Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T06:31:45.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Analysis of Disaster Related International Consensus Frameworks 2015-2017: Implications for WADEM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2019

Frank Archer
Affiliation:
Monash University Disaster Resilience Initiative, Clayton, Australia
Caroline Spencer
Affiliation:
Monash University Disaster Resilience Initiative, Clayton, Australia
Dudley McArdle
Affiliation:
Monash University Disaster Resilience Initiative, Clayton, Australia
Suresh Pokharel
Affiliation:
Monash University Disaster Resilience Initiative, Clayton, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction:

Between 2015 and 2018, a number of influential disaster-related International Consensus Frameworks evolved.

Aim:

To locate these Frameworks and identify commonalities, potential interactions, and possible implications for WADEM.

Methods:

A targeted literature review and thematic analysis.

Results:

The review identified the following Frameworks: Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030; Sustainable Development Goals 2030 Agenda; Paris Climate Change Conference; WADEM Position Statement on Climate Change; World Humanitarian Summit; Core Humanitarian Standards; Sphere Handbook, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response; Habitat111 - the new Urban Agenda; Sphere Guidelines for Urban Disasters; Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities Project; New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants; Dhaka Declaration on Disability and Disaster Risk Management; WHO Emergency Medical Teams and Accreditation; WADEM’s Disaster Research and Evaluation Frameworks; ALNAP’s Evaluation of Humanitarian Action Guide; and Evidence Aid’s Use of Evidence in the Humanitarian Sector: A Practice Guide.

Discussion:

All Frameworks used substantial theoretical and/or evidence-based underpinnings, and evolved from structured processes. One subset had major political and government influences while others reflected applied, professional influences. A number of the Frameworks further evolved during 2017-18, providing indicators, international reporting, and interpretative guidelines. Common themes included a desire to improve the quantum and quality of science, evidence-based and accountability, use of Resilience as a conceptual framework, commonalities, and interactions between the new generation humanitarian, development concepts, and traditional disaster concepts, particularly in the global influence of climate change and greater urbanization. Other themes included new paradigms (e.g. international influence of Rockefeller’s Acute Shocks), Chronic Stressors concept, and the anchoring theme of the Sustainable Development Goals and capacity building. The ALNAP, Rockefeller, Sphere, and WADEM Evidence Aid Frameworks provide useful guidelines on how the objectives of these International Consensus Frameworks may be achieved and measured. All Frameworks have implications for the future direction of WADEM.

Type
Quality and Finance
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2019