Evaluation and State-Of-The-Art Summary Report (Civil Protection Authorities)
Deliverable D1.1 “Evaluation and SOTA Summary Report (CPAs)“, as the first output of Work Package 1, provides the knowledge base for RiskPACC on the topics of disaster resilience, vulnerability, and risk perception as well as how these terms are operationalized by civil protection authorities.
The aim of the document is to:
- Review the state of the art of disaster resilience and risk perception concepts and methodologies in research, practice and policy, and investigate how these have evolved;
- Establish an appropriate working definition of disaster resilience and risk perception and determine how, as concepts, they have been tailored and operationalized in practice through existing resilience, risk management and crisis guidelines, standards, requirements, and approaches.
In the deliverable, disaster resilience is examined from an academic perspective, exploring the different uses across disciplines and the evolution of the term throughout history. The use of resilience in disaster risk management, including the exploration of the term in both literature and practice, is then examined.
The document explores also vulnerability and the use of the term in disaster risk management and the interaction between the terms resilience, vulnerability and risk perception are explore as well, and in particular the risk perception and how it relates to Civil Protection Authorities practices.
The evolution of risk perception in literature is also explored, including a discussion of the different focuses of risk perception in different disciplines. Different definitions of risk perception and their uses in practice, as well as definitions from previous EU projects and EU Agencies are explored and analysed.
Additionally, the gaps between how experts and lay people in their understanding and perception of risk are explored as well as factors that influence that risk perception. Finally, different Civil Protection Authorities activities to increase risk perception are discussed, with examples from Iceland, Costa Rica, and Bangladesh.
All of the above-mentioned concepts are tied together and addressed to how they relate to the Risk Perception Action Gap. The role of CPA-community relationships is emphasized, including the importance of trust in the relationship, and the challenges that can occur with the different understandings of risk that the two possess.