• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Social protection
    • Poverty & wellbeing
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Community-based disaster risk management in Pakistan

Community-based disaster risk management in Pakistan

Helpdesk Report
  • Emilie Combaz
November 2013

Question

Please provide an overview of the literature on Community-Based Disaster Risk Management in Pakistan. Identify successes and failures (including with regard to inclusion), and key factors of success and failure. Where possible, consider variation among provinces, engagement with local and district government, and the types and methodologies of interventions supported, including links with environmental management.

Summary

Disaster risk management (DRM), including disaster risk reduction (DRR), has received increased attention – particularly community-based DRM (CBDRM). Despite limited implementation and very limited evidence, some findings emerge:

  • Factors of success have included:
    – Work that is multi-sectoral, integrated and multi-hazard.
    – Good programming, with high-quality analysis, implementation and knowledge management.
    – Meaningful engagement with communities, over longer times and culturally attuned.
    – Ownership and leadership on part of communities and key actors.
    – Cooperation and trust among DRM institutions.
    – Strong DRM capacities, and effective capacity-building.
    – Creating social inclusion and space for equality within local settings, especially regarding gender.
    – Context, depending on locations and past experiences with disasters.
  • Factors of failure have included:
    – Little room for DRR in development, and the lack of sustained, integrated and systematic approaches to CBDRM.
    – Top-down, technocratic, reactive practices, and a focus on immediate issues.
    – A lack of capacities, resources or will among DRM actors.
    – Political economy dynamics (including in local government), along with institutional confusion and rivalries.
    – A lack of community ownership and the failure to truly engage with communities.
    – Inequalities and exclusions adversely affect groups such as women and girls or minorities.
    – Poor quality in some programmes.
    – The hurdles of urban settings, such as lack of space and complex multi-sector endeavours.
  • Learning from and enabling communities’ informal DRM and broader changes:
    – There is untapped potential in enabling communities’ informal DRM, working with their local knowledge and practices related to hazards, risks, vulnerabilities and risk management.
    – Broad social changes, such as improved telecommunications and roads, have had positive effects.
file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID Pakistan

Related Content

Aid and non-state armed groups
Helpdesk Report
2020
Non-State Policing in Fragile Contexts
Helpdesk Report
2019
The legitimacy of states and armed non-state actors
Topic Guide
2015
Non-state provision of skills development in South Asia
Helpdesk Report
2015
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023