Bibliographic details:

UNEP (2007). Environment and Disaster Risk. Emerging perspectives. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Post-Conflict and Disaster Management Branch, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) (UNISDR) working group on Environment and disaster, Geneva, Switzerland

Abstract:

This document is an analysis of the various factors that produce human vulnerability to hazards, particularly focusing on the role of environmental degradation in exacerbating both vulnerability and hazard. It identifies areas of mutual action where disaster risk and environmental managers can work together towards the interconnected goals of environmental sustainability and safer communities. In producing this document, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) outline a comprehensive approach to disaster risk reduction (DRR). This approach emphasizes the linkages between poverty, environmental degradation, and disaster risk, recognizing that these factors share similar causes and consequences for sustainable development, human security, and wellbeing. While this relationship seems obvious, for disaster risk management (DRM) scholars, whose focus for many years was restricted to disaster preparedness, alert and response, the differences between the two areas rested on individual perceptions and experiences. The document provides clear and concise definitions of DRR and environmental management terms. Particular emphasis is placed on recognizing the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary characteristics of the DRM field. There are five ways in which environmental management is linked to DRR: 1) natural hazards directly affect social processes; 2) healthy ecosystems provide natural defenses; 3) degraded ecosystems reduce community resilience; 4) some environmental impacts deserve immediate action; and 5) environmental degradation is a hazard in itself. The next section of the document presents the Five Priority Areas of Action outlined in the Hyogo Framework of Action and the various ways that environmental managers can engage with disaster risk managers and other development partners to affect change in these areas. The last section presents ten opportunities for integrating environmental management with DRR. These cover all aspects of integrating environmental considerations into DRR policies. The most notable ones focus on assessing environmental change as a parameter of risk, considering environmental technologies and designs for structural defenses, and integrating environmental and disaster risk considerations into spatial planning. ( English )

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Watters, J. (2010). The Business Continuity Management Desk Reference: Guide to Business Continuity Planning, Crisis Management & IT Disaster Recovery. Jamie Watters.

Abstract:

Tools and techniques to make Business Continuity, Crisis Management and IT Service Continuity easy. If you need to prepare plans, test and maintain them, or if you need to set up DR or Work Area Recovery; then this book is written for you. The Business Continuity Desk Reference is written in simple language but is useful to both experienced professionals and newbies. Inside you'll discover: - The key concepts; explained in simple terms. - How to quickly assess your Business Continuity so that you can focus your time where it matters. - How to complete a Business Impact Assessment. - How to write plans quickly that are easy to use in a disaster. - How to test everything so that you know it will work. - How to assess any third party dependencies. - How to make sure that suppliers are robust. - How to meet customer, audit and regulatory expectations. - Get your hands on tools and templates that will make your life easy and make you look great. - Understand what other people do and how to delegate your work to them to make your life easier!

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Shmueli, D., Ben Gal, M., Segal E., Reichman, A. and Feitelson, E. (2018). How can regulatory systems be assessed? The case of earthquake preparedness in Israel. Evaluation, 25(1), 80-98.
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1356389018803235

Abstract:

The aim of evaluating a regulatory system is to enable governments to improve the ways in which they function, regulate, and prioritize attention and resources to the system as a whole.
Academic and professional literatures provide useful principles with which to proceed. However, on-the-shelf methods for assessing regulatory systems with generic characteristics are scarce. The Regulatory System Scan and Assessment methodology was designed for this purpose and applied to the current regulatory framework that governs Israel’s actions to plan—mitigate, prepare, respond, and recover—from the damage which may be caused by a severe earthquake. Although there is oftentimes widespread agreement concerning the existence of problems in a regulatory system, there is rarely consensus or a thorough understanding of what those problems are. Only when problems are identified can policy makers create viable and effective solutions. Development of the Regulatory System Scan and Assessment is a step toward addressing this challenge.

מתוך דו"ח שהוגש למשרד המדע והטכנולוגיה ולוועדת ההיגוי הבין משרדית להיערכות לרעידות אדמה, פברואר, 2017 (מענק מחקר מספר 3-10813)
מגישים: דברה שמואלי, ערן פייטלסון, אמנון רייכמן, מיכל בן גל, אהוד סגל, גד ברזילי ועלי זלצברגר

קישור לדו"ח: הערכת המערך הרגולטורי להתמודדות עם רעידות אדמה בישראל

מיפוי גופים רגולטוריים: גופים בעלי סמכויות וחובות הנוגעות להתמודדות עם רעידות אדמה והקשרים ביניהם

מפה אינטראקטיבית (הִדוּדִית) של הרגולציה לכל גוף על פי תחומי עשייה: טבלה הכוללת את תחומי העשייה השונים הנחוצים להתמודדות עם רעידות אדמה, והגופים השונים שלהם חובות וסמכויות בכל תחום עשייה. הטבלה מאפשרת לבחון מי הם הגופים האחראיים על כל תחום, וכן לבחון לאילו תחומי עשייה אחראי כל גוף. בנוסף, בשורה העליונה בטבלה נמצאים קישורים לפרוט הסמכויות והחובות והחובות של כל גוף, ומקור הסמכות / חובה (חוק בשחור / החלטת ממשלה באדום).

ראו גם באתר מרכז מינרבה לחקר שלטון החוק במצבי קיצון

פרסומים

Shmueli, Deborah, Ehud Segal, Michal Ben Gal, Eran Feitelson and Amon Reichman (2019). "Earthquake readiness in volatile regions: the case of Israel”, Natural Hazards (?) 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03698-x

Shmueli, Deborah, Michal Ben Gal, Ehud Segal, Amon Reichman and Eran Feitelson (2018). “How can regulatory systems be assessed? The case of earthquake preparedness in Israel”. Evaluation  25(1), 80-98.
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1356389018803235

Environment -source materials

Bibliographic details:

Adey, P., & Anderson, B. (2012). Anticipating emergencies: Technologies of preparedness and the matter of security. Security Dialogue, 43(2), 99-117.

Abstract:

In this article, we examine contemporary ‘resilience’ through UK preparedness – an apparatus of security enacted under the legal and organizational principles of UK Civil Contingencies and civil protection legislation and practices. By examining the design, practices and technologies that constitute the exercises performed within Civil Contingencies, the article first suggests that the manner in which exercises have been mobilized as examples of preparedness and apocalyptical imaginations of the ‘unthinkable’ should be understood within the highly specific societal and political contexts that shape them. More substantially, the article then provides a nuanced understanding of the life of the security assemblage through an in-depth analysis of the exercise and its design, materials, play and contingent relations. Seeking to deepen and widen concerns for what matters in security studies, animated by concern for objects, bodily affects, contingencies and excess, the article contends for a more serious concern with how security and its practices can surprise, shock, enteral and disrupt in a manner that need not only be associated with failure.

Paper

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Alesch, D. J., & Petak, W. J. (2002). Overcoming obstacles to implementation: addressing political, institutional and behavioral problems in earthquake hazard mitigation policies. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 1(1), 152-158.

Abstract:

This project is aimed at bridging the three planes, from basic research, through enabling processes, to engineered systems. At the basic research plane, we have been working to improve our collective understanding about obstacles to implementing mitigation practices, owner decision processes (in connection with other MCEER projects), and public policy processes. At the level of enabling processes, we have been seeking to develop an understanding of how obstacles to greater mitigation can be overcome by improved policy design and processes. At the engineered systems plane, our work is intended to result in practical guidelines for devising policies and programs with appropriate motivation and incentives for implementing policies and programs once adopted. This phase of the research has been aimed, first, at a thorough, multidisciplinary review of the literature concerning obstacles to implementation. Second, the research has focused on advancing the state of the art by developing means for integrating the insights offered by diverse perspectives on the implementation process from the several social, behavioral, and decision sciences. The research establishes a basis for testing our understanding of these processes in the case of hospital retrofit decisions.

Paper

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Anderson, B. (2007). Hope for nanotechnology: anticipatory knowledge and the governance of affect. Area, 39(2), 156-165.

Abstract:

This paper describes how hopes can be, and have been, placed in nanotechnology. Focusing on two recent UK government reports into the future of nanotechnology, by the DTI/OST and MoD, the paper describes how the disclosure of the nanoscale as a place subject to intervention, the act that is taken to define nanotechnology, can be understood in the context of anticipatory knowledge practices that create futures. Because the object of such practices are virtual, such as opportunities and threats, the paper argues that affect is transversal to both nanotech science and anticipatory governance. In conclusion, I open up a set of questions about anticipatory knowledges and argue that the ground that enables hope to be placed in nanotechnology is the event that defines nano – to simultaneously reduce ‘life’ to matter and to multiply ‘life’ into a limitless set of materialities.

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Anderson, B. (2010). Preemption, precaution, preparedness: Anticipatory action and future geographies. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 777-798.

Abstract:

The paper focuses on how futures are anticipated and acted on in relation to a set of events that are taken to threaten liberal democracies. Across different domains of life the future is now problematized as a disruption, a surprise. This problematization of the future as indeterminate or uncertain has been met with an extraordinary proliferation of anticipatory action. The paper argues that anticipatory action works through the assembling of: styles through which the form of the future is disclosed and related to; practices that render specific futures present; and logics through which anticipatory action is legitimized, guided and enacted.

Paper

Webpage

Bibliographic details:

Anderson, B. (2010). Security and the future: Anticipating the event of terror. Geoforum, 41(2), 227-235.

Abstract:

This paper explores the relation between processes of security and futurity in the context of efforts to govern the complexity and contingency of events of terror. It argues that processes of securing function by generating a dangerous or promissory supplement to the present that thereafter propels the extension of forms of security. The paper develops this argument through an example of how an event of terror was anticipated: a RAND exercise into the aftermath of a ‘ground burst’ nuclear explosion in Long Beach, California on March 14th 2005. It argues that exercises (in)secure through three quasi-causal operations, each of which render events of terror actionable and result in specific relations between the present and future. First, ‘hypothetically possible’ generic events are named. The future takes place as a threatening horizon. Second, the defined phases of an event’s happening are staged (an advent, its multiplication into a crisis in the context of a milieu, and a response/recovery phase). The here and now is suspended between an ‘as if’ future and the present. Third, the consequences of the event are played. The future is both an intensified ‘practical’ presence embodied by exercise participants and an outside that exceeds attempts to definitively know it. The conclusion summarizes the implications of the paper for work on futurity, security and the event.

Paper

Webpage