Building Resilience Amongst Communities in
Europe: What Will it Take?
Maureen Fordham
Hugh Deeming
School of the Built and Natural Environment, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
[email protected]
Everyone is doing ‘resilience’ but…
• There is little agreement or understanding of what it is
• In many languages, there is no word for it!
• Resilience work has become increasingly interdisciplinary and
multidimensional
• Tension remains between those for whom the search is a technical
undertaking and those for whom it is more a political project
2
This presentation: resilience through both
research and practice
1. Research: A new four-year EU project:
emBRACE which will produce a framework or
frameworks for resilience in Europe
2. Practice: An example of grassroots women-led
development in Honduras, in which a sustainable
livelihoods approach has been used to reduce
vulnerability
• Considering an expanded social capital approach
3
Many resilience frameworks have been
developed – the starting point is important
4
Considering a resilience framework using a
Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA)
• Early push from DFID for poverty
reduction/elimination (poverty is also
very resilient!)
• “a livelihood comprises the
capabilities, assets and activities
required for a means of living: a
livelihood is sustainable which can
cope with and recover from stress
and shocks, maintain or enhance its
capabilities and assets, and provide
sustainable livelihood opportunities for
the next generation” (Chambers and Conway
Above: Ashley and Carney 1999’ below:
Twigg 2007
1992)
• Much decried and argued over but still
widely used
5
SLA criticised for an absence of gender
•
•
•
•
Often absent
Seen as divisive, ‘political’, ‘feminist’, ‘difficult’
Commonly equates to ‘women’
Regarded derogatively as ‘cultural’ rather than concerning
gendered power relations
• When present at all, gets ‘mainstreamed’ into non-existence
• Tendency to focus on women’s vulnerability and reproductive
role
• Ignores their capacities, and productive and community roles
which underpin resilience
6
PRACTICE: EXAMPLE OF
GRASSROOTS WOMEN-LED
DEVELOPMENT
7
GROOTS
Leading Resilient Development:
Grassroots Women’s Priorities,
Practices and Innovations
http://content.undp.org/go/cmsservice/download/publication/?versi
on=live&id=3221216
GROOTS & UNDP
(ed. Fordham and Gupta 2011)
8
Case study: Garifuna Emergency Committee of
Honduras – not just a focus on disasters
• Established in response to
Hurricane Mitch, 1998 and
the lack of official response
• Grassroots women
organized boats to rescue
people
• Led collective farming/
fishing initiatives
• Developed tool banks to
share farming tools
• Developed community
seed banks for ongoing
food security
9
Garifuna Emergency Committee of Honduras
Honduras - Comité de Emergencia Garífuna
• Led collective housing
construction
• Used a learning
exchange with Jamaican
Women’s Construction
Collective to learn
hurricane-safe roofing
• Bought land for
relocation of housing to
safer areas
• Enabled the poorest
families to participate in
the reconstruction
process
10
Garifuna Emergency Committee of Honduras
Comité de Emergencia Garífuna de Honduras
• Invited to participate in a planning meeting
coordinated by the Urban Planning Ministry
• Invited by local Mayors to train local government
on reducing vulnerabilities to disasters and
creating a coordinated plan for disaster response
• Negotiated with government to get support for
300 houses in Hurricane Mitch affected areas and
to establish Community Housing Councils in
each locality
• Signed an MOU with the national government to
access programs on housing and food security
• Advocate at global platforms
Grassroots leader
AnaLucy Bengochea
from Comité de
Emergencia Garífuna,
Honduras
11
Social capital/assets/resources – an important factor
in resilience research and this case study
• Social capital: the social resources (networks, membership of groups,
relationships of trust, access to wider institutions of society) people draw
upon in pursuit of livelihoods
• Bonding social capital – social cohesion within closely connected groups
• Bridging social capital - connections to groups only loosely or weakly
connected
• Linking social capital – inter-community/group connections, links with
external agencies (especially with people in power, with politically or
financially influential positions)
• Policy domain typically focuses on just one aspect - bonding social capital
(why?) but to affect change, bridging and linking social capital are also
needed
• But even expanded social capital is just one element of interest
12
Ensuring food security & sustainable livelihoods
Improving access to health services thru grassroots monitoring of services
Grassroots-led training/ knowledge exchange/ transfer & consolidation
Recognizing psychological resources/ building self esteem
Human
Resources
Improving infrastructure: roads/ water/ sanitation
Securing housing/ shelter/ tools/ equipment
Creating safe spaces for women & children
Social &
Political
Resources
Natural
Resources
GENDER
POWER
RELATIONS
Physical
Resources
Conserving natural resources
Protecting biodiversity thru
sustainable agriculture
Organizing communities
Alliance building/ networking/ creating
partnerships for DRR & good
governance
Influencing political decision-making
Financial
Resources
Building financial capital/ assets
Providing access to markets
Accessing government funds
13
Grassroots Women-led Sustainable Livelihoods & Disaster Resilient Communities
Grassroots Women-led Sustainable Livelihoods & Disaster Resilient Communities
Grassroots Women-led Sustainable Livelihoods & Disaster Resilient Communities
Grassroots Women-led Sustainable Livelihoods & Disaster Resilient Communities
Does a Sustainable Livelihoods Approach help?
• Incorporates [women’s] multiple roles (productive, reproductive and
community) which demand multiple strategies and interventions
• Incorporates tangible and intangible resources/assets
• Shows the connectedness of strategies, activities
• Opportunity to embed DRR firmly within the totality of livelihood
concerns rather than isolating it
Challenges:
• Requires acknowledgement of power relations throughout
• SLA – can be just an economic solution (capitals, assets) to a cultural
shock/ problem/ crisis
• It is a more complex approach which is needed to build resilience
14
How useful is this framework for a
European focus?
• Research: emBRACE
www.embrace-eu.org
• Building resilience amongst communities in
Europe
15
Funding support
• This project is supported by the
European Commission under
the Environment (including
climate change) Theme of the
7th Framework Programme for
Research and Technological
Development
• Project duration:
2011-2015
• Project cost: € 3,243,423.00
16
emBRACE aims and objectives
Main project aim
 Build resilience to disasters amongst communities in Europe
Specific objectives
 Identify the key dimensions of resilience across a range of disciplines and
domains
 Develop indicators and indicator systems to measure resilience concerning
natural disaster events
 Model societal resilience through simulation experiments
 Provide a general conceptual framework(s) of resilience, tested and grounded
in cross-cultural contexts
 Build networks and share knowledge across a range of stakeholders
 Tailor communication products and project outputs and outcomes effectively
to multiple collaborators, stakeholders and user groups
17
emBRACE Partners
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Université catholique de Louvain, Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of
Disasters, Brussels, Belgium (UCL) Administrative Coordinator
Northumbria University, School of the Built and Natural Environment, Newcastle upon
Tyne, UK (UoN) Scientific Coordinator
Kings College, Department of Geography, London, UK (KCL)
United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security, Bonn,
Germany (UNU)
Accademia Europea per la Ricerca Applicata ed il Perfezionamento Professionale
Bolzano, South Tyrol, Italy (EURAC)
Helmholtz-Zentrum Fuer Umweltforschung, Leipzig, Germany (UFZ)
University of York, UK (SEI-Y)
Stockholm Environment Institute, Oxford and Stockholm, UK (SEI-O, SEI)
Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research -WSL, Davos,
Switzerland (WSL)
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey (METU)
18
Work Packages
 WP 1 Systematic evaluation of literature on resilience in the context of natural
hazards and disasters
 WP 2 Development of a conceptual framework or frameworks
 WP 3 Disaster Data Review and Needs Assessment
 WP 4 Modelling Societal Resilience
 WP 5 Contextualising Resilience: Case studies across Europe
 WP 6 Refinement of the framework: bridging theory, methods and practice
 WP 7 Knowledge Exchange (continuous)
 WP 8 Policy and practice communication outputs to improve resilience
building in European societies
 WP 9 Coordination, Administration and Management
 Consultative groups including people from a variety of scales; Participatory
video; Agent based modelling; Disaster footprints; ...
 Working with communities in Europe
19
Case Studies
 River floods in Central Europe
(Germany, Poland, Czech
Republic)
 Earthquake in Turkey
 Multiple (Alpine) Hazards in
South Tyrol, Italy & Grisons,
Switzerland
 Heat-waves in London
 Combined river and surface
water floods in the north of
England (Morpeth,
Northumberland and Cumbria)
20
CONTINUOUS
ENGAGEMENT
21
Achievements so far
• Project Website www.embraceeu.org
• Project Factsheet
• Kickoff Meeting
• DISASTER-RESILIENCE
Discussion List for
International Day for
Disaster Reduction 2011
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgibin/webadmin?A0=DISASTER-RESILIENCE
22
Applying the livelihoods framework (just one
of the frameworks we are examining)
• How useful will it be in a European context?
• How important is scale?
• Resilience at the national or other higher scale may
encompass considerable costs, and a lack of
resilience, at the local or individual level
• Governance issues – subtly different
• Welfare state, forms of social protection
• Why so much interest in resilience from the policy
domain? Discourse of individual responsibility,
withdrawal of the state?
23
Resource sets – have we captured them all? Are
they all relevant for Europe?
Social
?
Human
Physical
Political
Financial
Natural
24
FINALLY,
LATEST WORD CLOUD ON
RESILIENCE FROM THE DISASTERRESILIENCE LIST MEMBERS
25
26
Disclaimer
The research leading to these
results has received funding
from the European
Community‘s Seventh
Framework Programme
FP7/2007-2013 under grant
agreement n° 283201.
The European Community is
not liable for any use that may
be made of the information
contained in this presentation.
27
Descargar

Slide 1