Votre recherche

Purpose Disaster risk reduction is of prime importance in informal settlements in the Global South, where several forms of vulnerability coexist. Policy and official programmes, however, rarely respond to the needs and expectations of citizens and local leaders living in these settlements. Even though these agents constantly attempt to reduce risks in their own way, we know very little about their activities, motivations and effective impact on risk reduction. Here we seek to conceptualize bottom-up initiatives to better grasp their origins, limitations and success. Design/methodology/approach Through a four-year action-research project in Colombia, Cuba and Chile, we theorize about the production of change by local agents. Through detailed case studies we explored the activism of 17 local leaders. Through narrative analysis we studied their motivations and explanations. Finally, by documenting 22 initiatives, we revealed effective changes in space. Findings In the face of risk and disasters, residents and leaders in informal settings engaged in symbolic, physical and social spaces of interaction. Their actions were guided by trust, emotions, time cycles and activism. Local agency was justified by narratives about risk and climate change that differ from those of authorities and scholars. Research limitations/implications There is still limited understanding of bottom-up initiatives in informal settings. It is crucial to conceptualize their origins, limitations and success. The focus on three specific countries necessitates further research for broader applicability and understanding. Practical implications A better comprehension of bottom-up actions is crucial for informing policies and programmes aimed at reducing risk in informal settings. Stakeholders must recognize the political, social and cultural roles of these actions for more impactful climate action. Originality/value We borrow Simon’s concept of “artefact” to introduce the notion of “Artefacts of Disaster Risk Reduction”, providing insights into the multifaceted nature of bottom-up initiatives. We also emphasize the simultaneous political and phenomenological character of these actions, contributing to a deeper understanding of their origins and impact.

Abstract The Paris Agreement made net zero emissions a global target. In response, net zero carbon building standards have proliferated, making net zero a popular target for buildings. But to meaningfully contribute to global decarbonization efforts, net zero standards and the organizations who promote them, must be deemed legitimate. Given the building industry’s reputation for being highly fragmented and slow to change, how has this legitimacy been constructed? What are the implications of this legitimation process? This article seeks to answer these questions by exploring the narratives used by the World Green Building Council (WGBC) to legitimate Net Zero Carbon Buildings (NZCB) from 2015 to 2021. Our analysis is based on over 100 documents produced by the WGBC and 22 interviews with WGBC and Green Building Council representatives, policymakers, and industry actors. Results reveal six main storylines adopted by the WGBC to extend the legitimacy of sustainable green building movement actors to the new net zero governance space. This legitimation process allows the WGBC to develop and implement net zero standards quickly, but also creates tensions between efficiency and procedural integrity, potential and proven results, corporate and collective value. While NZCB are here to stay, these tensions highlight barriers to their wide-scale adoption and question their ability to deliver an economically viable, socially just, environmental, net zero transition.

Abstract When the Syrian war erupted in 2011, the Lebanese government withdrew from managing the influx of Syrian refugees. Three years later, Lebanon’s Council of Ministers set new regulations for Syrians with the purpose of reducing access to territory and persuading refugees to leave the country. This article analyses the reasons for and the outcomes of Lebanon’s response to the refugee crisis before and after 2014. It then examines, through a qualitative exploratory approach and based on two longitudinal case studies, the impact of Lebanese regulations. In both cases, the so-called ‘temporary gatherings’ became permanent settlements beyond the government’s control. The government’s strategy backfired: in attempting to avoid ghettos, it created them. We conclude that when refugee situations become protracted, most efforts aimed at excluding refugees fail. Excluding refugees increases their vulnerability and reduces their chances of repatriation or resettlement. To prevent this, we argue that hosting policies must lead to the temporary integration of refugees within urban systems and public institutions.

Purpose Few people living in informal settlements in the Global South spontaneously claim that they are “resilient” or “adapting” to disaster risk or climate change. Surely, they often overcome multiple challenges, including natural hazards exacerbated by climate change. Yet their actions are increasingly examined through the framework of resilience, a notion developed in the North, and increasingly adopted in the South. To what extent eliminate’ do these initiatives correspond to the concepts that scholars and authorities place under the resilience framework? Design/methodology/approach Three longitudinal case studies in Yumbo, Salgar and San Andrés (Colombia) serve to investigate narratives of disaster risks and responses to them. Methods include narrative analysis from policy and project documents, presentations, five workshops, six focus groups and 24 interviews. Findings The discourse adopted by most international scholars and local authorities differs greatly from that used by citizens to explain risk and masks the politics involved in disaster reduction and the search for social justice. Besides, narratives of social change, aspirations and social status are increasingly masked in disaster risk explanations. Tensions are also concealed, including those regarding the winners and losers of interventions and the responsibilities for disaster risk reduction. Originality/value Our findings confirm previous results that have shown that the resilience framework contributes to “depoliticize” the analysis of risk and serves to mask and dilute the responsibility of political and economic elites in disaster risk creation. But they also show that resilience fails to explain the type of socioeconomic change that is required to reduce vulnerabilities in Latin America.

Purpose Driven by the New Urban Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals, decision makers have been striving to reorientate policy debates towards the aspiration of achieving urban resilience and monitoring the effectiveness of adaptive measures through the implementation of standardised indicators. Consequently, there has been a rise of indicator systems measuring resilience. This paper aims to argue that the ambition of making cities resilient does not always make them less vulnerable, more habitable, equitable and just. Design/methodology/approach Using an inductive policy analysis of ISO standard 37123:2019 “Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for resilient cities”, the authors examine the extent to which the root causes of risks are being addressed by the urban resilience agenda. Findings The authors show that the current standardisation of resilience fails to adequately address the political dimension of disaster risk reduction, reducing resilience to a management tool and missing the opportunity to address the socio-political sources of risks. Originality/value Such critical analysis of the Standard is important as it moves away from a hazard-centric approach and, instead, permits to shed light on the socio-political processes of risk creation and to adopt a more nuanced and sensitive understanding of urban characteristics and governance mechanisms.