Resilience has had a long multi-disciplinary history. Since its origins in the 19th century study of materials, resilience has been used in psychology (from the 1940s), ecology (from the 1970s), social sciences (from the 1990s), development aid (starting with DFID’s 1999 sustainable livelihoods perspective) and, in the last decade, economics and the study of organisations (McAslan, 2010; Manyena, 2006, 433-434).
Connection to disaster risk management
Disaster resilience is closely embedded in the longer international history of disaster risk management (DRM), notably disaster risk reduction (DRR) (Manyena, 2006; Revet, 2012). There is wide agreement in the literature that DRM is central to strategies and interventions to build disaster resilience: tools and lessons from risk reduction, prevention, preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery are deemed critical to address hazards, exposure, vulnerability and capacities, and thus to build resilience. At the same time, authors on disaster resilience largely agree that approaches and tools for disaster resilience are broader than the field of DRM: disaster resilience draws from, and brings together, knowledge and practices from fields such as climate change adaptation, poverty reduction, state-building and conflict resolution.
Key international resources on DRM relevant to disaster resilience
- Emergency Capacity Building Project – DRR
- Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery
- International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies – Disaster management
- NGO interagency group on DRR and Building Resilience
- Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs – Humanitarian-development nexus
- PreventionWeb
- UN Development Programme – Crisis prevention & recovery
- UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
- World Bank – DRM
The connection between DRM and disaster resilience is epitomised by the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities, adopted by the UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction (UNISDR, 2005b). Acknowledging the severity of the threat from disasters and the deficiencies of the existing international response, in 2005 the UN’s Hyogo Framework called for international actors and national governments to invest in disaster resilience (UNISDR, 2005b). It advocated the incorporation of DRR, poverty reduction, climate change adaptation, good governance and sustainable development into a single framework for building resilience. Another goal was to emphasise ‘prevention, mitigation, preparedness and vulnerability reduction’, with risk reduction integrated into emergency preparedness, response and recovery (UNISDR, 2005b, 3-4). The Framework identified gender equality and attention to the most vulnerable social groups and countries as key principles. It set out five priority areas for action.
Priorities of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities
- Prioritising disaster risk reduction by providing high-profile leadership, establishing relevant policies and programmes, and allocating resources to implement them
- Identifying, assessing and monitoring disaster risks and improving early warning systems
- Creating awareness at all levels of society about risk and providing information about how to reduce it
- Reducing social, economic and environmental vulnerabilities and those related to land use through improved development planning and post-disaster reconstruction by all sectors
- Strengthening disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels
Source: UNISDR, 2005b
Rationale for a resilience approach to disasters
Over the past decade, the concept of disaster resilience has gained prominence in aid policy debates (Manyena, 2006; OECD, 2013b, 1; Revet, 2012). For example, the UK government integrated resilience into its humanitarian policy (DFID 2011b) after the Humanitarian Emergency Response Review.
Review of the UK government’s humanitarian emergency response
This review suggests disaster resilience would be a more effective, efficient and sustainable approach than other current approaches to disasters. It recommends integrating into policy and practice seven interrelated principles: anticipation; resilience; leadership; innovation; accountability; partnerships; and humanitarian space. It advocates embedding resilience within development programmes; building regional, national and local capacities; and using ‘innovative funding models for risk transfer’ (Ashdown, 2011, 15-19).
This prominence has been prompted by growing recognition of both the severity of natural and man-made disasters and of the inadequacy of international efforts to reduce vulnerability to them. Specifically, there is growing consensus that:
- The frequency and severity of weather-related hazards is increasing. Climate change ‘contributes to more frequent, severe and unpredictable weather-related hazards such as droughts, tropical cyclones, floods and heat waves’ (IPCC, cited in UNISDR, 2011d; for quantitative and qualitative data, see: Ashdown, 2011; Cabot Venton et al., 2013, 2012; GFDRR, 2010; Oxfam, 2013; Paton et al., 2006; Shepherd et al., 2013; Turnbull et al., 2013; UNISDR, 2005b, 2011d, 2013).
- Exposure to all hazards is increasing. Exposure to natural and man-made disasters has increased and is likely to continue to increase with the effects of climate change (Oxfam, 2013; Shepherd et al., 2013; UNISDR, 2011d; 2013). Over the next two to three decades, increasing exposure and vulnerability due to economic and urban development ‘will have a greater influence on disaster risk than climate change’ (UNISDR, 2013, p. 92).
- Disasters have set back development: It is well documented that disasters have set back development gains, aggravated poverty and increased vulnerability (GFDRR, 2010, pp. 11-13; Shepherd et al., 2013; UNISDR, 2011d; 2013). Such negative impacts reflect and worsen inequalities, such as gendered and generational inequalities (Bradshaw & Fordham, 2013).
- Disasters and resilience related to natural hazards, violent conflict or state fragility share commonalities and connections, but interventions generally treat these contexts separately. Harris et al. (2013, pp. vii-ix) note that multiple vulnerabilities stack up. For instance, state fragility, vulnerability to climate change and the risk of mortality from drought seem closely associated. Yet conflict prevention and DRM are treated separately, with limited crossover and little documented integration (Harris et al., 2013).
- Disaster resilience has historically been underfunded: Only 2.6% of all humanitarian aid from 2006 to 2011 was spent on disaster prevention and preparedness (Oxfam, 2013, p. 20). DRR amounts to only 1% of the US$150 billion ‘spent in the 20 countries that received the most humanitarian aid’ in 2005-2009 (DFID, 2011a, p. 16). In contrast, spending on emergency humanitarian assistance has been growing over the past ten years (Cabot Venton et al., 2013, p. 8). Proponents of resilience argue that this balance needs to change, and greater emphasis should be placed on building capacities to reduce vulnerability and support communities to recover themselves (Cabot Venton et al., 2013; DFID, 2011a, pp. 16-17).
- Traditional humanitarian and development approaches have been inadequate: Humanitarian relief is targeted primarily at saving lives rather than reducing vulnerabilities; development assistance has not been sufficiently focused on building community capacity for adaptation; and approaches to DRR have often been decoupled from development, rights and power imbalances (Oxfam, 2013, p. 20).
- Responsibilities and roles need to be better balanced between the fields of development and humanitarian action: Many authors note that an integrated approach to disaster resilience will only yield benefits if development actors take the lead on a number of key strategies and interventions (DFID, 2011a; Levine et al., 2012, pp. 3-4; Oxfam, 2013; Turnbull et al., 2013; UNISDR, 2011b, p. 11). For instance, disaster prevention requires long-term development expenditures in addition to humanitarian aid in emergencies (GFDRR, 2010, p. 9).
- Ashdown, P. (chair) (2011). Humanitarian Emergency Response Review. UK Government.
See document online - Bradshaw, S., & Fordham, M. (2013). Women, Girls and Disasters. A Review for DFID. DFID.
See document online - Cabot Venton, C., et al. (2012b). The Economics of Early Response and Disaster Resilience: Lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia. Final report. DFID.
See document online - Cabot Venton, C. et al. (2013). The Economics of Early Response and Resilience: Approach and Methodology. DFID.
See document online - DFID (2011a). Defining Disaster Resilience: A DFID Approach Paper. DFID.
See document online - GFDRR. (2010). Natural Hazards, UnNatural Disasters. The Economics of Effective Prevention. United Nations, World Bank.
See document online - Harris, K., et al. (2013). When disasters and conflicts collide: improving links between disaster resilience and conflict prevention. ODI.
See document online - Levine, S., Pain, A., Bailey, S., & Fan, L. (2012). The relevance of ‘resilience’? ODI.
See document online - Manyena, S.B. (2006). The Concept of Resilience Revisited. Disasters, 30(4), 434–450.
See document online - McAslan, A. (2010). The Concept of Resilience. Understanding Its Origins, Meaning and Utility. Torrens Resilience Institute.
See document online - OECD (2013b). What Does “Resilience” Mean for Donors? An OECD Factsheet. OECD.
See document online - Oxfam (2013). No accident. Resilience and the inequality of risk. Oxfam International.
See document online - Paton, D., et al. (Eds.) (2006). Disaster Resilience: An Integrated Approach. Charles C Thomas Publisher.
- Revet, S. (2012). Conceptualizing and Confronting Disasters: A Panorama of Social Science Research and International Policies. In Attina, F. (2012). The Politics and Policies of Relief, Aid and Reconstruction: Contrasting Approaches to Disasters and Emergencies. Palgrave Macmillan. pp 42-56.
See document online - Shepherd, A., et al. (2013). The Geography of Poverty, Disasters and Climate Extremes in 2030. ODI. See document online
- Turnbull, M., et al. (2013). Toward Resilience: A Guide to Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation. Catholic Relief Services.
See document online - UNISDR (2005b). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. World Conference on Disaster Reduction. 18-22 January 2005, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. A/CONF.206/6. UNISDR.
See document online - UNISDR (2011b). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015. Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. Mid-term review. 2010-2011. UNISDR.
See document online - UNISDR (2011d). Revealing Risk, Redefining Development. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. UNISDR.
See document online - UNISDR (2013). From Shared Risk to Shared Value – The Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. UNISDR.
See document online