Multi-Risk Assessment and Management—A Comparative Study of the Current State of Affairs in Chile and Ecuador

Stefan Greiving, Leonie Schödl, Karl-Heinz Gaudry, Iris Katherine Quintana Miralles, Benjamín Prado Larraín, Mark Fleischhauer, Myriam Margoth Jácome Guerra and Jonathan Tobar
Additional contact information
Stefan Greiving: Institut für Raumplanung (IRPUD), TU Dortmund University, 44227 Dortmund, Germany
Leonie Schödl: Plan + Risk Consult, 44227 Dortmund, Germany
Karl-Heinz Gaudry: Instituto de Investigación Geológico y Energético (IIGE), Quito 170518, Ecuador
Iris Katherine Quintana Miralles: Independent Researcher, Lima 15000, Peru
Benjamín Prado Larraín: Independent Researcher, Santiago 92101, Chile
Mark Fleischhauer: Institut für Raumplanung (IRPUD), TU Dortmund University, 44227 Dortmund, Germany
Myriam Margoth Jácome Guerra: Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS), Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Jonathan Tobar: Instituto de Investigación Geológico y Energético (IIGE), Quito 170518, Ecuador

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 3, 1-23

Abstract: In Chile and Ecuador, multiple hazards and dynamic processes in vulnerability pose a high risk. Spatial planning and emergency management can contribute to disaster risk management but they follow different goals. However, global goals, such as from UN-ISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction) and UN SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) can potentially support cities and regions in defining concerted action. This paper aims at measuring the performance of Chile and Ecuador in regard to the aforementioned policy goals. Although both countries show considerable progresses in the implementation of the UN strategies, it is doubtful that the existing global monitoring approach is appropriately designed for measuring the real situation on the ground. Our paper is based on a desktop research combined with stakeholder workshops and expert interviews. Overall, both countries made considerable progress in regard to disaster preparedness and monitoring. However, multi-risks are rarely considered and there is still increasing vulnerability due to the expansion of informal settlements. The risk management is characterized by an imbalanced distribution of financial resources and institutional capacities between the metropolitan regions and smaller municipalities, and by low public participation and hardly community-based approaches. The paper underlines the importance for more qualitative, in-depth studies on the root causes of disaster risk which could complement the global monitoring which is very much focused on quantitative data and shows inconsistency between input and output indicators.

Keywords: disaster risk; vulnerability; monitoring; risk assessment; disaster management; UN-ISDR; SDGs (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1366/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1366/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1366-:d:488761

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().