Advertisement

Setting a Public Policy Agenda for Disaster Research in India

  • Krishna S. VatsaEmail author
Chapter
  • 4 Downloads
Part of the Disaster Studies and Management book series (DSDM)

Abstract

In India, public policy in disaster management can benefit significantly through an active research and education programme. An increasing exposure to disaster risks in recent decades has posed a serious challenge for public policies and institutions dealing with disaster management. As many higher education institutions are now offering academic programmes in disaster management, support for disaster research is necessary for growth and enrichment of the discipline as well as for maintaining its relevance for practice. The paper identifies several areas where research could influence government policies and programmes, and other stakeholders’ participation. An active research programme needs to be supported through a regular funding window for disaster research. It could also be encouraged through doctoral programmes, public agencies’ support for research and small grants. These steps would narrow the divide between academics and practitioners in the area of disaster management. Academic institutions in India need to encourage a multidisciplinary approach to disaster management and facilitate the sharing of knowledge across disciplines. In addition, there is a need to pay greater attention to the methodology of disaster research, including its qualitative aspects.

References

  1. Agarwal, B. (1990). Social security and the family: Coping with seasonality and calamity in rural India. Journal of Peasant Studies, 17(3), 341–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, W. A., & Mattingly, S. (1991). Future directions. In T. E. Drabek & G. J. Hoetmer (Eds.), Emergency management: Principles and practice for local government (pp. 311–335). Washington D.C.: International City Management Association.Google Scholar
  3. Aromar, R. (2008). Evidence and policy lessons on the link between disaster risk and poverty in Asia: Summary of regional studies. UNDP Regional Centre Bangkok. Available at http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/background-papers/documents/Chap3/Asia-overview/Revi-Asia-Case-Study-Report.pdf.
  4. Bhatia, S. C., Kumar, M. R., & Gupta, H. K. (1999). A probabilistic seismic hazard map of India and adjoining regions. Annali di Geofisica, 42(6), 1153–1164.Google Scholar
  5. Blanchard, B. W. (2005). Emergency management higher education project presentation. Available at http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/downloads/highedbrief_course2.pdf.
  6. Gupta, H. K., Rastogi, B. K., Mohan, I., et al. (1998). An investigation into the Latur earthquake of September 29, 1993 in southern India. Tectonophysics, 287, 299–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoogeveen, H. (2000). Risk and insurance by the poor in developing nations. In A. Kreimer & M. Arnold (Eds.), Managing disaster risk in emerging economies. Disaster risk management Series No. 2 (pp. 103–128.). Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  8. Jain, S. K., & Nigam, N. C. (2000). historical developments and current status of earthquake engineering in India. Available at http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/readings/12WCEE_2000.pdf.
  9. Kale, V. (2009). Research on floods in India. Available at www.iypeinsa.org/updates-09/art-7.pdf.
  10. Murty, C. V. R., Greene, M., Jain, S. K. et al. (2005). Earthquake rebuilding in Gujarat, India. An EERI recovery reconnaissance report. Oakland: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.Google Scholar
  11. Narula, P. L., Shome, S. K., & Murty, B. S. R. (Eds.) (1996). Killari earthquake, 30 September 1993 (p. 282). Geological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  12. Neal, D. (2000). Feedback from the field, developing degree programs in disaster management: Some reflections and observations. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. November. 18(3), 417–437. Available at http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/edu/neal.pdf.
  13. Nikolic-Brzev, S., Greene, M., Krimgold, F., & Seeber, L. (1999). Lessons learned over time, innovative earthquake recovery in India. Learning from earthquake series (vol II). Oakland: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.Google Scholar
  14. O’Hare, G. (2001). Hurricane 07B in the Godavari Delta, Andhra Pradesh, India: Vulnerability, mitigation and the spatial impact. The Geographic Journal, 167(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
  15. Oyola-Yemaiel, A., & Wilson, J. (n.d). Social science hazard/disaster research: Its legacy for emergency management higher education. The future of emergency management. Available at: http://www.training.fema.gov.
  16. Roy, S., & Rao, R. U. M. (1999). Geothermal investigations in the 1993 Latur earthquake area, Deccan volcanic province, India. Tectonophysics, 306, 237–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. UNDP. (2009). Kosi floods 2008. How we coped! What we need? Perception survey on impact and recovery strategies. New Delhi.Google Scholar
  18. World Bank. (2006). India inclusive growth and service delivery: Building on India’s success, a development policy review by the World Bank. 29 May 2006. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOUTHASIAEXT/Resources/DPR_FullReport.pdf.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UNDPNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations