.240) are listed as top actors. Since they are all governmental agencies, whose authorities are important to support stakeholder participation, we define factor 1 as “authority”. RDI (0.412) and MCI (0.429) can be listed as top actors in terms of factor 2. Acting as the third-party institutions, RDI and MCI play more and more important roles following outsourcing contracts with authorities. They conduct data analysis, stakeholder interviews using professional techniques to improve the effectiveness of stakeholder participation. Hence, we define this fac- tor as “the third-party institutions”. EPA (0.531), HRA (0.408) and HCA (0.433) are listed as top ones in terms of factor 3. They usually focus on the supporting measures, e.g., environmental protection, employment, relocation etc. Therefore, we define the factor as “supporting measures”. Overall, the factors contributing to collaborative decision include Authority, Third-Party Institutions (TPI) and Supporting Measures.
In the current context of China, authority is still vital to advance stakehold- er participation. Stakeholder participation in SSRA is more participatory deci- sion-making activity, which is dominated by government and involves various stakeholders versus autonomous actions of citizens. Recently, more businesses in SSRA have been outsourced to TPI, which works as participation facilitator (Marks, 2008). Highly skilled TPIs are essential to improve effectiveness of stake- holder participation in SSRA. This also implies that more social/market forces are being introduced to this area. Factor of “supporting measures” suggests that living needs of affected populations should be the a core issue in SSRA.
Conclusion
Using data collected through content analysis, we discussed some issues on stakeholder participation in SSRA, with hypotheses tested. Overall, we found that different types of stakeholder participations are not conducted and developed evenly in SSRA. Minority actors, which possess critical resources or are in charge of public resources coordination, are the most influential actors in all the net- works.
Moreover, we observed some fragmentations or gaps in the participatory process. First, it is difficult for the actors at core positions in early stage to hold high participation level in late stage. This reveals the barriers for effective learning and accountability. Second, grassroots representatives have get involved actively, although only in CD-N. Third, we observed that the higher-level governments can achieve more intensive stakeholder participation in SSRA due to possessing more authorities and resources. Yet, grassroots governments usually face much more actual problems, such as weak institutions, insufficient funds, and compet-
ing interests for the mega projects. So, stakeholder participation is always ignored intentionally or unintentionally at grassroots level.
Subsequently, we examined CD-N, the most active network, through iden- tifying main influential factors through SVD. The results show “authority” is essential for effective stakeholder participation. Hence, we suggest SSRA is a government-led consulation with stakeholders rather than autonomous actions of citizens. This is very different from stakeholder participation in western de- mocracies. The results on TPI also highlighted the importance of participation facilitator.
Network analysis offers a unique opportunity to study the stakeholder par- ticipation in SSRA. Howerever, it does not provide detailed explanation of the cases we observed. The next research step is to conduct an in-depth intervoews to understand network formation and dynamic changes. And future research should focus on solutions to facilitate stakeholder participation, e.g., SSRA facil- itated by TPIs.
References
Aaltonen, K., Kujala, J., Lehtonen, P., & Ruuska, I. (2010). A stakeholder network perspective on unexpected events and their management in international projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 3(4), 564-588.
Abbasi, A. & Kapucu, N. (2016). A Longitudinal Study of Emerging Networks in Response to Natural Disasters. Computational and Mathematical Organiza- tion Theory, 22(1), 47-70.
Bardach, E. (1998). Getting agencies to work together: The practice and theory of manage- rial craftmanship. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Beierle, T. C. (2002). The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Analysis, 22(4), 739-749.
Blackstock, K. L., Kelly, G. J., & Horsey, B. L. (2007). Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological Economics, 60(4), 726-742.
Blomquist, W., Dinar, A., & Kemper, K. E. (2010). A framework for institutional analysis of decentralization reforms in natural resource management. Society
& Natural Resources, 23(7), 620-635.
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1997). Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social Networks, 19(3), 243-269.
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2000). Models of core/periphery structures. Social Networks, 21(4), 375-395.
Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., & Freeman, L.C. (2012). Analyzing Social Networks.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Brody, S. D. (2003). Measuring the effects of stakeholder participation on the quality of local plans based on the principles of collaborative ecosystem management. Journal of Planning Education & Research, 22(4), 407-419.
Bruce, J. W., Knox, A., Sikor, T., & Müller, D. (2009). Structures and stratagems: making decentralization of authority over land in africa cost-effective. World Development, 37(8), 1360-1369.
Brunsting, S., Best-Waldhober, M. D., Feenstra, C. F. J., & Mikunda, T. (2011). Stakeholder participation practices and onshore CCS: lessons from the Dutch CCS case Barendrecht. Energy Procedia, 4(1), 6376-6383.
Bryson, J.M., Crosby, B.C., & Stone, M.M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 647-663.
Cameron, B. G., Crawley, E. F., Loureiro, G., & Rebentisch, E. S. (2008). Value flow mapping: using networks to inform stakeholder analysis. Acta Astro- nautica, 62(4-5), 324-333.
Chase, L.C., Decker, D.J., & Lauber, T.B. (2004). Public participation in wildlife management: what do stakeholders want? Society & Natural Resources, 17, 629-639.
Chess, C., & Purcell, K. (1999). Public participation and the environment: do we know what works? Environmental Science & Technology, 33(16), 2685-2692. Diehl, E., & Sterman, J. D. (1995). Effects of feedback complexity on dynamic decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62,
198–215.
Dong, L. (2011, April 22). Optimizing mechanism of social stability risk assess- ment. People’s Daily. p.3 (in Chinese).
Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Poli- tics, 9(3), 383-400.
Easton, D. (1979). A System Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Edwards, W. (1962). Dynamic decision theory and probabilistic information pro- cessing. Human Factors, 4, 59–73.
Erkul, M., Yitmen, I., & Celik, T. (2016). Stakeholder engagement in mega trans- port infrastructure projects. Procedia Engineering, 161, 704-710.
Estrella, M., & Gaventa, J. (2000). Who counts reality? Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation: a literature review. IDS Working Paper 70, Institute of Develop- ment Studies, Brighton.
Fazey, I., Kesby, M., Evely, A., Latham, I., Wagatora, D., & Hagasua, J. E. (2010). A three-tiered approach to participatory vulnerability assessment in the Solo- mon Islands. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 713–728.
Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science Technology & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243. Gattringer, R., Hutterer, P., & Strehl, F. (2014). Network-structured university-in- dustry-collaboration: values for the stakeholders. European Journal of Innova-
tion Management, 17(3), 272 - 291.
General Office of Chinese Communist Party Central Committee (2015). Guidance on Improving Mechanisms of SSRA. Retrieved on April, 13, 2015 from http:// www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2015/content_2847873.htm.
Gunderson, L., & Holling, C.S. (2002). Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Washington: Island Press.
Harshaw, H. W., & Tindall, D. B. (2005). Social structure, identities, and values: a network approach to understanding people’s relationships to forests. Journal of Leisure Research, 37(4), 426-449.
Hu, Q., Knox, C. C., & Kapucu, N. (2014). What have we learned since Septem- ber 11, 2001? A network study of the Boston marathon bombings response. Public Administration Review, 74(6), 698-712.
Johnson, N., Lilja, N., Ashby, J.A., & Garcia, J.A., (2004). Practice of participatory research and gender analysis in natural resource management. Natural Re- sources Forum, 28(28), 189-200.
Kapucu, N., & Garayev, V. (2011). Collaborative decision-making in emergen- cy and crisis management. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(6), 366-375.
Kapucu, N., Hu, Q., & Khosa, S. (2014). The state of network research in public administration. Administration & Society, 0095399714555752 (ahead of print). Kleinmuntz, D. N. (1985). Cognitive heuristics and feedback in a dynamic deci-
sion environment. Management Science, 31(6), 680-702.
Kleinmuntz, D. N., & Schkade, D. A. (1993). Information displays and decision processes. Psychological Science, 4(4), 221-227.
Koontz, T. M. (2005). We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collabora- tive stakeholder participation on land use policy. Policy Studies Journal, 33(3), 459–481.
Koppenjan, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2010). Managing Uncertainties in Networks: a Network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making. London: Routledge.
Larson, A. M., Pacheco, P., Toni, F., & Vallejo, M. (2007). The effects of forestry decentralization on access to livelihood assets. Journal of Environment & De- velopment, 16(3), 251-268.
Larson, A. M., & Soto, F. (2008). Decentralization of natural resource governance regimes. Environment and Resources, 33(33), 213-239.
Lawrence, A. (2006). “No personal motive?” volunteers, biodiversity, and the false dichotomies of participation. Ethics Place & Environment, 9(3), 279-298. Lawrence, S. V., & Martin, M. F. (2012). Understanding China’s political system. Current Politics & Economics of South Southeastern & Central Asia, 20(3), 1191-
1195.
Li, T. H. Y., Ng, S. T., & Skitmore, M. (2012a). Conflict or consensus: an inves- tigation of stakeholder concerns during the participation process of major infrastructure and construction projects in Hong Kong. Habitat International, 36(2), 333-342.
Li, T. H., Ng, S. T., & Skitmore, M. (2012b). Public participation in infrastructure and construction projects in China: From an EIA-based to a whole-cycle process. Habitat International, 36(1), 47-56 (in Chinese).
Li, W., Liu, J., & Li, D. (2012c). Getting their voices heard: Three cases of public participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 98(1), 65-72.
Liao, X., & Liu, B. (2016). The dilemma and regulation of social stability risk assess- ment in major policy decisions—a study based on the short-lived medical re- form in Chongqing. Chinese Public Administration, (1):27-36 (in Chinese).
Liu, S. (2016). Problems in current social stability risk assessment. Modern Infor- mation on Economy, 24, 77-78 (in Chinese).
Liu, Y., Li, Y., Xi, B., & Koppenjan, J. (2016a). A governance network perspective on environmental conflicts in China: findings from the Dalian paraxylene conflict. Policy Studies, 37(4), 314-331.
Liu, Z. Z., & Li, W. J. (2013). National risk management structural framework in perspec- tive of China social stability risk assessment. In Proceedings of 2013 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Grey Systems and Intelligent Services (pp. 330-334). Washington DC, U.S.: IEEE Computer Society.
Liu, Z. Z., Zhu, Z. W., Wang, H. J., & Huang, J. (2016b). Handling social risks in government-driven mega project: an empirical case study from west China. International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), 202-218.
Lu, W. (2016). The social stability risk assessment of tuition adjustment in Guangdong public universities. Chinese Public Administration, (1): 23-26 (in Chinese).
Ma, B., & Du, P. (2014). Topics and methods in social stability risk assessment for major decision making. Journal Harbin Institute of Technology, 16(1), 35-40 (in Chinese).
Mackinnon, A. J., & Wearing, A. J. (1985). Systems analysis and dynamic decision making. Acta Psychologica, 58, 159–172.
Marks, R. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431.
Marin, B., & Mayntz, R. (eds) (1991). Policy Networks: Empirical Evidence and Theo- retical Considerations. Colorado: Westview Press.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R.A.W. (eds) (1992). Policy Networks in British Government.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mazmanian, D.A., & Nienaber, J. (1979). Can Organizations Change? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution,.
Mertha, A. (2009). Fragmented Authoritarianism 2.0: Political Pluralization in the Chinese Policy Process. The China Quarterly, 200, 995–1012.
Middendorf, G., & Busch, L. (1997). Inquiry for the public good: democratic par- ticipation in agricultural research. Agriculture & Human Values, 14(14), 45-57. Moore, A., & Warren, A. (2006). Legal advocacy in environmental public partic- ipation in China: raising the stakes and strengthening stakeholders. China
Environment Series, 8, 3-23.
O’Toole, L.J. (1997). Treating networks seriously: practical and research-based agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review, 57(1), 45-52. Olander, S. (2007). Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project manage-
ment. Construction Management and Economics, 25(3), 277-287.
Pira, M. L., Inturri, G., Ignaccolo, M., Pluchino, A., & Rapisarda, A. (2016). Finding shared decisions in stakeholder networks: an agent-based ap- proach. Physica A Statistical Mechanics & Its Applications,466, 277–287.
Poetz, A. (2011). What’s your “position” on nuclear power? an exploration of con- flict in stakeholder participation for decision-making about risky technolo- gies. Risk Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 2(2), 1-38.
Pohlner, H. (2016). Institutional change and the political economy of wa- ter megaprojects: china’s south-north water transfer. Global Environmental Change, 38, 205–216.
Prell, C., Hubacek K., & Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources, 22(6), 501-518.
Reed, M. S. (2007). Participatory technology development for agro-forestry ex- tension: an innovation-decision approach. African Journal of Agricultural Re- search, 2(8), 334-341.
Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431.
Reed, M. S., Dougill, A. J., & Taylor, M. J. (2007). Integrating local and scientific knowledge for adaptation to land degradation: Kalahari rangeland manage- ment options. Land Degradation & Development, 18(3), 249–268.
Reed, M. S., Fraser, E. D. G., & Dougill, A. J. (2006). An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communi- ties. Ecological Economics, 59(4), 406-418.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 25(1), 3-29.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004a). Evaluating public-participation exercises: a re- search agenda. Science Technology & Human Values, 29(4), 512-556.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004b). Evaluation of a deliberative conference. Science Technology & Human Values, 29(1), 88-121.
Sequeira, D. (2010). Stakeholder Engagement : A Good Practice Handbook for Compa- nies Doing Business in Emerging Markets. Washington, DC: International Fi- nance Corporation.
Shen, Q. (2014). A comparative analysis of social stability risk assessment and public-participated investigation of EIA. Environment & Development, 15(1), 41-43(in Chinese).
Stewart, T. R., Dennis, R. L., & Ely, D. W. (1984). Citizen participation and judg- ment in policy analysis: a case study of urban air quality policy. Policy Scienc- es, 17(1), 67-87.
Smith, L. G., Nell, C. Y., & Prystupa, M. V. (1997). Forum: the converging dy- namics of interest representation in resources management. Environmental
Management, 21(2), 139-146.
Sultana, P., & Abeyasekera, S. (2008). Effectiveness of participatory planning for community management of fisheries in Bangladesh. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(1), 201-13.
Tan, R., & Zhou, T. (2015). Decentralization in a centralized system: project-based governance for land-related public goods provision in China. Land Use Poli- cy, 47, 262-272.
Tatenhove, J. P. M. V., & Leroy, P. (2003). Environment and participation in a con- text of political modernization. Environmental Values, 12(2), 155-174.
Thabrew, L., & Ries, R. (2009). Application of life cycle thinking in multidisci- plinary multi-stakeholder contexts for cross-sectoral planning and imple- mentation of sustainable development projects. Integrated Environmental As- sessment & Management, 5(3), 445–460.
Wandersman, A. (1981). A framework of participation in community organiza- tions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 17(1), 27-58.
Weber, E. P., & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challeng- es, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administra- tion Review, 68(2), 334-349.
Xu, W. (2013). The current problems existing in social stability risk assessment.
Studies on Local Finance, 8(12), 16-20 (in Chinese).
Yang, K., & Pandey, S. K. (2011). Further dissecting the black box of citizen par- ticipation: when does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes? Public Ad- ministration Review, 71(6), 880-892.
Zhang, L., & Tong, X. (2015). Social stability risk assessment of major policy deci- sion: the problem, response and improvement. Jiangsu Social Sciences, 4, 7-16 (in Chinese).
Zheng, H., Jong, M. D., & Koppenjan, J. (2010). Applying policy network theory to policy-making in China: the case of urban health insurance reform. Public Administration, 88(2), 398-417.
Zhu, D. (2012). Policy gap, risk origin and social stability risk assessment. Com- parative Economic & Social Systems, 2(5): 20-23 (in Chinese).
Zhu, Z. W., Li, W. J., & Zhao, X. X. (2014). Research on the affecting factors of public participation willingness in social stability risk evaluation. Journal of Xian Jiaotong University, 34(2), 49-55(in Chinese).
Appendices
Appendix 1 SSRA Events Used for the Research
Code |
SSRA Event | Government in Charge |
Time for Imple- mentation |
A
B | Land Requisition Project Mega for Hua Neng Power Plant Con- struction
Land Requisition for Natural Gas Conduit Construction | Central Government
City Government |
2015.11
2015.8 |
C | Residents Displacement and Re- settlement for Electronic Facili- ties Construction (North) | County Government |
2015.7 |
D | Residents Displacement and Re- settlement for Electronic Facili- ties Construction (South) | County Government |
2015.6 |
E | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Railway Con- struction | City Government |
2015.5 |
F | Residential Area Reconstruction Project (East) | Provincial Govern- ment |
2015.4 |
G | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Modern Agri- culture Park Project | City Government |
2015.4 |
H | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Modern Circu- lar Economy Park Project | Central Government |
2015.3 |
I | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Modern Agri- culture Park Project(West) | City Government |
2015.1 |
J | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Reservoir Project | City Government |
2015.1 |
K | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for the National Road Project | City Government |
2014.11 |
L | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for National Gra- nary Project(North) | City Government |
2014.6 |
M | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Cargo Railway Project | City Government |
2014.5 |
N | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Hydropower Plant Project | Central Government |
2014.2 |
O | Land Requisition for Natural Gas Conduit Transportation and Distribution | City Government |
2013.11 |
P |
Land Requisition for Natural Gas Conduits Connection | County Government |
2013.4 |
Q |
Land Requisition for Power Sub-station Project (East) | City Government |
2013.4 |
R |
Land Requisition for Power Sub-station Project(South) | City Government |
2013.3 |
S | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for National Gra- nary Project(South) | City Government |
2012.8 |
T | Land Requisition and Residents Displacement for Metro Project (Line No.1) | City Government |
2011.10 |
Appendix 2 Involved Actors Common to SSRA Events
Actor Abbreviation
Project Developer PDR
Research & Development Institution RDI Management Consultancy Institution MCI Agriculture Administrative Agency AAA
Forestry Administrative Agency FAA
Environmental Protection & Monitoring Agency
EPA
Municipal Planning Agency MPA
Housing Construction Agency HCA
Development & Reform Agency DRA Social Stability Maintenance Agency SMA Public Complaint Division PCD Human Resources & Social Security Agency HRA Department of Land & Resources DLR Administration of Production Safety APS
Department of Ethnic Minorities & Reli- gions
DER
Education Administrative Agency EAA
Police Department PDT
Judicial Bureau JBU
Legislative Affairs Office LAO
Water Resources Agency WRA
Department of Economy & Trade DET
Statistical Bureau SBU
Supervision Branch of Communist Party Committee
SBC
Comprehensive Administrative Agency CAA
General Office of Government/ Communist Party Committee
COC
Representative of Affected Community RAC
Research article
UDC: 005.334:334.713(6-13)
005.35
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.2
Governmental Incentivization for SMEs’ Engagement in Disaster Resilience in Southeast Asia
Aleksandrina V. Mavrodieva*, Dyah S. Budiarti, Zhou Yu, Federico A. Pasha, Rajib Shaw
1 Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus
5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa Prefecture 252-0882, Japan; almavrodieva@gmail.com; dyahs. budiarti@gmail.com; zhouyukeio@gmail.com; federicopasha@gmail.com; shaw@sfc.keio.ac.jp.
* Correspondence: almavrodieva@gmail.com;
Received: 14 November 2018; Accepted: 3 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: The resilience of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) is regarded as a precon- dition of sustainable development both at the local and the national levels, as they are the providers of the main portion of jobs in the market, contributing an average between 57 to 97% of national employment in the ASEAN countries. At the same time, SMEs are the most vulnerable businesses as a result of financial, technological, and administrative lim- itations, where the majority of SMEs lack even basic knowledge on disaster preparedness and response techniques. The current study argues that governments have a particular- ly important role in mobilizing SMEs disaster resilience through developing adequate policies and legislation, and through providing the necessary infrastructure and invest- ment climate for SMEs to thrive, focusing particularly on Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. The research tries to present the current level of SME involvement in each of the three countries and to identify relevant gaps and opportunities. This paper does not include an extensive list of recommendations but tries to focus on some of the basic tech- niques which governments can and should employ in their efforts towards economic and community resilience, arguing that a number of appropriate incentives would be bene- ficial in engaging SMEs as one of the vital parts of private sector. structured abstracts: 1) Introduction; 2) Methods; 3) Results; 4) Conclusions and implication
Keywords: Small and Medium Enterprises (SME), Private Business, Disaster Response, Disaster Pre- paredness and Resilience, Government Incentives, Southeast Asia, Business Continuity.
Introduction
The resilience of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) is regarded as a precondition of sustainable development both at the local and the national lev- els, as they are the providers of the main portion of jobs in the market, con- tributing an average between 57 to 97% of national employment in the ASEAN countries (Villarroel et al., 2013; ADPC, 2017). Furthermore, they operate in various economic sectors both in rural and urban areas, and have the advantage of developing close links with the community (ASEAN and Secretariat, 2015; ADPC, 2017). Therefore, the ability of SMEs to respond to disasters is crucial for the recovery of the community economic fabric in affected areas. At the same time, SMEs are the most vulnerable businesses due to financial, technological, and administrative limitations (Picard, 2017). Developing innovative disaster risk measures in planning, such as utilizing cutting-edge technology, are diffi- cult to achieve due to insufficient funds and capacities (UNISDR, 2013). Most of the time SMEs lack even basic knowledge on disaster prevention and response techniques, such as the development of Business Continuity Plans (BCPs) or conducting safety and first aid trainings for their staff (Samantha, 2018; Zhang, Lindell, & Prater, 2009).
A particular problem for engaging SMEs in disaster resilience efforts rep- resents the fact that a large number of companies in Southeast Asia function in the informal economy to avoid paying taxes. In the aftermath of disasters those companies are excluded from government support programmes, render- ing them the most vulnerable group of SMEs (Villarroel et al., 2013). Having in mind SMEs importance for community and economic resilience, and at the same time their high vulnerability, such businesses require special support from the government in strengthening their resilience to disasters. Governments have a particularly important role in mobilizing SMEs disaster resilience through developing policies and legislation and through providing the necessary infra- structure and investment climate for SMEs to thrive, as well as through direct in- tervention during pre and post disaster activities (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015). The current paper will, therefore, focus on some of the ways local and national governments can support and regulate further this process through providing incentives for SMEs to engage in DRR, especially in the developing countries of the Southeast Asia (SEA) region.
The paper will focus on three countries from SEA, namely Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand, presenting the current level of SME involvement in each of them. Some gaps and opportunities have also been identified and dis- cussed later in the text. This paper does not include an extensive list of recom- mendations but tries to focus on some of the basic techniques which govern-
ments can and should employ in their efforts towards economic and community resilience, arguing that a number of appropriate incentives would be beneficial in engaging this vital and vulnerable part of the private sector, which are the SMEs.
Focus on Southeast Asia, SMEs, and Incentives
Southeast Asia (SEA), as the most natural disaster-prone region in the world, is continuously suffering from a range of different intensity disasters (Gupta, 2010; Rampangilei, 2016). As its location sits in several plates and lies between two oceans (Indian and Pacific Oceans), this region has been prone to earthquakes, volcano eruptions, tsunami and seasonal typhoons. More than 50% of global disaster mortalities occurred in SEA in the ten-year period be- tween 2004 and 2014 and caused economic losses of US$ 91 billion. Within this region, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand are among the countries that have experienced some of the gravest economic damages based on their Aver- age Annual Economic Loss (AAL), amounting to respectively US$ 926 million, US$284 million, and US$272 million (Gupta, 2010). In order to seek ways to diminish the economic losses caused by disasters in these volatile conditions, the current research will focus namely on the above mentioned countries. This research has opted to focus on small and medium-size enterprises, or SMEs, because of their huge significance in the economies of these countries and their links to communities. SMEs represent around 88-99% of private companies and provide significant percent of all national employment (around 52-97%) within all economic sectors in both rural and urban areas in the region. SMEs contrib- ute to 30-35% of GDP on average, yet their share in total exports is still small (about 10-30%), which means they require additional support for development and promotion towards strengthening their business (ADPC, 2017).
Furthermore, SMEs are important for the creation of social capital in re- storing the ruptured social fabric in communities after disaster. By reopening local businesses and making spaces for social bonding in affected communities, SMEs attract people back to the area, as well as new investment, necessary to rebuild the affected areas. In a wider context, strong SMEs can also endorse na- tional resilience to shocks by expanding and diversifying the domestic economy. Thus, reducing the sole dependency on large companies or only on few sectors, and engaging SMEs has the potential to improve the protection of a wide-base of labor force from certain shocks in specific sectors and fluctuations in inter- national markets (Villarroel et al., 2013). “SME” has a different definition in the three countries of focus, generally categorising them based on their capital size. Indonesia and the Philippines categorise SME into three types: micro, small,
and medium enterprises. Meanwhile, Thailand only has two categories, which are small and medium enterprises. In addition, the Philippines and Thailand add more variables in defining SMEs, such as the number of workers involved in the business. Table 1 below is used to give more clear indication of what SME means in the different countries:
Table 1: (M)SME Definition across SEA countries (Picard, 2017)
Countries | Capital Size (USD) | Worker Size |
Micro | Small | Medium | Micro | Small | Medium |
Indonesia | <3,740 | 3,740- 37,400 | 37,400-74,800 | - | - | - |
Philippines | <63,000 | 63,000- 317,000 | 317,000-21,200,000 | <9 | 1-9 | 9-99 |
Thailand (Services & Manufacture) |
- |
<1,561,000 |
1,561,000-6,244,000 |
- |
<50 |
50-200 |
The 2004 tsunami in Indonesia heavily affected the private sector (78% of total destruction), and 104,500 SMEs were completely wiped-out (Ismail et al., 2018). Meanwhile, as a result of the 2011 Thailand floods, around 557,637 busi- ness entities, consisting of 90% SMEs, were hit, resulting in 2.3 million people losing their jobs (Perwaiz, 2015; Auzzir, Haigh, & Amaratunga, 2018). Lastly, in the Philippines, the Ondoy typhoon in 2009 caused a total of PhP 111.4 billion in damages and production losses in the private sector where it was mostly SMEs that were hit the hardest in the impacted areas (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015). The direct impacts of disasters affecting SMEs include the complete/partial de- struction of assets and stock, insecurity of business data and records, and threats to employees` lives and livelihoods. Meanwhile, the indirect impacts consist of interruption of the normal production, caused by assets damage and trapped employees; interruption of products and service delivery, caused by blocked roads; losing contact with markets, caused by damage of communication in- frastructure; and supply chain disruption, caused by interruption of products supplied from upstream industries and shrinkage of products demanded by the downstream industries or target markets. From a macroeconomic perspective, this will also cause higher interest rates, labour shortages, and reduced demand
of goods and services (UNISDR, 2015). SMEs’ willingness to invest in innovative activities related to disaster preparedness can assist the company to protect its own business (e.g. its vital assets and records). Engagement in disaster manage- ment could also provide for a stable environment for business (e.g. reduces disas- ter risk, protects its resources, and reduces social and economic vulnerability). Such initiatives can protect whole or partial value chains, and improve condi- tions for customers and staff (e.g. employees` families, property, health and safety risks). Some other benefits include building reputation and demonstrating good citizenship; enhancing government relationships, as well as inter-business rela- tionships; creating possibilities to influence stakeholder perceptions; improving staff motivation and retention; and providing new business opportunities that create shared value. In the longer term, this will ensure their business continuity, competitiveness and sustainability (Izumi & Shaw (ed.), 2015; UNISDR 2015).
There are a number of possible mechanisms for disaster resilience of rel- evance to SMEs, including corporate social responsibility (CSR), developing business continuity plans (BCP) and joining partnerships with the public sector (PPP). These mechanisms increase SMEs’ internal protection and have the po- tential to contribute to wider community resilience. A step forward in this direc- tion could be SMEs’ direct assistance to the affected societies through donations, or awareness raising initiatives. Lastly, enterprises may link their production and services directly to disaster resilience and become suppliers to humanitarian ac- tors. An example is the production of special earthquake-resistant laminated glass for buildings, produced by companies and widely used in construction in Japan (UNISDR, 2013). To promote, initiate and support SMEs’ engagement in disaster preparedness and resilience, governments need to provide incentives, which would be relevant for the targeted companies. “Incentives” are gener- ally defined as ways to encourage people/groups to change their behaviour or practices, as a result of receiving a reward for performance improvement (ADB, 2016). In this paper, “incentive” is any effort to persuade (inducement) SMEs in taking action in improving disaster resilience, for themselves and for the affect- ed community, provided prior to or in the aftermath of disaster events.
2. Current level of SMEs’ Engagement
Before suggesting some techniques for governments to incentivize the in- volvement of SMEs in disaster management, it is necessary to discuss the current level of SME engagement and government initiative within the three nations of interest. For ease, the data is represented in Table 2 and Table 3 below:
Table 2: Current Condition Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Policy Framework for SME (ADPC, 2012)
| Indonesia | Philippines | Thailand |
Extent of Institu- tional Application of DRM in rela- tion to SMEs
Extent of DRM application in SME Develop- ment and Promo- tion |
SME and private sector needs are not considered specifically in the policy and implementation processes for DRM | DRM institutions are established as coordinating mecha- nism to mainstream the issues into government across sectors and at all levels |
DRM mechanisms are supported by government financial institutions with specific mandates for SMEs. |
The legislative and policy mandates of the DRM and CCA systems, and the SME promotion system, do not currently interact to any signifi- cant extent at either a policy or operational level | MSME development already provides many opportunities for information sharing, training and incentives for undertaking risk assessments |
OSMEP and other SME support institu- tions demonstrated a high capacity to support SME disaster recovery following the 2011 floods. |
Table 3: SMEs Disaster Resilience Survey (ADPC, 2012)
| Indonesia | Philippines | Thailand |
Company BCP Availability |
14% |
6% |
21.50% |
Disaster Resilience Training |
10% |
41% |
33% |
Type of Disaster resilience training needs |
Awareness Training |
Disaster Prepared- ness (including drills) | Emergency response, evacuation, risk assess- ment, and emergency communication |
Needs for Govt. Provision | Provision of technical assistance, consultancy services |
SME financial in- centives from Govt. |
Disaster Insurance Mechanisms |
In a 2016 survey, conducted by the University of Indonesia among 400 rep- resentatives of small and medium business, respondents were asked about the type of coping mechanism they use to deal with business disruption. Sixty-three percent of the companies replied that they are using own savings, 34% were man- aging through loans, 24% with support from family, and 21% by working more. Thirteen percent of all, reported that they did not have any coping mechanism (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). This picture hardly represents only the situation in Indonesia. The scenario where SME owners look for funds from relatives and friends or pawn personal items to recover from disasters is a common one in Southeast Asia. A survey conducted in Indonesia, Viet Nam, The Philippines and Thailand revealed that SMEs often resort to loans from friends and family or informal financing as a result of a combination between a tradition of self-reli- ance and the lack of official mechanisms that provide affordable and flexible risk financing (ADPC, 2017, Regional Synthesis Report). Such methods can support recovery in a one-time crisis, but in a region subject to constant and complex disasters it cannot be a sustainable mechanism, and it could even exacerbate already existing issues, destabilizing the economy in the whole community.
When typhoon Haiyan devastated the Philippines, the assessment con- ducted by the Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) showed that businessmen relied mainly on their own resources/savings or loans from private/ informal lenders. The lending rate of informal institutions was twice as high, or even higher, than the one offered by the bank, but the required collateral and piles of complicated supportive documentation of banks and formal financing institutions represented barriers to SMEs. Compared to them, informal lenders could provide loans quickly, which was quite important for SMEs’ rapid resum- ing of activities, despite of the higher interest rates (ILO & ECOP, 2015). This is further confirmed and aggravated by the fact that in the developing economies of Southeast Asia a large percent of SMEs bypass official registration to avoid paying taxes and thus do not exist in the official registers of the local and nation- al government. As a consequence, when a crisis hits, these SMEs do not receive financial support from the government, as they are non-existent as a legal entity (Villarroel et al., 2013). This comes to show the importance of government action to engage SMEs through providing incentives for them to register and employ risk resilience mechanisms to secure their own survival.
SMEs may not be able to build disaster resilience without support from the government. Governments’ assistance is essential in building capacity in SMEs to conduct preliminary risk assessments and develop risk mechanisms, such as BCP, through both conventional and unconventional education (ADPC, 2015). Business Continuity Plan or BCP is a set of documented procedures that guide organizations to respond, recover, resume and restore their business to a pre-de-
fined level of operation, following disruptions such as disasters (Ono, 2014). BCP is a mechanism very much oriented towards company survival, but its proper implementation can have impact on a much wider set of actors, benefiting com- munities at large. BCP is relevant to companies of all sizes and business areas and are considered one of the cheapest forms of insurance which can be pro- duced at minimal cost (APEC, 2014).
At the same time, even though it has been estimated that 75 % of compa- nies without a BCP fail within 3 years of a disaster (UNDP PRRP, 2017), this practice is still largely absent from company policies. The role of national and local governments here is especially crucial, as the majority of studies show that large percentage of small and medium companies are not aware of the concept at all or do not know how to develop BCPs. Thus, for instance, the 2016 survey, conducted by the University of Indonesia, showed that 62 % of the participating companies had not heard of BCP and 32% did not know how to establish one. To add to this, of those interviewed, only 10% of respondents had ever attended a workshop or training explaining the concept of BCP and only 9% had attended a training related to general DRM (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). The rate of SMEs who had a written BCP was also low in the Philippines (ADPC & DIT, 2016). Findings also showed that awareness levels of Thai SMEs on business con- tinuity planning (BCP) is relatively low compared to other Southeast Asia coun- tries (ADPC, 2015). The absence of BCP was assessed to be a common condition among SEA Countries.
The results of the survey clearly indicated the need for increased dis- semination of information, training on BCP preparation, and general aware- ness on the need for BCP. Some of the respondents also mentioned that it was difficult for them to develop a BCP as they were linking it to higher costs and resource capacity (ADPC & DIT, 2016). Some efforts have been taken by the administration of the three mentioned countries. For example, the Government of Thailand tried to promote the adoption of BCP, when in 2015, the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, (DDPM) as the nation’s focal point to carry out disaster management, has revised the National Disaster Management Plan, incorporating policies for encouraging the adoption of BCP. It was indicated by the Office of Public Sector Devel- opment Commission (OPDC) that the government agencies must establish a team to oversee and protect critical business activities in the midst of a disaster (ADPC, 2015). These and other efforts, however, still have a limited effect and outreach and have not reached the desired levels of SME prepared- ness. Mutual aid agreements among organizations for response during and after disasters (such as privately-run emergency teams, fire brigades, search and rescue teams and mutual help associations), could be very beneficial for
small and medium companies as those would allow for sharing the burden of additional costs and human capital. However, in the three discussed coun- tries, it was found that such mechanisms mostly do not yet exist (63% in In- donesia). Such support mechanisms for collaboration so far occur only spo- radically in some places as found by the ADPC survey report (ADPC, 2017).
Government Incentivization Mechanisms
SMEs often see inclusion of disaster risk measures as additional cost and ef- fort. Governments, therefore, have a crucial role in developing enabling environ- ment and adequate incentives for SMEs to engage in disaster management. These incentives generally fall into two types: financial and non-financial. Financial incentives include grants (intergovernmental, or government to person or com- pany), tax credits, subsidies, discounts (on prices or insurance premiums), con- ditional cash transfers or vouchers, bonds and sureties, access to concessional loans or credits, and others. Meanwhile, non-financial incentives include, but are not limited to, technical capability and capacity building (providing train- ing for building risk assessment: training of tradespeople in disaster-resilient construction, resulting in access to knowledge and access to construction op- portunities); access to technology (technology transfer resulting in access to new, locally appropriate disaster-resilient technology); access to information (access to reliable and credible information about current and future risks, resulting in informed risk-sensitive decision making); awards or certification endorsement of good practice (increasing company brand image to society); and participation of stakeholders (including SMEs and community) in decision making (potential favourable influence in disaster resilient development) (ADB, 2016; Gall, Cutter, S.L., & Nguyen, 2014).
Awareness Raising for BCP
Asked what type of incentives would SMEs in Indonesia prefer to see from the government, 57% responded that they would benefit from receiving techni- cal assistance and training to cover the knowledge gap. Awareness is, therefore, an essential part of incentivizing SMEs to develop internal procedures related to risk mitigation. The same survey showed that while the majority of interviewees did not have initial knowledge of BCPs and other relevant mechanisms, 82% of them were willing to participate in a national planning process to support them to prepare for disasters (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016), which comes to show the potential for governments and SMEs to work together and improve the relevant policy and processes.
In the Philippines, the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) cooperated with external organizations, such as ADPC, and with other agencies to launch a project on strengthening the disaster resilience of SMEs. It conducted one Training of Trainers (TOT) in 2016 with 32 participants and four BCP awareness seminars in four regions of its country (DTI website: https://www.dti.gov.ph/ 28.06.2018). The Office of Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion (OSMEP) of Thailand has also been working with ADPC to hold awareness raising forums and workshops on BCP. In 2015, OSMEP established the One Stop Service Cen- ter in five provinces across Thailand, and has further cooperated with ADPC in developing technical assistance, knowledge dissemination and capacity building on disaster risk management (ADPC, 2015).
Risk Financing and Insurance
Financing is essential to mitigate and cope with disaster risk. Donors, gov- ernments and multilateral development banks have gradually scaled up financial assistance for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation (UNESCAP, 2018). Risk financing can be defined as the deployment of financial tools and processes to mitigate the impact of events, which have a negative effect on fi- nancial flows required to support an enterprise. Risk financing may be arranged in advance (ex-ante) or on the occurrence of an event and identification of the need (ex-post). The former is generally considered both more efficient and more effective than the latter (UNESCAP, 2018). Risk insurance is a beneficial risk transfer mechanism to reduce the economic losses of SMEs caused by disasters and help them recover quickly. However, unlike some business insurances, such as fire insurance, business insurance for natural disasters had a quite low pur- chasing rate. One of the reasons has been the perception of owners that it is an additional unnecessary cost. Another reason is the absence of tailored insurance products relevant to smaller companies’ needs. Governments should, therefore, urge insurance companies to develop targeted insurance products with lower premiums. Governments should also take the responsibility to strengthen and promote the adoption and use of this kind of risk insurances (UNESCAP, 2018). At the same time, the resilience of insurance companies themselves is a factor affecting the overall resilience of SMEs. Facing the destructive 2011 flood in Thailand, under the burden of large insurance payouts, insurers and rein- surers were forced to either withdraw, or increase their premiums, or refuse to renew contracts, in order to protect their own normal business (ADPC, 2015). In this case, Thailand already had set up Insurance Pooling Fund, with the initial capital worth 50,000 million Baht, in accordance with the 2012 Royal Decree on Insurance Pool Fund. The Insurance Fund was established as a legal entity to
assist the insurance industry in providing insurance coverage for various nat- ural disasters, particularly in the event of flood, thus increasing the flexibility and coping capacities of a wide range of businesses (APEC SMEWG, 2014). In Indonesia, insurance for micro businesses was introduced by the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs in cooperation with OJK (Financial Services Authority) and Insurance Association. This insurance covers losses caused by natural di- sasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions. It is targeted for low-income entities, having a premium of only Rp 40,000 (about 3 USD) per year and maximum coverage of Rp 5,000,000 (about 360 USD). It may be applied for protection of business premises, inventories, and business equipment (Japhta et al., 2016).
Governments can also increase wider community resilience through the promotion of insurance for individual employees. In the 2016 ADPC survey re- spondents ranked the “employees were unable to go to work” option first on the list of reasons for interrupted business operations (ADPC, 2017). Asia Grand- view Hotel in Coron, the Philippines, was regarded as a good example when Ty- phoon Haiyan struck. All employees were covered by SSS (pension and calam- ity assistance) insurance, Philhealth (hospitalization), and Pag-IBIG (housing), substantially reducing the negative effects of the disaster on the livelihoods of the employees and on the business itself (ECOP, 2015). Securing and recovery of records should also be promoted to SMEs. Apart from protecting assets and employees, the safekeeping of records is of utmost importance for enterprises. Essential information includes employee records, records of business transac- tions, customer records, and records of assets (e.g. real-estate property). Losing such information can delay recovery of operations after a disaster (ECOP, 2015).
Soft Loans
In terms of risk retention, soft loans and credits can also represent incen- tives. Compared with hard loans, soft loans have more flexible terms for repay- ment and lower interest rates. What is more, going back to the report conducted in the Philippines, complicated and lengthy documentation and screening pro- cess is another barrier for SMEs to resort to formal financial agencies for loans or credit. A quicker screening and bureaucracy reduction for loan application can encourage SMEs to return to formal loans for help. In Indonesia, banks were reported to have decreased credit lending interest rate for SMEs to under 10% from about 17% (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). In Thailand, SMEs were provid- ed with loan guarantee of 120 billion Baht in 2011 flood reconstruction by Small Business Credit Guarantee Corporation (SBCG) (State-owned enterprise under the owned enterprise under the supervision of the Ministry of Finance). Soft
loans were also provided to build up flood-protection system for business opera- tors, who installed system for flood protection according with the governmental regulations (APEC, 2014). In the Philippines, after Super Typhoon Yolanda, En- terprise rehabilitation financing program targeted for SMEs’ disaster response was launched. The DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) also assisted SMEs to receive loans from government banks.
One particular initiative in the Philippines could be emphasized, where the government established Negosyo Centers under the mandate of Republic Act No. 10644, and the the Go Negosyo Act of 2013. Negosyo Centers provide one- stop service for SMEs, including business registration, information acquisition, and specific governmental support services. This not only improved the public service for SMEs, bust also helped integrate more SMEs into formal regulation. The availability of formal company data can contribute to quicker fund distribu- tion when SMEs apply for loans and credits (Picard, 2017).
Tax benefits
Governments can stimulate SMEs to take some disaster resilience actions by tax exemptions. In Thailand, tax exemption and reduction measures were implemented by the Customs Department, Revenue Department, and Board of Investment for private sectors and SMEs, particularly after the 2011 flood (APEC, 2014). The financial support from the government significantly limited the burden on SMEs in the aftermath of the flood. Tax exemption can also be an incentive to encourage more SMEs to engage in disaster preparedness, instead of response, which would be a more effective way to limit disaster-related loss. Last but not least, governments should provide relevant incentives according to spe- cific needs and priorities. For example, in the Philippines, the local government requires enterprises to submit hazard assessment and field investigation reports for the issuance of certificates, as part of assuring implementation of climate change adaptation. Another case is the promotion of cash for work schemes in- stead of relief goods after disaster, in order to infuse more cash in reviving local industries (Ballesteros, Marife M., & Sonny N. Domingo, 2015).
Remaining Challenges and Further Opportunities
Despite of the current level of effort in incentivizing SMEs’ engagement in disaster management in the three countries, a number of gaps and challenges still remain. Those gaps are mainly related to lack of coordination among gov- ernment bodies, as well as the lack of SME registration data, lack of hazard risk data relevant to businesses, and outstanding knowledge and risk financing gaps
(ADPC, 2017). First of all, lack of specifically designated bodies responsible for SME DRM engagement in national administration would mean that there is no institutional memory and continuity of the process. The current legislative and policy mandates of the Disaster Risk Management (DRM) and Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) systems and the SME promotion system in Indonesia, for in- stance, are not yet interacting significantly at both policy and operational levels (ADPC, 2017). A collaborative mechanism between agencies and bodies is need- ed in building SMEs resilience to disasters. To add to this, most governmental bodies currently do not have effective monitoring processes to ensure that gov- ernmental efforts and programmes have indeed improved SMEs’ resilience. This is crucial in making sure that current programs for SMEs within the respective countries have been implemented appropriately and have lead to improved con- ditions for SMEs (ILO & ECOP, 2015).
Secondly, the lack of reliable data on SMEs in the three countries would mean that it will be difficult to assess if policies have reached all relevant enter- prises and if the developed policies are adequate and well-suited to the needs of SMEs. This also refers to the common practice of SMEs to avoid official regis- tration and taxation. Thus, it is of great importance that governments develop incentives to specifically target such companies and encourage them to engage with the system. Such incentives should include supportive, rather than just pu- nitive, measures, recognizing the needs and vulnerabilities of informal SMEs (Villarroel et al. 2013). Furthermore, it might be beneficial for governments to profile and engage with SMEs from the same sector in developing specific innovative solutions for DRR to tackle concrete problems. This would also en- hance the cooperation among SMEs and with larger businesses, as well as with the public sector. Involving SMEs in public-private partnerships could increase awareness of disaster risk and mutual cooperation, while at the same time pro- vide new business opportunities for SMEs.
Thirdly, there are still remaining gaps in developing and sharing of hazard risk data to be used in risk assessments for SMEs. It is crucial to have data on di- saster and climate risk, including risk mapping, to be available for communities and SMEs. This includes data publication which is relevant to businesses and easy to understand by non-experts. The information should also be specific to lo- cal areas and should be tailored to target different industry sectors. In addition, cross-referencing local with national data on SMEs would be beneficial for wider SME disaster risk assessments and in the creation of cross-sectoral cooperation mechanisms (ADPC, 2017).
Another challenge includes the lack of common organization among SMEs which infringes their representation in policy and planning processes. Even though larger industries might have endeavoured in advocating for SMEs’ in-
terests, more efforts in certain sectors are needed to accommodate SMEs’ repre- sentatives in policy making, including those with women owners and operators (ADPC, 2017). This can be done by promoting the establishment of business associations to represent SMEs in certain areas or sectors. There are a few cases, such as the response during the Indian tsunami and the Great East Japan Earth- quake, which illustrate the important role of business associations in leading and informing government-led strategy for disaster recovery (Villarroel et al., 2013). Moreover, SME’s knowledge of specific risk reducing mechanisms, such as BCP, appears to be still rather low, though in surveys they have shown in- terest in receiving more information, training, and incentives to improve their preparedness and resilience. There are several opportunities which can be used to close this gap. For example, disaster risk awareness could be integrated into already existing general business trainings provided by governments and/or pri- vate sector, natural hazard risk assessments could be included in standard BCP/ BCM procedures, and engagement with larger enterprises could provide mutual benefits through including SMEs in their supply chain, making SMEs more re- silient to disasters (ADPC, 2017). In addition, instead of individual or company BCP, area or group BCP can also be initiated by sector or area to accelerate the establishment of risk assessment including reduction of the need of expert or human resources to build the assessment (Ono, 2014).
Lastly, risk financing mechanisms are still widely unavailable or out of reach for the majority of SMEs (including because of the lack of credit infor- mation) (ADPC, 2017; Torres, 2015). Currently governments’ initiatives tend to focus more on SMEs access to capital (ADPC, 2017). However, more flex- ible small-scale risk financing, such as affordable disaster insurance products for SME market, are more needed (ADPC, 2017; Villarroel et al., 2013). Support from government through policies and engagement of private insurance sectors is a necessary step in improving the preparedness of SMEs (Japhta et al., 2016).
Conclusion
As the countries of Southeast Asia lie in one of the most disaster prone regions of the world, causing losses for millions of dollars each year, building disaster resilience for businesses and especially for small and medium compa- nies, is crucial. SMEs, as the major provider of employment and as an important factor for the overall economic stability in Asia, require the special attention and efforts of national and local governments. Being the most vulnerable part of pri- vate sector, due to financial and capacity limitations, SMEs are in need of special targeted support through policies and legislation, aided by necessary infrastruc- ture, investment climate, and direct interventions. Governments have, therefore,
a significant role in assisting SMEs to thrive and strengthen their business in the face of constant disaster risk (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015). In order to ensure SMEs engagement in DRM efforts, governments also need to provide a number of relevant and adequate incentives, focused on reaching long-term sustainable involvement and solutions.
Current engagement of SMEs in disaster resilience in the three SEA coun- tries of interest in this paper (Indonesia, Thailand, and Phillipines) is still rela- tively low. Some of the reasons are rooted in the fact that knowledge of risk man- agement techniques is largely missing in SMEs. Other reasons include the lack of coordination among designated administrative bodies responsible for build- ing resilience in small businesses, or the lack of sectoral SME organization and representation in local and national policies. Despite of the current low level of SME engagement, the governments in these countries have been improving their policies aimed at strengthening SME resilience. Some of these measures include raising awareness for BCP and other risk reduction mechanisms; promotion of disaster risk insurance through policies and collaboration between government and insurance companies (insurance pools fund and low premium disaster in- surance for SMEs); provision of soft loans (for disaster recovery and flood pro- tection systems); and tax benefits (tax exemptions before and after disaster for affected SMEs). However, a number of challenges still remain. Gaps in govern- ment responsibility, lack of data on SMEs and on hazard risks, lack of sectoral representation, knowledge gaps, and risk financing unavailability are among the important issues which require organized national and local effort. Mechanisms for inter-agency and public-private collaboration, improved SME databases, easy to understand and to follow administrative registration processes, establishing and supporting business associations for SMEs and inclusion in planning and decision making processes are some of the steps which governments can take to improve SME disaster resilience.
Finally, the potential of SMEs to play a significant role in wider community resilience needs to be realized and supported. Their close links with the com- munity and specific expertise could be utilized through coordinated continuous policies, legislation and incentives. The meaningful inclusion of SMEs into DRR efforts would guarantee that societies in Asia are better prepared and more re- silient to crises.
References
Villarroel, M. I., Pyle, J., Ryoko, I., Bhat, M., Fernandez, A., Vatsa, K., Shumba, O., et al. 2013. Small Businesses: Impact of Disasters and Building Resil- ience. Analysing the Vulnerability of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterpris- es to Natural Hazards and Their Capacity to Act as Drivers of Community Recovery. UNDP Crisis Prevention and Recovery. Retrieved from: https:// www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2013/en/bgdocs/UNDP,%20 2013.pdf, Accessed: 05.06.2018.
ASEAN, and Secretariat. 2015. ASEAN Strategic Action Plan for SME Develop- ment 2016-2025. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat. Retrieved from: http://www. smecorp.gov.my/images/pdf/SAP-SMED-Final.pdf. Accessed: 10.06.2018.
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC). 2017. Strengthening Disaster and Climate Change Resilience of Small & Medium Enterprises in Asia: Indo- nesia, Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam. Regional Synthesis Report, October 2017, Retrieved from: https://goo.gl/KP23Ek, Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Picard, Mary. 2017. Enabling Environment & Opportunities Philippines Strength- ening Disaster and Climate Resilience of Small & Medium Enterprises in Asia: Philippines. ADPC, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http://www. academia.edu/34920586/ENABLING_ENVIRONMENT_and_OPPOR- TUNITIES_Philippines_STRENGTHENING_DISASTER_AND_CLI- MATE_RESILIENCE_OF_SMALL_and_MEDIUM_ENTERPRISES_IN_ ASIA. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). 2013. Private Sector Strengths Applied: Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction from Japan. Retrieved from: https://www.preventionweb.net/files/33594_private- sectorstrengthsapplied2013di.pdf.Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Samantha, Gunathilaka. 2018. The Impact of Natural Disasters on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs): A Case Study on 2016 Flood Event in Western Sri Lanka. Procedia Engineering 212: 744–51. Elsevier. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.096. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Zhang, Y., Lindell, M. K. and Prater, C. S. 2009. Vulnerability of Community Busi- nesses to Environmental Disasters. Disasters 33 (1): 38–57. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01061.x.a. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Ballesteros, Marife M., and Sonny N. Domingo. 2015. Building Philippine SMEs Resilience to Natural Disasters. Discussion Paper Series No. 2015-20 (Re- vised). Philippine Institute for Development Studies. Retrieved from: https:// dirp3.pids.gov.ph/webportal/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1520_rev.pdf.
Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Gupta, Sushil. 2010. Synthesis Report of Ten ASEAN Countries Disaster Risks As- sessment: ASEAN Disaster Risk Management Initiative. ASEAN. Retrieved from: http://www.unisdr.org/files/18872_asean.pdf. Accessed: 17.06.2018.
Rampangilei, Willem. 2016. ASEAN Vision 2025 on Disaster Management. ASE- AN. Retrieved from: http://www.asean.org/storage/2012/05/fa-220416_ DM2025_email.pdf. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
Ismail, Nafesa, Kenji Okazaki, Chiho Ochiai, and Glenn Fernandez. 2018. Liveli- hood Changes in Banda Aceh, Indonesia after the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsu- nami. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 28 (June): 439–49. Elsevier. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.003. Ac- cessed: 21.06.2018.
Perwaiz, Aslam. 2015. Thailand Floods and Impact on Private Sector. In Disaster Management and Private Sectors, 231–45. Disaster Risk Reduction. Spring- er, Tokyo. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55414-1_14. Accessed: 22.06.2018.
Auzzir, Zairol, Richard Haigh, and Dilanthi Amaratunga. 2018a. Impacts of Di- saster to SMEs in Malaysia. Procedia Engineering 212: 1131–38. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.146. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
UNISDR. 2015. Disaster Risk Reduction Private Sector Partnership: Post 2015 Framework-Private Sector Blueprint Five Private Sector Visions for a Resilient Future, Retrieved from: https://www.preventionweb. net/files/42926_090315wcdrrpspepublicationfinalonli.pdf. Accessed: 19.06.2018.
Izumi, T. & Shaw, R. 2015. Chapter 1: Overview and Introduction of the Private Sector’s Role in Disaster Management in Izumi, T. & Shaw, R. (eds.) Disaster Management and Private Sectors. Challenges and Potentials. Springer Japan 2015. ISSN 2196-4106. DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-55414-1.
Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2016. Incentives For Reducing Disaster Risk In Urban Areas. Experiences from Da Nang (Viet Nam), Kathmandu Val- ley (Nepal), and Naga City (Philippines). ADB Philippines. Retrieved from: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/185616/disas- ter-risk-urban.pdf. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
ADPC. 2012. Strengthening Disaster and Climate Resilience of Small & Medium Enterprises in Asia. Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http:// www.adpc.net/sme-resilience-asia/download/THA/IP_CR_Thailand.pdf. Accessed: 08.06.2018.
Mardanugraha, E. - ADPC. 2016. Disaster Resilience of Small and Medium En- terprises (SMEs) in Indonesia – Survey Results and Policy Environment. Presentation at Asian Business Forum 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.
adpc.net/igo/contents/blogs/ABF2016/download/presentation/Day%20 1_20%20Apr%202016/02_Thematic%20Discussion/4.%20PPT_EUGE- NIA-mcp-rev.pdf. Accessed: 08.06.2018.
International Labour Organization (ILO), Bureau for Employers’ Activities; Re- gional Office for Asia and the Pacific; Employers’ Confederation of the Phil- ippines. 2015. Needs Assessment For The Private Sector in The Philippines: Disaster Preparedness, Response And Recovery. Bangkok, Thailand: ILO. Retrieved from: https://www.ilo.org/asia/publications/WCMS_368162/ lang--en/index.htm. Accessed: 10.06.2018.
ADPC. 2015. Towards A Resilient Business Community in Thailand. Bang- kok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http://www.adpc.net/igo/contents/publica- tions/publications-Details.asp?pid=782#sthash.nt1KncwZ.dpbs. Accessed: 11.06.2018.
Ono, Takahiro. 2014. Area Business Continuity Planning Study by JICA 12. OS- MEP. 2015. SMEs in Thailand. Shensu-U Jp. Retrieved from: http://ir.acc. senshu-u.ac.jp/?action=repository_uri&item_id=10333&file_id=15&file_ no=1, Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). November 2014. How to Promote Business Continuity Planning to Mitigate the Impact of Disasters. A Guide for Government Officials, Emergency Preparedness Working Group. Re- trieved from: https://goo.gl/NBMAuQ. Accessed: 04.07.2018.
UNDP, Pacific Risk Resilience Programme (PRRP). August 2017. The Building Blocks for Successful Private Sector Engagement. Retrieved from: https:// goo.gl/UanKaS, Accessed: 28.06.2018.
Gall, M, Cutter, S.L., and K Nguyen. 2014. Incentives for Disaster Risk Manage- ment. IRDR AIRDR Publication No.2). Beijing: Integrated Research on Di- saster Risk. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.3178.8325.
UNESCAP. 2018. Opportunities for Regional Cooperation in Disaster Risk Fi- nancing. Retrieved from: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/ES- CAP_Opportunities_Regional_Cooperation_DRF_2018.pdf. Accessed: 28.06.2018.
Japhta, Rubin, Prashant Murthy, Yopie Fahmi, Anastassiya Marina, and Aarti Gup- ta, eds. 2016. UKM Yang Dimiliki Wanita Di Indonesia: Kesempatan Emas Utk Institusi Keuangan Lokal. International Finance Corporation World Bank Group. Retrieved from: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/737221477568795492/UKM-yang-dimiliki-wanita-di-Indonesia-kes- empatan-emas-untuk-institusi-keuangan-lokal. Accessed: 26.06.2018.
APEC Small and Medium Enterprise Working Group (SMEWG). November 2014. APEC SME Disaster Resilient Policy Framework. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/user/Dropbox/%D0%AF%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B-
D%D0%B8%D1%8F/Keio%20SFC%202018/WGs/WG2/M%20SCE%20
02%2011A_APEC%20SME%20Disaster%20Resilience%20Policy%20 Framework_final_v2ed%20(1).pdf. Accessed: 05.06.2018.
Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP). 2015. Retrieved from: http://ecop.org.ph/. Accessed: 26.06.2018.
Torres, Ted P. 2015. Philippines Lags in SME Lending in ASEAN. Philstar. Com. September 3, 2015. Retrieved from: https://www.philstar.com/busi- ness/2015/09/03/1495620/philippines-lags-sme-lending-asean. Accessed: 26.06.2018.
Author Contributions: Author Contributions: A.V.M. was responsible for the over- all coordination among the authors, for the body and flow of the paper, and for all editing. She has provided some input in chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5. D. S. B. and
Z.Y. have provided close to equal input in all chapters of the paper. F.A.P. has provided input related to the country profiles and has prepared all graphs in the paper. R.S. has provided overall coordination and guidance for the structure, flow and focus of the paper.
Acknowledgments: The first author is thankful to the Ministry of Education, Cul- ture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan for the provided schol- arship to conduct research in the field of disaster risk reduction. The second and fourth authors are thankful to the Pusbindiklatren Bappenas Programme, Government of Indonesia, for the provided scholarship. The authors also ac- knowledge the support received from the Disaster Resilience and Sustainable Development Program of the Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Japan, in conducting this study.
Conflicts of Interest: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 51
51-61
Review article
UDC: 005.334:504.4(560)
005.35
DOI:https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.3
Natural Disasters in Turkey: Social and Economic Perspective
Adem Öcal 1
1 Independent Researcher; Assoc. Prof. Dr., PhD
* Correspondence: ocadem@gmail.com
Received: 12 November 2018; Accepted: 15 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: Turkey is located in one of the most significant active seismic regions in the world. The country also is subject to many other natural disasters, that’s why, natural disasters have been seen in Turkey forever. These events have caused physical destruction to the death of more than 100.000 people and to the wounding of a lot, and shacked the country’s economy in the last century. Disasters sources from geological, meteorological, biological and technological sources, however, the results and effects of disasters involve of interest to social sciences. In developing the social perspective on disasters, the main factor is that disasters are effective on human communities. The development of individ- ual, state and international cooperation mechanisms in combating disasters is a necessity. In this study, it was aimed to review the sociological, economical and psychological ef- fects of the disasters, and to call attention to social scientist on the effects of disasters in Turkey.
Keywords: disaster; earthquake; social impact; flood; hazard; natural disaster; Turkey
Introduction
Disaster is defined as an event that transcends local capacity, requires na- tional or international assistance (Hoyois, Below, Scheuren & Guha-Sapir, 2006), causes physical, economic and social losses for people who cause great harm and human death, and interrupts normal life and human activities by disrupting hu- man activities (Ergünay, 1996). The severity of a disaster is generally measured by loss of life, injuries, structural damage, social and economic damages resulting from an event that is the result of a hazardous event. The severity of disasters in Turkey is generally higher than the mean of the world. Because, Turkey is located between Europe and Asia with a population reaching more than 80 million. The growth rate of the population, undergoing a very rapid process of urbanization in the last 70 years. The ratio of urban population, which was 26% in 1950, had
climbed to 60% by the end of the century, now is about 91%. Also Turkey has high fertility rate (‰ 2,14) in the World (TUIK, 2016). This high-density popula- tion brings many problems with such as the increase in the number of buildings and settlements. However, the weakness of structures against disasters increases the severity of possible disasters.
While the human factor is more effective in the formation and development of humanitarian disasters; in natural disasters, it can be seen that natural causes are more effective. The source of disasters can be originated from geophysical, at- mospheric, hydrological, climatological or biological factor (Table 1) (EM-DAT, 2018).
Atmospheric events can be observed by humans and sometimes necessary precautions can be taken without reaching the disaster dimension. The atmo- sphere of our world is constantly monitored through satellites from sky and by meteorologists from the ground. However, there is still the possibility of damage from disasters. Some meteorological events cannot be observed directly because they occur over a long period of time. For example, the direct observation of de- sertification, global warming, climate change, and large atmospheric events such as El Nino-La Nina are quite difficult. Such meteorological events are assessed by their results. Hydrological disasters can be occurred after severe meteorological events; however climatological disasters can be caused by lack of some meteoro- logical factors or carelessness.
Table 1: EM-DAT disaster classifications.
Type Events
Geophysical Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic activities
Extreme temperatures, storms, open air turbulence, acid rain,
Atmospheric (Meteorological)
icing, sea and lake water levels change, frost, el nino - la nina, erosion, storms, air pollution, global warming and climate change, ozone gas depletion, fog and low visibility distance
Hydrological Floods, landslides, avalanches
Climatological Droughts, wildfires
Biological Epidemic diseases, insect bites
Biological disasters occur more slowly than other disasters. This kind of di- sasters can be controlled by observing the developmental stages of the harmful cause. Sometimes biological and technological factors can bring together in some biological disasters as Bhopal (Broughton, 2005).
Geophysical events as volcanoes and earthquakes take their source from the depths of the Earth. It is quite difficult to determine the natural events of these kinds and to determine the time of arrival. The lack of knowledge of the people on the natural history of place-based events leads to the loss of life and property in such disasters.
The features of disasters in Turkey
Turkey is a country which has a high average elevation (1132 m) compared to Europe, with three sides surrounded by the sea (Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, and Aegean Sea). Mediterranean, Continental and Black Sea climate types (simi- lar to Oceanic climate type) are experienced on the country soil. Also important air masses of the world (Siberia HP, Asor HP, Island LP and Basra LP) confront on Turkey. It is possible to observe 4 different seasons in Turkey within a year.
Turkey is constantly facing the danger of natural disasters because of its geo- graphical features. Disasters such as earthquake, landslides, floods, avalanche, drought, wildfires, extreme winter conditions and storms are seen in our country. As seen in Table 2, the most common type of all disaster events in Turkey is the landslide (32,7%) [6]. Climatological factors, geological structure and elevation are influential on occurring the landslides in Turkey.
Moreover, since Turkey is a geologically young country the rock fall events are often seen. Floods are significant natural disasters in Turkey (12,2%). The fact that Turkey is a higher country than Europe; the variation of weather conditions in short distance and time can cause floods. Another type of disaster seen in our country is avalanche (3,8%). There is an avalanche in Turkey, especially in the eastern part of Turkey. More than one natural disaster can sometimes be experi- enced at the same time. Apart from the above mentioned disasters, other natural disasters such as extreme weather conditions (1,7%) are also seen in Turkey (Ta- ble 2).
Table 2: The number of death and injured people in disasters in Turkey (1900 - 2018) (TABB, 2018).
Event Death Injured
| f | % | f | % | f | % |
Landslide | 16223 | 32,7 | 36 | 0,0 | 41 | 0,1 |
Flood | 6069 | 12,2 | 232 | 0,2 | 116 | 0,2 |
Earthquake | 3368 | 6,8 | 95544 | 95,6 | 47411 | 77,2 |
Wildfire | 2256 | 4,6 | 41 | 0,0 | 42 | 0,1 |
Avalanche | 1892 | 3,8 | 128 | 0,1 | 80 | 0,1 |
Storm | 1816 | 3,7 | 264 | 0,3 | 326 | 0,5 |
Extreme winter conditions | 845 | 1,7 | 143 | 0,1 | 944 | 1,5 |
Explosions | 601 | 1,2 | 256 | 0,3 | 1352 | 2,2 |
Urban fi | 608 | 1,2 | 57 | 0,1 | 250 | 0,4 |
Terror | 441 | 0,9 | 202 | 0,2 | 548 | 0,9 |
Traffic accidents | 1359 | 2,7 | 1128 | 1,1 | 7373 | 12,0 |
Other* | 14097 | 28,4 | 1897 | 1,9 | 2941 | 4,8 |
TOTAL | 49575 | 100,0 | 99928 | 100,0 | 61424 | 100,0 |
* Victims are affected by more than one event together or separately
Turkey is located on most important fault zones in the world. It is possible to collect these fault lines in three main regions: North Anatolia Fault Zone (NAFZ), South East Anatolia Fault Zone (SEAFZ), and West Anatolia Fault Region (Fig- ure 1). These fault generations produce severe and deadly earthquakes. Furthermore, the horst-graben system lies in the west of Turkey and has continuous earthquake gener- ating capacity (Ambraseys & Finkel, 2006).
Figure 1. Earthquake Regions Map of Turkey (AFAD, 2018).
NAFZ starts from Van province in the east and extends to Tekirdağ in the west (AFAD, 2018). This fault line is similar to the San Andreas Fault Line in California. Turkey’s large and very populated settlements are located on this line. During the historical period there have been devastating earthquakes in this area. These are the important ones in Istanbul (1509, 1766, 1894), Erzincan (1939,
1992), Varto (1966), Bolu (1957), İzmit (1999) and Düzce (1999). SEAFZ is a convex belt extending from Antakya to Hakkari counties in the direction of SW- NE. It is seen severely earthquakes on this fault zone. One of the risky areas in terms of seismicity in Turkey is Western Anatolia. The Big Menderes, the Little Menderes and Gediz depressions; Izmit Gulf coast, Bakırçay Basin, Edremit Gulf coast, Ulubat and Manyas depressions, Bursa, Yenisehir, İnegöl and İznik depres- sions are located in this earthquake zone (Levy & Salvori, 2000). 96% of Turkey’s surface area, 99% of the population and 98% of the industrial areas are located in the first 4-degree earthquake zone considered as risky from the seismic point of view (Türkoğlu, 2001).
Social, psychological and economic effects of natural disasters in Turkey
Natural disasters caused considerable loss of lives and property even in re-
cent history of Turkey. As a result of natural disasters, in the last century, approx- imately 100.000 people died, over 61.424 people injured, over 108.573 buildings demolished, and over 1.337.521 buildings damaged in Turkey since the begin- ning of 20th Century (TABB, 2018).
Earthquakes are the most hazardous disasters in Turkey as in the past and for future. During the known historical period, there have been major earthquakes that have been damaging to life, causing damage and loss of property. The rate of earthquakes incidence is 6,8% in the country, but the effect of earthquake is more than this ration. In the last century, 3.368 earthquakes that have been damaged and recorded in Turkey (Table 3).
Table 3: The number of damaged and demolished buildings in disasters in Tur- key (1900 - 2018) (TABB, 2018).
Event Damaged buildings
Demolished buildings
| f | % | f | % | f | % |
Landslide | 16.223 | 32,7 | 21334 | 1,6 | 3638 | 3,4 |
Flood | 6069 | 12,2 | 62400 | 4,7 | 507 | 0,5 |
Earthquake | 3368 | 6,8 | 1.238.599 | 92,6 | 104.136 | 95,9 |
Wildfire | 2256 | 4,6 | 128 | 0,0 | 9 | 0,0 |
Avalanche | 1892 | 3,8 | 1179 | 0,1 | 135 | 0,1 |
Storm | 1816 | 3,7 | 3648 | 0,3 | 23 | 0,0 |
Extreme winter conditions | 845 | 1,7 | 13 | 0,0 | 0 | 0,0 |
Explosions | 601 | 1,2 | 226 | 0,0 | 1 | 0,0 |
Urban fi | 608 | 1,2 | 961 | 0,1 | 56 | 0,1 |
Terror | 441 | 0,9 | 14 | 0,0 | 0 | 0,0 |
Traffic accidents | 1359 | 2,7 | 1 | 0,0 | 0 | 0,0 |
Others | 14097 | 28,4 | 9018 | 0,7 | 68 | 0,1 |
TOTAL | 49.575 | 100,0 | 1.337.521 | 100,0 | 108.573 | 100,0 |
Turkey, as it has been in the past, is suffering too much due to natural disas- ters today. In this sense, the Gölcük Earthquake of 7.4 magnitude, which took place on 17 August 1999, has been an unforgettable bitter experience for our country. Only 17.479 people lost their lives in this earthquake and about 43.953 people were injured (Özman, 2000).
The feeling that someone who lives in an earthquake will feel the first mo- ment is fear and panic. It has been seen that those who suffer from earthquakes are concerned about their family members, are saddened about the dead and wounded in the earthquake, and they try to make sense of life again (Cvetković, Öca & Ivanov, in press) Fear, anxiety, guilt, anger, tension and despair are the most prominent features of this period [13]. The psychological reactions of the people living with the earthquake to the events have been researched about the effects of the people on the depressed people after 1992 Erzincan, 1995 Dinar and 1999 Izmit earthquakes (Karancı, 1999; Sarp, 1999). After one year of Göl- cük Earthquake, 1999, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rate was found to be 43% in the survivors (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou, 2002). In another study this rate (PTSD) was found to be 25.4% in the survivors living in a tent city after one year of the disaster (Tural, Coşkun, Önder, Çorapçioğlu, Yildiz, Kesepara, Karakaya, Aydin, Erol, Torun & Aybar, 2004). On May 1, an earthquake mea- suring 6.4 occurred, centred in Bingöl and felt in the surrounding cities. Özen & Sir (2004) measured the frequency of PTSD in Bingöl and found PTSD was to be 25% after 2 months of the earthquake.
Behaviourally, behaviours such as an excessive arousal state, sleeping prob- lems, changes in appetite, speech disorders, increase in alcohol and drug use, avoidance of certain stimuli are observed in earthquake victims. In a study con- ducted 16 months after the 1992 Erzincan earthquake, it was determined that the subjects living with the earthquake were more nervous and nervous than those living with the earthquake (Karancı, 1999).
There are also some changes in social situations in people with disabili- ties. In a survey conducted, 42.8% of the employees were employed before the earthquake, while after the earthquake this rate dropped to 36.8%. The homes of some of the victims were completely destroyed in the earthquake, and some of them were damaged. Most of the earthquake victims have lost their electronic home appliances (television, dishwasher, washing machine, oven, etc.), while at the same time they have been deprived of their income from real estate such as rented houses and shops. These people also stated that they consumed their deposits in the banks after the earthquake. After disasters, a number of cultural changes were also observed. The bonds of social assistance have been damaged, and relative changes have been recorded in religious beliefs. There has been some increase in divorce requests. After the 1999 Gölcük earthquake, there was a de-
crease in confidence in civil society organizations and in the sentence. Neverthe- less, there is a growing confidence in civil society organizations such as AKUT (Kasapoğlu & Ecevit, 2001).
Natural disasters lead to massive economic losses wherever they occur. These losses can be in the form of direct, indirect and secondary losses. For example, on 17 August 1999, earthquake-affected area is home to 23% of the country’s population, and accounts for 34.7% of Gross National Product (GNP) (Pelling, Özerdem & Barakat, 2002). According to statistics, direct losses in our country are found to be 1% of Gross National Product due to natural disasters in our century. Indirect losses are much more (3-4%). Only the earthquakes of August 17 and November 12, 1999 caused 6.1% of the country’s Gross National Income (GNI) (JICA, 2004). It is estimated that the impact on the public finance of the depression is about 6.2 billion dollars. This amount of $ 3.5 billion is tempo- rary and permanent new residential construction and residential construction. Turkey’s industrial and communications infrastructure has suffered a great loss, and direct and indirect losses to the depreciated country’s economy amounted to approximately $ 13 billion (DPT, 1999). It was emphasized that the economic cost of Gölcük Earthquake in Turkey is 9-13 billion dollars (Özerdem & Barakat, 2000).
Earthquakes also occur elsewhere in the world and lead to heavy material damage. For example, it was estimated that the property damage in the 1923 Japan (Kanto) earthquake was $ 15.6 billion, and that $ 17 billion in Italy in 1976 was $ 10 billion (Barka, Altunel & Akyüz, 2000).
Discussion and Conclusion
August 17, 1999 Gölcük earthquake revealed the disruptions and shortcom- ings of the disaster management mechanism implemented in our country for many years. With this earthquake, critical views on disaster management policies in our country have been developed. After this date, it is seen that a national level understanding of the need for more permanent and radical changes in disaster mitigation in Turkey, rather than post-disaster wound policies, has been reached. A reflection of the change in disaster management and planning in Turkey is also seen in the field of education. More and more emphasis has been given to disas- ter education in widespread and structured education. Disasters can be assessed through different perspectives in different disciplines. For example, an earth- quake is essentially a geological event; however, its effects are studied under the disciplines such as economy, sociology, psychology, geography, history, and law (Öcal, 2000). The development of a healthy perspective on disasters can eliminate the harmful effects of disasters, or even destroy them.
Turkey is exposed to disasters today as it has been throughout history due to its geographical location and features. Since it is not possible to escape disasters, it is necessary to learn to live with disasters. While the formations of disasters are generally described by science, they need to be addressed by the social sci- ences in terms of their consequences and impacts. Disasters in Turkey also have sociological, psychological, economic, legal, etc. It is understood that there are various influences from the care and that it needs to be handled by the related social sciences. It is impossible for a disaster management to be realistic without considering the social consequences of disasters.
In this study, it was tried to develop a social point of view for the effects of disasters in Turkey. It is a well-known fact that disasters in our world have increased quantitatively and their effects have influenced wider masses. There is a greater need for national and international co-operation in the sense of pre- paredness and mitigation of disasters than ever. Because events causing disasters do not accept political and administrative borders. Even states that are struggling with each other may have to cooperate with disasters in combat.
References
AFAD. (2018). Turkey earthquake regions map. https://www.afad.gov.tr/ en/26735/Turkeys-New-Earthquake-Hazard-Map-is-Published
Ambraseys N.N., Finkel C.F. (2006). Türkiye’de ve komşu bölgelerde sismik etkinlikler: bir tarihsel inceleme, 1500-1800 [Seismicity of Turkey and adja- cent areas: a historical review, 1500-1800]. TÜBİTAK Publishing, Ankara.
Barka A, Altunel E, Akyüz S. (2000). Yeryüzü ve Deprem [Earth and earthquake].
Boyut Publishing, İstanbul.
Başoğlu M, Şalcıoğlu E, Livanou M. (2002). Traumatic stress responses in earth- quake survivors in Turkey. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15(4), 269-276.
Broughton E. (2005). The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review. Environ- mental Health, 4(1), 6.
Cvetković V.M., Öcal A., Ivanov A. (2019). Young adults’ fear of disasters: a comparative study among Turkey, Serbia and Macedonia. IJDRR, 35, 101095.
Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı [State Planning Organization]. (1999). Depremin ekonomik ve sosyal etkileri-muhtemel finansman ihtiyaci kisa, orta ve uzun vadede alinabilecek tedbirler [Economic and social effects of depres- sion-possible financing needs measures that can be taken in short, medium and long term]. Ankara.
EM-DAT. (2018). The international disaster database, centre for research on the epidemiology of disasters. (accessed on January 25, 2018), http://www. emdat.be/classification
Ergünay O. (1996). Afet yönetimi nedir ve nasıl olmalıdır? [What is disaster management and how should be it?]. Erzincan ve Dinar Depremleri Işığın- da Türkiye’nin Deprem Sorunlarına Çözüm Yolları Arayışları (TÜBİTAK Deprem sempozyumu) Bildiriler Kitabı (Der. Tuğrul TANKUT), 263-272, Ankara.
Hoyois P, Below R, Scheuren JM, Guha-Sapir D. (2006). Annual disaster statis- tical review numbers and trends. Univeriste Catholique de Louvain-Brus- sels-Belgium. Brussels. www.cred.be.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). (2004). Türkiye’de doğal afetler konulu ülke strateji raporu [Country strategy report on natural disasters in Turkey]. Ankara
Karancı A. N. (1999). Depremin psiko-sosyal boyutlari: Erzincan, Dinar ve 17 Ağustos 1999 Marmara Depremleri (Psychosocial dimensions of the Erzin- can, Dinar and the 17 August Marmara earthquakes). Türk Psikoloji Bülteni, Volume 5, No 14, 55-58.
Kasapoğlu A, Ecevit M. (2001). Depremin sosyolojik araştirmasi [Sociological survey of the earthquake]. Sosyoloji Derneği Yayınları, No:8, Ankara.
Levy M., Salvori M. (2000). Deprem kuşaği: deprem nedir? Ne değildir? [Earthquake zone: what is earthquake? What is not? (Translator T Gürer). Doğan Pub- lishing, İstanbul.
Öcal A. (2010). Hazard education in 4th to 7th grade social studies courses in Turkey. Social Studies Research & Practice, 5(1), 87-95. Retrieved from http://www.socstrp.org/issues/PDF/5.1.8.pdf.
Özen S, Sir A. (2004). Frequency of PTSD in a group of search and rescue workers two months after 2003 Bingol (Turkey) earthquake. The Journal of nervous and mental disease, 192(8), 573-575.
Özerdem A, Barakat S. (2000). After Marmara Earthquake: lessons for avoiding short cuts to disasters. Third World Quaterly, 21, (3), 425-439.
Özmen, B. (2000). 17 Ağustos 1999 İzmit Körfezi Depreminin hasar durumu (rakamsal verilerle), [17 August 1999 İzmit Golf Earthquake damage assess- ment], TDV/DR 010-53, Türkiye Deprem Vakfı
Pelling M, Özerdem A, Barakat S. (2002). The Macro- Economic Impact of Disaster. Progress in Development Studies. 2, (4), 283–305.
Sarp N. (1999). Depremin çocuklar üzerindeki etkileri, çocuklarimiza nasil yardimci olabiliriz? (The effect of earthquakes on child: How can we help our children?) Milli Eğitim, Sayı: 144, 25–26.
Tural Ü, Coşkun B, Önder E, Çorapçioğlu A, Yildiz M, Kesepara C, Karakaya I, Aydin M, Erol A, Torun F, Aybar G. (2004). Psychological consequences of the 1999 earthquake in Turkey. J. Traum. Stress, 17: 451–459. doi:10.1007/ s10960-004-5793-9
Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK). (2016). Fertility statistic 2015, http://www. tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21514.
Türkiye Afet Bilgi Bankası [Turkey Disaster Information Bank] (TABB) (2018) Republic of Turkey, Prime Ministry Disaster and Emergency Management Authority. https://tabb-analiz.afad.gov.tr/
Türkoğlu N. (2001). Türkiye’nin yüzölçümü ve nüfusunun deprem bölgelerine dağılışı [The area of Turkey and distribution of population to earthquake regions]. Ankara Üniversitesi Türkiye Coğrafyası Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi, Volume 8, 133–148.
Yılmaz V. (2004). A statistical analysis of the effects on survivors of the 1999 earthquake in Turkey. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 32(6), 551-558.
Conflicts of Interest: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
Research article
UDC: 005.8:502.58:556.166(520:549.3)
005.334
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.4
Preparing International Joint Project:
use of Japanese flood hazard map in Bangladesh
Kumiko Fujita1 and Rajib Shaw2
1 Researcher, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Japan 2 Professor, Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Japan
* Correspondence: kumiko.fujita@gmail.com
Received: 17 November 2018; Accepted: 10 December 2018; Published: 25 March 2019
Abstract: Both Japan and Bangladesh suffer from floods, and variety of measures have been developed in each country. In addition to the structural measures such as embank-ment, non-structural measures such as flood hazard map and warning system have been developed and used for evacuation effectively in Japan. However, flood hazard map is not a common measure in Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, different measures such as raising / elevating their houses with plinth, placing sand bags on the riverbank and migration are common. The major reason of this difference is because of the different flood phenomena. For example, the flood phenomena in Japan is more destructive in short term compared to the flood in Bangladesh because of the difference of the topography. In Japan, the river velocity is fast because of the steep river bed, therefore, even one hit is possible to destroy buildings and deprive of people’s lives sometimes. However, flood in Bangladesh is not able to destroy buildings and deprive of people’s lives in short term. Long inundation period such as a few months makes people impossible to secure food by farming and deprive of human lives by starvation. Thus, understanding the different flood phenomena is the base of starting project. However, many researchers and mem-bers in international joint projects start without noticing the different phenomena and perception toward river and flood. In addition, understanding the background of each country is also needed, since the technology for flood disaster risk reduction have been developed under the social condition of each country. Since the flood in Japan is destructive in short term, Japanese are afraid of flood, thus flood disaster risk reduction has been considerable interest for government and local people. Government has been developing measures and legislation, and local people are cooperative to the government. However, Bangladeshi are not afraid of flood itself, the flood-conveyed fertile soil is even welcome by farmers. They pay attention to the duration of flood, since it is related to the available duration of farming and securing food. Thus, government and local people in Bangladesh did not choose the way of controlling the river flow by structural measures like Japan.
In this research, river floods in Bangladesh and Japan are compared for clarifying the differences. Since social background is also important factor for developing the flood measures, it is also reviewed and compared, such as land use, population, education and disaster risk reduction system. Then the possibility of adjusting Japanese hazard map to the condition in Bangladesh are discussed.
Keywords: Flood Hazard map, Technology transfer, Social background, Japan, Bangladesh
Floods in Bangladesh and Japan
Recognizing the difference of rivers and floods in Bangladesh and Japan is the basic background for starting joint project. Therefore, rivers and floods in Bangladesh and Japan are compared first.
Comparison of river speed and slope
Generally, Bangladesh experiences four types of flood, i) Flash Flood, ii) Rain fed Flood, iii) River Flood, and iv) Coastal Flood (cyclonic storm surges flood and tidal flood) (Figure 1). This research focuses on iii) river flood, which are also called as river bank erosion or monsoon flood. River flood occurs along major rivers during the monsoon from June to September every year. According to the Bangladesh Water Development Board about 1,200 km of river banks are actively eroding and about 100,000 people living on the river banks are affected (Zimmermann et al. 2009).
Figure 1: Flood affected area Source: arranged from (WMO/GWP 2003)
Bangladesh has the total area of 144,000 km2, and about 10,000 km2 (about 7%) of the total area is covered with water. The area is 820 km from north to south and 600 km from east to west, and approximately 80% of the area is with- in 10 meters above mean sea level. Thus, the flood plains make up 80% of the country, and large areas are annually flooded during the monsoon season from June to September. Therefore, velocity of the major rivers in Bangladesh is slow. Figure 2 is the comparison of the slope of major rivers in the world. For example, the Ganges river in Bangladesh runs slowly.
On the contrary rivers in Japan are very fast and shorter than rivers in Ban- gladesh. Topography of Japan is rugged with many mountains, gorges, rivers, lakes, marshes and a complex coastline. The island is long with high mountain ranges in the center, and rivers flow from the high mountains to coasts. The pre- cipitation in mountains and hills are high and the distance from the mountains to coasts is short generally, therefore, the flow is rapid.
Figure. 2: Slope of major river in the world Source: based on (MLIT 2001)
1.2. Flood inundation period
Rivers in Bangladesh have gentle slope and flow slowly. Though the flood is the cause of erosion, it does not hit buildings, land and people. As a result, they are able to live in the inundated place as long as it exists (Figure 3), and there is enough time to prepare for evacuate / migrate. Sometimes they do not need to leave their land. However, the erosion affects large area. It deprives people of their farm land and crop resulting starvation.
Figure 3: Villagers walking flooded path (Sundarganj, Gaibandha in Aug. 2014)
On the contrary, the river flow in Japan is rapid even in dry season if it is compared to the river flow in Bangladesh. If heavy rains fall in Japan, water flows from upstream to oceans in short time, and there is high risk to hit people, buildings, and properties. This phenomenon is called “flood” in Japan. Floods in Japan are more destructive in short time. Even one hit of flood is possible to destroy embankment, buildings, etc. and take people’s lives directly. However, the flood duration is much shorter, within a several hours to a few days in most cases. Thus the flood duration in Japan and Bangladesh is different.
Social background
Understanding social background of each country is also important for suc- cessful joint project.
Population density and land use
Bangladesh is densely populated country as Figure 4 shows. Since the coun- try is flat (Figure 4, right), people are able to live in and cultivate most of the area, except the south coastal area which is Shunderban Forest, a World Heritage Site, and the east area next to India and Myanmar which is hilly.
Figure. 4: Bangladesh population density (left )and low elevation topography (right) http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/downloads/maps/lecz/lecz-urban-rural-popu- lation-estimates-v1/bangladesh-population-density-and-lecz.jpg
Japan is partially densely populated as Figure 5 (left) shows. This is because of the topography. About 73% of Japan’s area is steep mountainous, volcanic land, and hills, which locates interior of Japan (Figure 5 right). It is difficult to live in and around mountain ranges because of frequent mountain disasters such as landslide, debris flow, flash flood and so on, and especially it is difficult to build large cities in such steep slope areas. Therefore, less than 10% of the population live in the rural/mountainous parts.
Figure 5: Japan population density (left) and rugged topography (right) Source based on: (left) http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/downloads/maps/ grump-v1/grump-v1-population-density/jpndens.jpg
(right) https://www.worldofmaps.net/typo3temp/images/topographie-japan.jpg
Scattered plains and basins among mountains cover only about 27% (Sta- tistic Bureau, 2016). Japan has three major plains areas all in the main island. The largest is the Kanto plain with the capital Tokyo. Second is the Yamato plain with Kyoto and Osaka. Third is the Nobi plain with Nagoya. Tokyo is the larg- est metropolitan area in the world, and Osaka and Nagoya are the second and third-largest metropolitan areas in Japan. Throughout Japanese history, these three plains provided the greatest agricultural potential and served as the eco- nomic, political and cultural centers. Japan’s population is concentrated in these three major plains and plains / basins along the south coast, and to a lesser extent the north coast. Thus, the interior of Japan, which is mountainous are, is practi- cally depopulated (Figure 6).
Figure 6: A typical mountain village in Reihoku area, Kochi prefecture (left) and typical greater Tokyo area (right) https://www.uniquejapantours.com/how-big-is-tokyo/
Therefore, Japan’s habitable and arable area is extremely limited. The habit- able land, including agricultural land about 12%, is about 33% (Statistic Bureau, 2016) and more than 90% of the population live there. The interior mountain- ous area is difficult for people to live because of the steep slope topography and mountain disasters such as debris flow, landslide, and flash flood. Thus, because of the topography, people in Japan are forced to live in flood plain areas and Ja- pan’s urban areas is densely populated. Today, about 50% of the population and 75% of properties are located on flood plains, which is about 10% of the country (Yoshikawa 2011).
Population
The population is increasing Bangladesh (Figure 7) and it makes people more difficult to survive the food shortage during floods. Food production is being disrupted by floods more frequently and more severely than before due to climate change (Douglas 2009). Climate change is expected to change the fre- quency, intensity, duration and magnitude of floods (IPCC 2007). It is also likely to pose problems on food supplies, because Bangladeshi are highly dependent on the monsoon farming (Shukla 2003). In addition, as the population increase, more and more people are forced to live in flood risk area. Thus, the increasing population affects the number of flood victims, and the possibility of starvation caused by flood is increased.
Japan’s population steadily increased through the 20th century. Because of the rapid increase, urbanization was accelerated. Foot hill of the mountains has been also developed where people did not live because the area is moun-
tain disasters-prone area, such as landslide and flash flood. After many years of slowing population growth, the number of people who live in Japan has begun to decrease. The fall began in 2004, and it has accelerated since then (Figure 7).
Figure 7: Bangladeshi Population <164.76 million in 2017> and Japanese Popu- lation <126.79 Million in 2017>
Source: World Bank (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?loca- tions=BD)
Different needs for flood disaster risk reduction
Because of the different flood phenomena in Japan and Bangladesh men- tioned in section 1, and the different condition depended on the topography in Japan and Bangladesh mentioned in section 2, the major initial purpose of flood disaster risk reduction is different. However, the final purpose is the same. It is saving lives.
In Japan, avoiding destructive direct hit by flood in short term is needed for saving lives and properties.
In Bangladesh, floods are not destructive and cannot deprive people’s lives in short term. Though long-term inundation causes difficulty of farming and food shortage, inundation caused by flood bring following many beneficial effects:
Figure 8 is the image of comparing flood event in Japan and Bangladesh. Destructive flood in Japan gives damages on properties and human in a short term. However, flood in Bangladesh gives both damage and benefits such as fer- tile soil after long flood / inundation period.
Figure 8: Flood as a short-term event in Japan and a long-term event in Bangladesh
Thus, floods are even considered the benefit especially for agriculture. Since farmers rely on flood conveyed fertile soil for farming, it is not expected to con- trol flood totally in Bangladesh. However long-lasting inundation causes the lack of available farm land and causes food shortage. Then it causes starvation. Therefore, protecting farm land from long lasting inundation is considered to secure food and to save lives.
Measures for flood in Japan
Protecting lives and properties from floods is essential for Japan to develop the country. Structural and non-structural measures have been developed for protecting lives and properties from destructive hit. Self-help, mutual-help and public-help is also common. In addition, the system of preparedness, occur- rence, response, recovery have been improved (Figure 9). Now, integrated man- agement for flood disaster risk reduction is common in Japan.
In preparedness stage, structural measures such as embankment, dams, reservoirs etc. are prepared by government, and non-structural measures such as hazard map is also prepared. People are educated how to interpret the local hazard map. During flood, central and local government provide supports, and local people receive warning issued by government through leaders of local com- munities. Then, people are able to evacuate following the hazard map informa- tion. In addition to the local people, external helps such as NGOs, government, volunteers are available especially for response and recovery stages.
Figure 9: Flood management cycle of preparedness, occurrence, response and recovery
Hazard map
Hazard map is effectively used under the integrated management in flood prone areas in Japan. Flood hazard map is prepared based on the provided in- formation by central government and issued by cities, towns and villages in Ja- pan. The local hazard map is distributed to each household. It is also able to download. It includes the information of (1) possible part of dyke break, (2) possible inundation area, and (3) evacuation route and place (Figure 10). This information makes local people easily prepare for the possible local flood. Since flood in Japan is destructive, in addition to structural measures for protecting people’s lives and properties, non-structural measure such as evacuation is need- ed for securing people’s lives. Today, about 50% of the population and 75% of properties are located on flood plains (Yoshikawa 2011).
Figure 10: An example of flood hazard map (Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, Japan) https://slideplayer.com/slide/5815374/
Followings are essential condition for preparing and utilizing hazard map.
Ability of including necessary information in hazard map
Ability of updating maps
Ability of interpreting hazard map by local people
Warning system
Detail of each condition is reviewed as follows.
Ability of including necessary information in hazard map -Contents of hazard map
For preparing flood hazard map, following information is needed.
possible range and extent of flood damage
flood danger spot
evacuation shelter
evacuation route
disaster-related public organizations (local government offices, fire sta- tions, police, hospital etc)
Public schools and public centers are designated as evacuation shelters / cen- ters in most cases. People are able to know the safe evacuation route for avoiding the destructive direct hit by flood. The duration of the evacuation is several days in most cases of flood in Japan. Therefore, food for surviving several days are
stocked and conveyed if people evacuate to the designated evacuation shelters / centers. Expected function of evacuation shelter is not only for accommodation, but for getting official and several supports. Since there is the system to provide food, water and some necessary items to stay for several days at shelters, Japanese local people are able to evacuate with minimum necessaries.
Ability of updating maps -Frequency of updating map
Since flat land is limited in Japan, people have to live in limited flat but flood prone area. Flood in Japan has possibility to destroy buildings and deprive peo- ple’s lives. As a result, structural measures to control the flow have been needed in Japan’s rivers, such as high embankment, for protecting the people’s lives, assets, infrastructure and buildings. Flood plains are protected by river levees. River levees are important infrastructures that protect our country’s people and properties and to prevent such enormous economic and social loss. Japan have a great many rivers. They are short and disconnected. The river flow is controlled to flow straight and rapidly from the mountains to the nearest coast, and do not change the shape (Figure 11). River levee is essential for hazard map, since it keeps river shape. Therefore, updating map is easy and not frequent.
Figure 11: Japanese river with structural measure for flowing straight and rapidly Source: based on Sabo in Japan (MLIT)
Rivers in Bangladesh have few structural measures (Figure 12), since small flood is rather beneficial for farming and so on. Most of the rivers keep natural
condition and people are easily able to access rivers. They live next to rivers and even in rivers (Figure 13). People utilize and rely on the flood conveyed fertile soil for agriculture. This natural condition makes it difficult to update map. Since the shape of the river changes every flood, it is needed to update map every after flood if they prepare for hazard map.
Figure 12: Bangladeshi river with few structural measure Source: google map
Figure 13: Living in elevated houses with plinth next to flooded river (Sundarganj, Gaibandha in Aug. 2014)
Ability of interpreting map
For utilizing the hazard map by local people, people need to read letters and interpret map. Japan’s literacy rate is about 99%. Map education has been compulsory in general primary school since 1908. Tanaka says “In the teach- ing of map-making, (i) the preparation of distribution map for the statistical map-making became popular in general primary schools, (ii) the national land map-making using ready-made maps was widely practiced in the teaching of their native districts, (iii) the field map-making became popular in general pri- mary schools as a step to the learning of geography” (Tanaka, 1992). Map educa- tion continues in junior high schools also. Based on this background, Japanese adults are able to interpret map and utilize hazard map.
However, in Bangladesh the literacy rate of adult (% of people ages 15 and above) is 73% (WB, 2016), and map education is not common like Japan.
Warning system
Warning and hazard map is well related in Japan. After the warning is is- sued, people are able to evacuate following the hazard map information such as evacuation route and shelter. Since the flood speed is rapid, the evacuation time is limited. Therefore, the warning system have been developed. People are able to receive information through several media, such as TV, Internet, mobile phone and local media system.
3.2. External help
External help is also systematically developed. Usually after evacuating to the designated evacuation centers or shelters, evacuees are able to receive hous- ing information, food, water, daily necessity etc., since NGOs, government, vol- unteers and related organizations are well organized and linked.
Hazard map in Bangladesh
Various flood hazard map is already introduced to Bangladesh and all over the world with different names and different approaches such as GIS based haz- ard map, based on flood affected frequency, based on flood depth and velocity etc. (Osti 2008). It is technically possible to prepare for hazard map similar to Japan’s hazard map, however the contents are different. The user is also different. Local people in Bangladesh do not use hazard map usually. It is used by local government and not local people. Figure 14 is a hazard map of Dharmapasha
Upzila, Sunamganj district, Bangladesh. Hazard map is not distributed to local people because of the social background. There is difficulty for local people to interpret hazard map since literacy rate is about 70% and map education is not common in Bangladesh, and people are not able to interpret map. In addition, since there is enough time to prepare for evacuation such as a few weeks, and inundation period is long like a few months, they rather migrate than evacuate based on their experience (Fujita 2017). They seasonally move for finding safe area to live and job. Usually, the linkage with the local government is weak, and there is no support for migrants to move and settle to new places, except during emergencies (Martin et al., 2013).
Figure 14: Hazard map: Dharmapasha Upazila (ULDMPD 2014)
Conclusion
For successful use of foreign technology, recognizing different disaster phe- nomena in each country is the basic and key point. Many countries suffer from many disasters, such as flood, landslide, volcanic eruption, tsunami, storm etc. Though these disasters have the same names in many countries, the real phe- nomena may be different. As the flood phenomena in Bangladesh and Japan is differently recognized, other disaster phenomena are also different in each country and area. After recognizing the difference of the phenomena, the social background is also needed to be compared. Since the technology is developed based on the social background of the original country, recognizing the different social background in each country is needed for utilizing the technology.
Figure 15 is the summary of the steps of preparing for research on hazard map technology transfer from Japan to Bangladesh. In this research paper, flood is the selected disaster and hazard map is the selected technology. Therefore, first, flood phenomena are compared. Then prerequired condition for utilizing selected technology, hazard map, is reviewed.
Figure 15: Steps for transferring hazard map technology
Since the flood phenomena is different in Japan and Bangladesh, the pur-
pose of flood disaster risk reduction is different. Avoiding direct hit by destruc- tive flood is the major purpose in Japan. For the emergency response, evacua- tion route and place are the most expected information. Protecting farmland and living place by long lasting inundation is the major reason for flood risk reduction in Bangladesh. Therefore, their most expected information are inun- dation duration and depth. Thus, it is important to know the difference of flood phenomena, and to clarify the reason /purpose of flood risk reduction before project start.
For the next step, the social background is needed to be compared for ana- lyzing the possibility of transferring the selected technology. In case of transfer- ring Japanese hazard mapping technology, followings are necessary condition.
preparing evacuation shelter and the route ability of interpreting map by local people updating maps every after flood
warning / information system
These conditions are not developed for river flood in Bangladesh. Thus, condition of Bangladesh is not ready for utilizing Japanese type hazard map.
The most important information for the local people in Bangladesh is the duration of flood, since they may lose arable land and living places. However, Japanese hazard map do not have the information of flood/inundation duration. In addition, Bangladeshi local people expect the benefit of flood such as fertile soil, increased growth of fisheries, and favorite condition for ecosystem. There- fore, such as showing / predicting long lasting area is more useful using haz- ard mapping technology. Thus, there is possibility to use the hazard mapping technology in Bangladesh. In addition, if there are areas where similar flood phenomenon is seen in Bangladesh, Japan’s hazard map will be used effectively.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) for their support of SATREPS Project “Research project on disaster prevention/mitigation measures against floods and storm surges in Bangladesh”. We also thank Professor Md. Anwarul Abedin, Department of Soil Science, Bangladesh Agricultural University.
References
Douglas, Ian. (2009). “Climate change, flooding and food security in south Asia.” Food Security, 1:127-136
Fujita Kumiko, Rajib Shaw, Hajime Nakagawa (2017). “Social Background in River Erosion Areas Bangladesh: Implication for Japanese Hazard Map- ping Technology”, Annuals of Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto Univ. (60) pp701-710 http://www.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/nenpo/no60/ronbunB/ a60b0p39.pdf
IPCC 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. The Fourth Assessment Re- port, IPCC.
Martin, Maxmillan, Yi hyun Kang, Motasim Billah, Tasneem Siddiqui, Richard Black and Dominic Kniveton (2013): “Policy analysis: Climate change and migration Bangladesh” in Working paper 4, An output of research on cli- mate change related migration in Bangladesh. http://migratingoutofpoverty. dfid.gov.uk/files/file.php?name=wp4-ccrm-b-policy.pdf&site=354
MLIT (2001): Rivers in Japan, Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport Osti, Rabindra, Shigenobu Tanaka, Toshikazu Tokioka, (2008),”Flood hazard
mapping in developing countries: problems and prospects”, Disaster Preven- tion and Management: An International Journal, Vol.17 Iss 1 pp. 104 –113: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09653560810855919
Shukla PR (2003). “Climate Change and India.” University Press India, Hyder- abad
Statistics Bureau (2016), “Statistical Handbook of Japan 2016” http://www.stat. go.jp/english/data/handbook/pdf/2016all.pdf
Tanaka, Kohzo (1992) “Map Education in the Taisho Era and the First Half of the Showa Era” in 新 地 理 40-2 1992年9月 (in Japanese with English abstract) ULDMPD 2014, “Upazila Level Disaster Management Plan Development Upa- zila Dharmapasha, District Sunamganj” Plan Developed by Upazila Disas-
ter Management Committee, Dharmapasha, Sunamganj, Coordinated by VARD (Voluntary Association for Rural Development)
WMO/GWP (2003) “Integrated Flood Management Case Study -Bangladesh: Flood Management, World Meteorological Organization and Global Water Partnership Associated Programme on Flood Management”
World Bank (2016) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR. ZS?view=chart
Yoshikawa Katsuhide (2011) “A Study on the Development and Management of River Levee Systems” J.Japan Soc. Hydrol. And Water Resour. Vol.24,
No.1, Jan 2011 pp.21-36 (in Japanese with English abstract) https://doi. org/10.3178/jjshwr.24.21
Zimmermann, Markus, Karl-Friedrich Glombitza and Barbara Rothenberger (2009). “Disaster Risk Reduction Programme for Bangladesh 2010-2012”. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC
Research article
UDC: 005.334:[351.778.5:614.84(497.11)
005.35
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.5
Risk Perception of Building Fires in Belgrade
Vladimir M. Cvetković1*
1 Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade, Serbia; vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
* Correspondence: vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
Received: 10 November 2018; Accepted: 25 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: Starting from the frequency and seriousness of fi e in residential buildings in the area of Belgrade, this paper presents the results of research on the perception of cit- izens’ risks of fi es in residential buildings. A series of 322 face-to-face interviews were conducted at the beginning of 2017 in Belgrade. The results of multivariate regressions of risk perception of building fi es show that the most important predictor of perceived risk of building fi es is fear, age, employment status, income level, and marital status. The remaining variables (e.g., gender, education level, previous experience) did not have a significant impact. Respondents who have fear, are married, have higher income, and elderly people perceive the higher level of risk in relation to those who have no fear, live alone, have lower incomes and younger persons. The results of the research can be used to improve the level of safety of citizens by raising their awareness of the risks of fi es in housing facilities by designing and using appropriate educational programs and campaigns.
Keywords: fire risk; perception; building fires; Belgrade.
Introduction
The perception of the risk of fires in residential buildings is a significant and determining dimension of the process of planning the protection and rescue of people. Lack of awareness about the level of probability and possible consequences of fire can result in a high level of non-taking preventive measures by citizens. According to official data obtained from the RS Emergency Situations Department, the number of fires in 2017 increased by 50 percent compared to the same period in the previous year. For example, while in 2016 about 3,643 fires were recorded in the area of Belgrade, two years later, in 2018 the number of fires increased to 5,142 (Secretariat for Administration - Statistics Division). In order to reduce the level of risk from the occurrence of material and non- material consequences of fire, it is necessary to continuously improve the level of
preparedness that implies possession of appropriate knowledge on combustion processes, methods of fire fighting, preventive measures; written or oral response plans in such situations; evacuation plan; fire alarm devices and fire extinguishers, etc.
The risk of a fire incident implies potential direct or indirect losses on social entities or the system, and the risk can be expressed in the form of a mathematical formula for the probability of the emergence of economic, social or environmental consequences in a given period of time (Cardona, 2004). On the other hand, understanding risk includes a lot of uncertainty, and terms such as risk assessment, risk assessment, and risk analysis are used mixed in the description of techniques and processes in risk management (Frosdick, 1997). In theory, the concepts of hazards and risks are intertwined and risk is taken as a synonym for danger, although the risk besides danger implies additional elements (Smith & Petley, 2009). In the literature, three main questions about risk are also mentioned (Garrick, 2008): What can go wrong?; How likely is that to happen? What are the consequences if this happens? The first question, what can go wrongly refers to possible scenarios of the event, “risk scenarios”. The second question relates to testing the likelihood of such scenarios, while the third focuses on the possible consequences of such scenarios. The meaning of the word “risk” is conditioned by diverse cultural and ethnic characteristics. For example, Arabic “risq” means everything that is given from the Lord and from which the lesson can be learned (Kedar, 1970).
In Latin, “risicum” describes the specific scenario facing the sailor in trying to avoid dangerous reefs. It is usually used with a negative meaning (Alexander, 2013). Slovic (1993) points out that people react to extraordinary situations that perceive, and if such perceptions are wrong, then their actions will most likely be misguided. Kirkwood (1994) emphasizes that there is a difference between an objective and a scientific risk assessment from one and perceiving the public about risks on the other. A wider and unprofessional public does not possess sufficient expertise to comprehend and understand the risks of emergencies. Scientists use established risk assessment methodologies and are able to rationally, impartially and objectively identify and assess risks. That is precisely why there is no matching of subjective assessments of the risk of emergencies that have a wider public and objective estimates that are alluded to by experts.
Literary review
In the literature, there are a number of papers in which the level of readiness of citizens to respond to disasters and their perceptions of risk is examined (Cvetković, 2017, Cvetković & Filipović, 2017a, 2017b, 2018, Khan, 2008, Kumar
& Newport, 2007; Simpson, 2008). The results of a certain number of studies show that there is a link between risk awareness and preventive measures (Cvetković
& Filipović, 2018, Murphy, 2007, Olympia, Rivera, Heverley, Anyanwu, & Gregorits, 2010 Anyanwu & Gregorits, 2010; Paton 200). In a very interesting study, Wachinger et al. (2013) explain why some studies on disasters did not find a connection between risk perception and protective action: occupants perceive high risks but do not decide to engage in protective action; instead, they believe the authorities will help them; do not think they have enough resources to engage in protective actions. Also, there are a lot of theoretical models related to risk perception and human behavior in emergency situations caused by fires: heuristic- systematic models, model of transactional stress, model of decision action, models of reasoned actions, model hazard chain action, security motivation system etc. (Kinateder, Kuligowski, Reneke, & Peacock, 2014). In literature, there are different results related to which factors have the impact on the perception of risk as poorly designed alarm systems may not induce a high enough perceived risk (Kuligowski, 2011) and visibility or vertical vs. horizontal distance may be important confounding factors (Kinateder et al., 2014). The results show that men have lower awareness of risks than women (Cvetković, Roder, Öcal, Tarolli,
& Dragićević, 2018; Firing, Karlsdottir, & Christian Laberg, 2009; Slovic, 2010; Weber, Blais, & Betz, 2002). When the age is concerned, the results show that older adults are better at risk assessment than younger adults since they have to practice risk-related decisions more frequently in their daily lives (Kinateder et al., 2014; McLaughlin & Mayhorn, 2014; Wilson, Gott, & Ingleton, 2013). Previous experience is one of the most important predictors; however, in certain situations, previous experience without personal injuries can reduce the level of risk perception (Wachinger, Renn, Begg, & Kuhlicke, 2013). Also, in the results of various studies, the correlation of perception of risk with the emotional state was confirmed (Mathews & MacLeod, 1985) and knowledge (Cvetković et al., 2019; Lindell & Whitney, 2000).
Methods
In the creation of the questionnaire, a detailed analysis of the results of a large number of previous research on fires began (Gandit, Kouabenan, & Caroly, 2009; Merino, Caballero, Martínez-de Dios, Ferruz, & Ollero, 2006; Slovic, 1987; Taylor &Daniel, 1984). As a part of general work, questions were given regarding demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of citizens: gender (male or female), age (younger, middle-aged or older), level of education (secondary, higher or college), marital status , married or single) and employment status (employed or unemployed), while in the second part there was a question regarding the
assessment of the level of risk of fire in the residential objects. In the course of 2017, 322 citizens were surveyed by multi-point random sampling. In the first phase, several buildings were selected in the central parts of Belgrade in which the survey will be conducted. Then, it was decided to conduct interviews with two household members in apartments (odd numbers). Household members were selected according to the gender criteria (one female and one male), fulfilled the condition of adulthood. Compared to the structure of the sample, women are more represented (59.3%) than men (40.7%). However, if we look at the full structure of the population, where women are also more represented, it can be said that the sample is representative. By analyzing the age of the respondents in the sample, it is noted that the youngest respondents (55.9%) are the most frequent ones. Compared to the level of education, those with secondary education (57.7%) are mostly represented. Respondents who were not related were more represented (43.5%) than those who were in a relationship (27.9%) or married (27.9%). Regarding the status of employment, there are relatively more non-employed respondents (53.4%) (Table 2).
Table 2. Basic demographic and socio-economic information about respondents (n = 322).
Variables Category N %
Gender Men 131 40.7
Women 191 59.3
Age Younger (18-38) 180 55.9
Middle-aged (39-59) 80 24.8
Older (преко 59) 62 19.2
Secondary School 186 57.7
Level of education
Marital status
College 73 22.6
Faculty 63 19.5
Not in relationship 140 43.5
In relationship 90 27.9
Married 92 28.5
Employment status Yes 150 46.5
No 172 53.4
After completion of the entry, preliminary analyses and data checks were carried out in order to eliminate the technical errors that occurred during the data entry. During the first step, basic descriptive statistical analyses were conducted with the aim of testing the frequency of individual responses. Multivariate regression analysis and Pearson correlation were used to identify the extent to
which the perceived risk was associated with the next demographic and socio- economic variable.
Results
When questioned whether they knew or were aware of the risks of fires in residential buildings, 320 respondents answered with an average rating of M
= 1.84, SD = .363. Out of the total number of respondents, 84.5% pointed out that there is no risk of a fire in relation to 15.5% who say the opposite. With a goal to test the central hypothesis of which different factors is predictive variable in the perception of building fires, a multivariate regression analysis was used to identify the extent to which perceived risk was associated with the following demographic and socioeconomic variables: gender, age, education level, income level, marital status, employment, previous experience and level of fear. According to Table 2 categories, males, young, low-income people, married, people with fear and previous experience, have been coded as 1; 0 have been assigned otherwise. Previous analyses showed that the assumptions of normality, linearity, multicollinearity, and homogeneity of variance had not been violated. The results of the multivariate regressions (Table 2) of risk perception of building fires show that the most important predictor is fear (β=.370), and it explains 37% variance, then age (β=-0.253), it explains 25.3% variance, employment status (β=-0.183), it explains 18.3% variance, than income level (β=-0.169), it explains 16.9% variance, income level (β=-0.169), it explains 16.9% variance, marital status (β=-0.152), it explains 15.2% variance of risk perception of building fires. The remaining variables (e.g., gender, education level, previous experience) did not have significant effects. This model (R2=0.182, Adj. R2=.163, F=9.59, t=25.6, p=0.000) with all mentioned independent variables explains the 16.3% variance of risk perception of building fires.
Table 2. Multivariate regression analysis results in risk perception of building fires (N=322).
Predictor
Risk perception of building fires
variable Gender | B -.040 | SE .046 | β -.055 | Sig. .379 |
Age | -.244 | .085 | -.253 | .004* |
Education level | .067 | .040 | .091 | .095 |
Income level | -.124 | .040 | -.169 | .002** |
Marital status | -.111 | .039 | -.152 | .004* |
Employment | -.169 | .079 | -.123 | .052 |
Previous experience | .020 | .50 | .022 | .691 |
Level of fear | -.277 | .042 | -.370 | .000** |
*p=.05. **p ≤ .01.
A further correlation between risk perception of building fires and age, income level, marital status and level of fear was also investigated using the Pearson linear correlation coefficient. Preliminary analyses are carried out to further satisfy the assumptions about the normality, linearity, and homogeneity of variance. The results obtained show that there is a correlation between the marital status (r =
.180, n = 322, p < .001), level of fear (r = .308, n = 322, p < .000), income level (r = -.198, n = 322, p < .000), and age (r = .250, n = 322, p < .000). Respondents who have fear (M = 1.93, SD =.255) are more likely to perceive the risks of fire compared to those who do not (M = 1.70, SD =.320). Further analysis of the results obtained shows that respondents who are in a married (M = 2.35, SD
=.189) are more likely to perceive the risks of fire in residential buildings than non-married respondents (M = 1.78, SD =.219). Respondents with lower incomes (M = 1.76, SD = .329) perceive less than the respondents with a higher level of income (M = 1.90, SD = .389). Compared to the age of the respondents, it was found that older respondents, in relation to younger respondents, perceived the risks of fires in residential buildings.
Discussion
In the research perception of building fires, the hypothesis that perception of risk is influenced by certain demographic and socioeconomic factors pointed out by the results of previous research (Cvetković et al., 2019; Kineder et al., 2014; Lindell & Whitney, 2000 Mathews & MacLeod, 1985; McLaughlin & Mayhorn, 2014; Wachinger et al., 2013; Wilson et al., 2013). The obtained results show that the perception of the risk of fire in residential buildings is influenced by fear, the age of respondents, income level, marital status, while gender, level of education and previous experience are not. The most important predictor of perception of risk are fears of disasters that have a decisive importance in the process of risk assessment (Cvetković, Öcal, & Ivanov, 2019). It can be assumed that respondents who have real fears from the consequences of fire are more informed and aware of the risk of the occurrence of such events. For this reason, fears can be a serious driver of people in taking preventive measures to protect their lives and property (Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Of course, additional research is needed in terms of the motivation of people who do not feel fear of fire in residential buildings, in order to understand the nature of their motivational factors better.
The results showed that respondents in the marital community are more likely to perceive the risks of fires in residential buildings than those who are not in a marital union. It can be assumed that respondents who are married care about the risks and safety of their close person. In addition, it can be pointed out that respondents who are married discuss such topics more often, which contributes to a higher level of perception of risk. Further research needs to be carried out to deepen the nature of the relationship between marital status and the perception of risk. Compared to the age of the respondents, the results obtained are in agreement with the results of previous studies (Kinateder et al., 2014; McLaughlin & Mayhorn, 2014; Wilson et al., 2013). It can also be assumed that older people, due to their limitations in speed and efficiency of movement, lower physiological resistance, and rich experience, perceive the risks to a greater extent in order to be adequately prepared for responding to such situations. Further research needs to be carried out and examined which are the prevailing factors of the risk perception difference in young people and the elderly. In the end, one should not forget the very interesting results of the research, according to which respondents with lower incomes are less likely to perceive the risks of fire. It can be assumed that they are burdened with existential issues and that they are not able to pay attention to other security issues. Of course, in the next research, it is necessary to examine the more detailed nature and the way of the impact of the level of income on the perception of risk.
Conclusions
Understanding the perception of the risk of fire in residential buildings is a prerequisite for effective disaster risk management and for improving the safety of citizens. If citizens do not have awareness of the risks of a fire, it is simply impossible to expect a high level of their willingness to react in such situations. The results of the survey clearly show that respondents who have fear, are married, have higher income, and older people are more likely to perceive the level of risk compared to those who have no fear, live alone, have lower incomes, and younger people. In accordance with the results obtained, it is necessary to devise and implement certain educational programs and campaigns that would primarily target citizens who live alone, have lower incomes and younger ones. Naturally, given the generally low level of awareness among all citizens of such risks, it is necessary to undertake various activities in order to change the situation in a positive way. The survey that was conducted in 2017 also had its limitations that looked at the random selection of respondents in several dozen endangered buildings from the city of Belgrade. In future research, it is necessary to include housing facilities in different parts of the city so that the sample of the respondents would be even more representative. The scientific implications of the research are reflected in the creation of a solid empirical and theoretical knowledge fund that allows the results to be compared with other similar research carried out in different social and cultural circumstances and ambiances. The importance of research for improving the safety of citizens is very high and it is necessary to undertake certain proactive activities in a shorter period of time in order to educate and train citizens in time to react in such situations.
References
Alexander, D. E. (2013). Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological journey. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13(11), 2707-2716.
Cvetković, V. (2017). Krizne situacije – pripremljenost države, lokalne zajednice i građana. Vojno delo, 69(7), 122-136.
Cvetković, V. M., Öcal, A., & Ivanov, A. (2019). Young adults’ fear of disasters: A case study of residents from Turkey, Serbia and Macedonia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 101095. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijdrr.2019.101095
Cvetković, V., Noji, E., Filipović, M., Marija, M. P., Želimir, K., & Nenad, R. (2018). Public Risk Perspectives Regarding the Threat of Terrorism in Belgrade: Implications for Risk Management Decision-Making for Individuals, Communities and Public Authorities. Journal of Criminal Investigation and Criminology/, 69(4), 279-298.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2017a). Pripremljenost za reagovanje na rizike od prirodnih katastrofa: Zadužbina Andrejević.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2018). Ispitivanje percepcije rizika o požarima u stambenim objektima: demografski i socio-ekonomski faktori uticaja. Vojno delo, 70(5), 82-98.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2017b). Pripremljenost za reagovanje na rizike od prirodnih katastrofa: preporuke za unapređenje bezbednosti građana. Beograd: Zadužbina Andrejević - Instant system.
Cvetković, V., Kevin, R., Shaw, R., Filipović, M., Mano, R., Gačić, J., & Jakovljević, V. (2019). Household earthquake preparedness in Serbia – a study from selected municipalities. Acta Geographica, 59(1).
Cvetković, V., Roder, G., Öcal, A., Tarolli, P., & Dragićević, S. (2018). The Role of Gender in Preparedness and Response Behaviors towards Flood Risk in Serbia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(12), 2761.
Firing, K., Karlsdottir, R., & Christian Laberg, J. (2009). Social influence in military leadership training. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 30(8), 709-721.
Gandit, M., Kouabenan, D. R., & Caroly, S. (2009). Road-tunnel fires: Risk perception and management strategies among users. Safety science, 47(1), 105-114.
Garrick, B. J. (2008). Quantifying and controlling catastrophic risks: Academic Press. Kedar, B. (1970). Again: Arabic risq, medieval Latin risicum, studi medievali.
Spoleto: Centro Italiano Di Studi Sull Alto Medioevo.
Khan, M. S. A. (2008). Disaster preparedness for sustainable development in Bangladesh. Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(5), 662-671. doi: 10.1108/09653560810918667
Kinateder, M. T., Kuligowski, E. D., Reneke, P. A., & Peacock, R. D. (2014). A review of risk perception in building fi evacuation: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Kirkwood, A. S. (1994). Why Do We Worry When Scientists Say There Is No Risk? Disaster Prevention and Management, 3(2), 15-22. doi: 10.1108/09653569410053905
Kuligowski, E. D. (2011). Terror defeated: occupant sensemaking, decision- making and protective action in the 2001 World Trade Center disaster.
Kumar, T. S. A., & Newport, J. K. (2007). Institutional preparedness and sustainability of micro finance institutions during post disaster scenario. Disaster Prevention and Management, 16(1), 21-32. doi: 10.1108/09653560710729785
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81(1), 146.
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2000). Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Analysis, 20(1), 13-26.
Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1985). Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states. Behaviour research and therapy, 23(5), 563-569.
McLaughlin, A. C., & Mayhorn, C. B. (2014). Designing effective risk communications for older adults. Safety science, 61, 59-65.
Merino, L., Caballero, F., Martínez-de Dios, J. R., Ferruz, J., & Ollero, A. (2006).
A cooperative perception system for multiple UAVs: Application to automatic detection of forest fires. Journal of Field Robotics, 23(3-4), 165- 184.
Ozmen, F. (2006). The level of preparedness of the schools for disasters from the aspect of the school principals. Disaster Prevention and Management, 15(3), 383-395. doi: 10.1108/09653560610669873
Simpson, D. M. (2008). Disaster preparedness measures: a test case development and application. Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(5), 645-661. doi: 10.1108/09653560810918658
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. science, 236(4799), 280-285.
Slović, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 675- 682.
Slovic, P. (2010). The feeling of risk: New perspectives on risk perception: Routledge.
Taylor, J. G., & Daniel, T. C. (1984). Prescribed fire: Public education and perception. Journal of Forestry, 82(6), 361-365.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., & Kuhlicke, C. (2013). The risk perception paradox—implications for governance and communication of natural hazards. Risk Analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., & Kuhlicke, C. (2013). The risk perception paradox—implications for governance and communication of natural hazards. Risk analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
Weber, E. U., Blais, A. R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of behavioral decision making, 15(4), 263-290.
Wilson, F., Gott, M., & Ingleton, C. (2013). Perceived risks around choice and decision making at end-of-life: a literature review. Palliative medicine, 27(1), 38-53.
Funding: This research was funded by Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management.
Conflicts of Interest: Declare conflicts of interest or state “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT (IJDRM)
Dear Professor/Researcher,
International International Journal of Disaster Risk Management is a peer-reviewed (twice a year) journal serves all aspects of disaster studies, policy, and management. It provides a platform for academics, policymakers and practitioners to publish high-qu- ality research and practice concerning natural disasters, anthropogenic disasters, comp- lex political emergencies and crises around the world. The journal crosses and affects interdisciplinary boundaries to promote communication, collaboration and teamwork between professions and disciplines to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and pre- paredness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable deve- lopment. The journal encourages to the interchange of ideas and experience, to decrease the risk of disasters and build community resilience within the context of sustainable development and planetary boundaries.
Journal will cover all aspects of disaster risk management from a global perspective, including but not limited to:
Disaster and crisis management theory and practice,
Risk awareness and assessment,
Hazard and vulnerability analysis,
Knowledge development including education, training, research and informati- on on disasters,
Public commitment and institutional frameworks, including organizational, po- licy, legislation and community action,
Disaster prevention, mitigation, response, recovery planning, policies, and implementation,
Promotes the interchange of ideas between practitioners, policy-makers and academics.
Submission Process
Authors are kindly invited to submit their formatted full papers. All paper submis- sions will be blind peer reviewed and evaluated based on originality, Research content, correctness, relevance to conference and readability. Please read complete submission and formatting guidelines before submitting your paper.
com.
You can submit your paper through following - disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.
Sincerely,
Editor-In-Chief,
Assist. Prof. Vladimir M. Cvetković, PhD vladimirkpa@gmail.com; vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs Disaster Risk Management
The University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vučića 50, Belg-
rade, Serbia
Founder and Principal of Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Manage- ment, Belgrade, http://upravljanje-rizicima.com/.
Journal Website - http://upravljanje-rizicima.com/editorial-board/
Guıdelınes for contrıbutors
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management publication is intended to furt- her the progress of science by reporting research or reviews. Authors are expected to follow the publication ethics, and avoid data fabrication and falsification. Plagiarism constitutes scientific misconduct and is not acceptable. All the submitted articles will be checked in for plagiarism. So authors and co-authors are expected to have made reaso- nable attempts to check findings before submitting to our journal for publication. Also, authors are expected to keep all research data for verification even after the publication. The failure to keep the data may be regarded as misconduct.
Submission of Manuscripts
Manuscripts are accepted for review with the understanding that the same work has not been, will not be, nor is at present submitted elsewhere, and that its submission for publication has been approved by all of the authors and by the institution where the work was carried out; in addition that any person cited as a personal communication has approved such citation. Written authorisation may be required at the editor’s discretion.
Articles and any other material published in the International International Journal of Disaster Risk Management represent the opinions of the author(s) and should not be construed to reflect the opinions of the editor(s) and the publisher. Authors submitting a manuscript do so with the understanding that if it is accepted for publication, copyright
in the article, including the right to reproduce the article in all forms and media, shall be assigned exclusively to the publisher. The publisher will not refuse any reasonable request by the author for permission to reproduce any of his/her contributions to International Journal of Disaster Risk Management.
Submit your Manuscripts
All the submissions should be submitted in disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com
Length of paper
The usual length of paper should be restricted to 4.000 words without references. However, longer paper can be considered by the editorial team, when applicable. Longer paper will be subjected to a delay in publication.
List of Symbols
The manuscript should contain a list of all symbols used in the paper. They should be identified typographically for the printer, not mathematically. This list will not appear in print, but is essential to avoid publication delay.
Footnotes
Text footnotes should be avoided whenever possible. If they must be used, indicate them by superscript lower-case letters in the text.
References
References are to be listed in the order cited in the text as APA (American Psychological Association) style. References in the text are to be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals, in the order of first appearance. They can be typed in superscripts after punc- tuation marks, e.g. in below:
APA Examples - Books
Page numbers refer to the relevant page in the Publication Manual of the American Psycho- logical Association, 6th ed.
Book (p. 203):
Takahashi, S. (2009). The manga guide to statistics. San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press.
Book chapter in an anthology (p. 204):
Vessey, D. (2001). Hey-diddley-ho neighboreenos: Ned Flanders and neighborly love. In
Irwin, M. T. Conrad, & A. J. Skoble (Eds.),
The Simpsons and philosophy (pp. 202-214). Chicago, IL: Open Court.
Article in a reference book (p. 203):
Chapman, R. (2000). GI Joe. In T. Pendergast & S. Pendergast (Eds.), St. James encyclope- dia of popular culture (Vol. 2, pp. 229-230).
Detroit, MI: St. James Press.
APA Examples - Periodicals
Journal article with DOI (p. 198):
Shepherd, L. & Kuczynski, A. (2009). The use of emotive imagery and behavioral tech- niques for a 10-year-old boy’s nocturnal fear
of ghosts and zombies. Clinical Case Studies, 8(2), 99-112. doi:10.1177/1534650108329664
Journal article with no DOI listed (p. 199):
If article was retrieved from a print journal:
Mabry, R., & Deiermann, P. (2009). Of cheese and crust: A proof of the pizza conjecture and other tasty results.
American Mathematical Monthly, 116(5), 423-438.
If article was retrieved in electronic format:
Check CrossRef for DOI
If DOI is found, cite using DOI.
“If no DOI has been assigned to the content, provide the home page URL of the journal or of the book or report publisher. If you are accessing the article from a private database, you may need to do a quick web search to locate this URL... In general, it is not necessary to include database information.” (pp. 191-192)
Deno,S.(1985).Curriculum-basedmeasurement:Theemergingalternative.
Exceptional Children,52(3), 219-232. Retrieved from http://www.cec. sped.org
Your instructor may ask you to use a modified version of APA style, in which you include the name of the database instead of the journal home page or cite articles without a DOI in the print journal format. Check your assignment or ask the professor.
Magazine article - accessed online (p. 200):
Kushner, D. (2009, September). Tricked-out golf carts swarm Florida communities.
Wired 17(10). Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/magazine
Magazine article - accessed in print (p. 200):
Reyes, P. (2010, August). Paradise swamped: The boom and bust of the middle-class dream. Harper’s Magazine, 321(1923), 39-48.
Newspaper article - accessed online (p. 200):
Kepner, T. (2004, October 21). Back from dead, Red Sox bury Yanks and go to series.
The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com.
Newspaper article - accessed in print (p. 200):
Itzkoff, D. (2010, July 20). Banned TV episode has its day on DVD. The New York Times, pp. C1, C5.
APA Examples - Websites
Entire website (ref.):
To cite an entire website, give the URL of the site in the text of your paper. It is not ne- cessary to put cite it in the references section. Only include retrieval dates for sites that change frequently, such as wikis.
Example: The APA style website gives examples of references (http://apastyle.org).
Article on a website (ref.):
Welch, C. (2009, September 9). Web goes nuts for ‘crasher squirrel.’ Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/09/09/minnesota.crasher.squirrel/
Article from an online reference work (p. 205):
Boondoggle. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved from http:// www.m-w.com/dictionary/boondoggle
Tables
Tables should be numbered with Arabic numerals in order of appearance in the text. Each table should have a short descriptive caption. Table footnotes should be indicated by superscript lower-case letters.
Figures
Figures should be numbered (with Arabic numerals) in order of appearance and should have short descriptive captions. Line drawings must be professionally drafted originals, in black ink, with lettering large enough to be legible after a reduction of 50-60%. Figures should be designed to fit the proportions of the printed page. Illustrations in colour can be accepted only if the authors defray the cost.
Offprints
Reprints may be purchased; quotes to be provided by publisher upon request.
CIP - Каталогизација у публикацији Народна библиотека Србије, Београд
504
614.8.069
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management/Editor-in-Chief Vladimir M. Cvetković. - Vol. 1, no. 1 (2019) - Beograd: Scientific- Professional Society for Disaster Risk
Management, 2019 - (Belgrade: Neven). - 24 cm
*Semi-annually.
ISSN 2620-2662 = International Journal of Disaster Risk Management COBISS.SR-ID 275206924
