Multi-risk governance for natural hazards in Naples and Guadeloupe

Anna Scolobig (), Nadejda Komendantova, Anthony Patt, Charlotte Vinchon, Daniel Monfort-Climent, Mendy Begoubou-Valerius, Paolo Gasparini and Angela Ruocco

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, 2014, vol. 73, issue 3, 1523-1545

Abstract: Technical and institutional capacities are strongly related and must be jointly developed to guarantee effective natural risk governance. Indeed, the available technical solutions and decision support tools influence the development of institutional frameworks and disaster policies. This paper analyses technical and institutional capacities, by providing a comparative evaluation of governance systems in Italy and France. The focus is on two case studies: Naples and Guadeloupe. Both areas are exposed to multiple hazards, including earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, tsunamis, fires, cyclones, and marine inundations Cascade and conjoint effects such as seismic swarms triggered by volcanic activity have also been taken into account. The research design is based on a documentary analysis of laws and policy documents informed by semi-structured interviews and focus groups with stakeholders at the local level. This leads to the identification of three sets of governance characteristics that cover the key issues of: (1) stakeholders and governance level; (2) decision support tools and mitigation measures; and (3) stakeholder cooperation and communication. The results provide an overview of the similarities and differences as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the governance systems across risks. Both case studies have developed adequate decision support tools for most of the hazards of concern. Warning systems, and the assessment of hazards and exposure are the main strengths. While technical/scientific capacities are very well developed, the main weaknesses involve the interagency communication and cooperation, and the use and dissemination of scientific knowledge when developing policies and practices. The consequences for multi-risk governance are outlined in the discussion. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Keywords: Natural hazard governance; Technical and institutional capacities; Stakeholder cooperation and communication; Qualitative evaluation tool; Comparative analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11069-014-1152-1 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:spr:nathaz:v:73:y:2014:i:3:p:1523-1545

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11069

DOI: 10.1007/s11069-014-1152-1

Access Statistics for this article

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards is currently edited by Thomas Glade, Tad S. Murty and Vladimír Schenk

More articles in Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards from Springer, International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().