Periodic Reporting for period 2 - CARISMAND (Culture And RISkmanagement in Man-made And Natural Disasters)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2017-04-01 al 2018-09-30
CARISMAND aims to deal with issues of preparedness, response to disasters and after-crisis recovery which are, inevitably, influenced by the cultural background of individuals and the society they live in. Cultural factors play an important role in determining the way people respond to stress, engage in crisis management and accept disaster relief in an emergency. Disaster management that is aware, respects, and makes use of local cultural aspects will not only be more effective but, will also improve the community’s disaster coping capacities.
CARISMAND is setting out to:
Objective 1: provide a broad multi-disciplinary overview of existing knowledge about the cultural factors that may shape and influence citizens’ risk perceptions, emotions, and risk behaviour in the context of man-made, natural and technical disasters, and establish a sound theoretical basis for improving disaster policies and procedures.
Objective 2: To provide a detailed gap analysis between current legal frameworks, policies, regulations and actual practices across different European countries regarding the inclusion of cultural aspects in the disaster management cycle, and identify best-practice examples and the structural potential to implement them in other locations.
Objective 3: To identify how disaster risk communication itself is embedded in culture – including the role of the media in risk communication – and which cultural factors within disaster management organisations influence the effectiveness of professional management and response.
Objective 4: To explore the possibilities and current practices of how cultural aspects can strengthen the ability of citizens and communities to prepare for disaster situations, respond efficiently and accelerate recovery processes, proposing recommendations for disaster managers on how cultural values can be used for citizen empowerment.
Objective 5: To analyse citizens’ uptake – or rejection – of different technologies in disaster preparation, response, and recovery, exploring how different technology acceptance cultures can contribute to both successful disaster management and the enhancement of citizens’ coping strategies.
Objective 6: To develop over the project’s life-time an active feedback-loop between disaster management stakeholders and citizens that can be institutionalised. This will establish, test and refine solutions for culturally-informed best practices in disaster management and benefit from a wide cross-sectional knowledge transfer.
Objective 7: To develop a “formal” toolkit for disaster management stakeholders, as well as a knowledge base that is “mapping” culture in the context of disaster and can be used by disaster managers in their everyday practice as well as by interested citizens for awareness, information and empowerment purposes.
The innovative approach of CARISMAND places at its very core the continuous information exchange with and between disaster management stakeholders and citizens, through three Stakeholder Assemblies and six large-scale Citizen Summits in different European locations.
CARISMAND is setting out to:
Objective 1: provide a broad multi-disciplinary overview of existing knowledge about the cultural factors that may shape and influence citizens’ risk perceptions, emotions, and risk behaviour in the context of man-made, natural and technical disasters, and establish a sound theoretical basis for improving disaster policies and procedures.
Objective 2: To provide a detailed gap analysis between current legal frameworks, policies, regulations and actual practices across different European countries regarding the inclusion of cultural aspects in the disaster management cycle, and identify best-practice examples and the structural potential to implement them in other locations.
Objective 3: To identify how disaster risk communication itself is embedded in culture – including the role of the media in risk communication – and which cultural factors within disaster management organisations influence the effectiveness of professional management and response.
Objective 4: To explore the possibilities and current practices of how cultural aspects can strengthen the ability of citizens and communities to prepare for disaster situations, respond efficiently and accelerate recovery processes, proposing recommendations for disaster managers on how cultural values can be used for citizen empowerment.
Objective 5: To analyse citizens’ uptake – or rejection – of different technologies in disaster preparation, response, and recovery, exploring how different technology acceptance cultures can contribute to both successful disaster management and the enhancement of citizens’ coping strategies.
Objective 6: To develop over the project’s life-time an active feedback-loop between disaster management stakeholders and citizens that can be institutionalised. This will establish, test and refine solutions for culturally-informed best practices in disaster management and benefit from a wide cross-sectional knowledge transfer.
Objective 7: To develop a “formal” toolkit for disaster management stakeholders, as well as a knowledge base that is “mapping” culture in the context of disaster and can be used by disaster managers in their everyday practice as well as by interested citizens for awareness, information and empowerment purposes.
The innovative approach of CARISMAND places at its very core the continuous information exchange with and between disaster management stakeholders and citizens, through three Stakeholder Assemblies and six large-scale Citizen Summits in different European locations.
Three main lines of work were carried out in the project:
(a) a ‘status quo’ analysis consisting of a thorough mapping of actors, systems, processes and policies in disaster management current standing in the countries represented by the CARSIMAND consortium members (WP2); an extensive literature review of risk perception and ‘risk cultures’ (WP4); an initial identification of cultural factors that influence the take-up and use by citizens of technologies used as part of disaster response (WP3); an identification of citizens’ rights in times of disasters (WP6); the role of citizen empowerment strategies as documented in literature (WP7) and a reflection on risk communication and the role of the media in risk communication (WP8).
(b) stakeholders and citizens engagement: three stakeholders meetings were held in this period in Bucharest, Romania, in Rome, Italy and Lisbon, Portugal bringing together more than 180 stakeholders in each event and six citizen summits in Bucharest, Malta, Frankfurt, Rome, Lisbon and Utrecht bringing more than 120 citizens for each event. This allowed the project to better understand and verify findings in the status quo analysis against the everyday realities faced by the stakeholders and citizens.
(c) the development of the CARISMAND Toolkit and Cultural Map. These resources were validated in the CARISMAND Final Conference in Florence with more than 120 practitioners and are made available on the project website. These are meant to support citizens and disaster practitioners.
(a) a ‘status quo’ analysis consisting of a thorough mapping of actors, systems, processes and policies in disaster management current standing in the countries represented by the CARSIMAND consortium members (WP2); an extensive literature review of risk perception and ‘risk cultures’ (WP4); an initial identification of cultural factors that influence the take-up and use by citizens of technologies used as part of disaster response (WP3); an identification of citizens’ rights in times of disasters (WP6); the role of citizen empowerment strategies as documented in literature (WP7) and a reflection on risk communication and the role of the media in risk communication (WP8).
(b) stakeholders and citizens engagement: three stakeholders meetings were held in this period in Bucharest, Romania, in Rome, Italy and Lisbon, Portugal bringing together more than 180 stakeholders in each event and six citizen summits in Bucharest, Malta, Frankfurt, Rome, Lisbon and Utrecht bringing more than 120 citizens for each event. This allowed the project to better understand and verify findings in the status quo analysis against the everyday realities faced by the stakeholders and citizens.
(c) the development of the CARISMAND Toolkit and Cultural Map. These resources were validated in the CARISMAND Final Conference in Florence with more than 120 practitioners and are made available on the project website. These are meant to support citizens and disaster practitioners.
There are four impacts of the CARISMAND project:
Impact 1: Increased effectiveness of those who respond to disasters –Having a grounded knowledge of which cultural factors influence and shape disaster risk perception, emotions, and behaviour of victims in disaster situation, and an understanding how disaster risk communication itself is affected by cultural aspects will increase the effectiveness of those who respond to disasters.
Impact 2: A more resilient society by ensuring that cities are better prepared for and able to recover from emergencies: As socio-economic, environmental and cultural contexts are inherently entwined, achieving an increased resilience of societies requires a holistic approach that does not single out individual factors but acknowledges and explores their connectedness. Therefore, CARISMAND embeds the analysis of how cultural factors can both reinforce perceived and actual vulnerabilities as well as benefit individual and communal empowerment into the broader societal context.
Impact 3: Better meeting the needs of various cultures during disaster relief, thus improving reaction time and reducing fatalities, in order to provide disaster relief.
Impact 4: Providing a framework for improving disasters’ policies and practices by taking into consideration every disaster victim’s cultural and personal uniqueness.
Impact 1: Increased effectiveness of those who respond to disasters –Having a grounded knowledge of which cultural factors influence and shape disaster risk perception, emotions, and behaviour of victims in disaster situation, and an understanding how disaster risk communication itself is affected by cultural aspects will increase the effectiveness of those who respond to disasters.
Impact 2: A more resilient society by ensuring that cities are better prepared for and able to recover from emergencies: As socio-economic, environmental and cultural contexts are inherently entwined, achieving an increased resilience of societies requires a holistic approach that does not single out individual factors but acknowledges and explores their connectedness. Therefore, CARISMAND embeds the analysis of how cultural factors can both reinforce perceived and actual vulnerabilities as well as benefit individual and communal empowerment into the broader societal context.
Impact 3: Better meeting the needs of various cultures during disaster relief, thus improving reaction time and reducing fatalities, in order to provide disaster relief.
Impact 4: Providing a framework for improving disasters’ policies and practices by taking into consideration every disaster victim’s cultural and personal uniqueness.