Earth and Environmental Sciences

The benefit-cost-ratio (BCR), used in cost-benefit analysis (CBA), is an indicator that attempts to summarize the overall value for money of a project. Disaster costs continue to rise and the demand has increased to demonstrate the economic benefit of disaster risk reduction (DRR) to policy makers. This study compiles and compares original CBA case studies reporting DRR BCRs, without restrictions as to hazard type, location, scale, or other parameters. Many results were identified supporting the economic effectiveness of DRR, however, key limitations were identified, including a lack of: sensitivity analyses, meta-analyses which critique the literature, consideration of climate change, evaluation of the duration of benefits, broader consideration of the process of vulnerability, and potential disbenefits of DRR measures. The studies demon- strate the importance of context for each BCR result. Recommendations are made regarding minimum criteria to consider when conducting DRR CBAs.

The overall aim of the TACTIC project (Tools, methods And training for CommuniTIes and society to better prepare for a Crisis; http:www.tacticproject.eu) is to increase preparedness to large-scale and cross-border disasters amongst communities and societies in Europe. To achieve this, TACTIC considers a range of studies on risk perception and preparedness in order to develop a participatory preparedness audit. The audit aims to enable communities to assess their motivations and capacities with regard to risk communication and education to prepare in a multi-hazard context. This current report presents findings from a literature review on risk perception and preparedness which spans floods, earthquakes, epidemics/pandemics, and terrorism, as well as discussions and feedback from experts in relevant fields. It aims to provide the underpinning evidence base for the project as a whole and as such has been shaped by the specific hazards to be examined and also key components of preparedness identified through an iterative process of literature reviews and discussion with experts.

ABSTRACT
Increasingly, citizens are being asked to take a more active role in disaster risk reduction (DRR), as decentralization of hazard governance has shifted greater responsibility for hazard preparedness actions onto individuals. Simultaneously, the taxonomy of hazards considered for DRR has expanded to include medical and social crises alongside natural hazards. Risk perception research emerged to support decision-makers with understanding how people characterize and evaluate different hazards to anticipate behavioral response and guide risk communication. Since its inception, the risk perception concept has been incorporated into many behavioral theories, which have been applied to examine preparedness for numerous hazard types. Behavioral theories have had moderate success in predicting or explaining preparedness behaviors; however, they are typically applied to a single hazard type and there is a gap in understanding which theories (if any) are suited for examining multiple hazard types simultaneously. This paper first reviews meta-analyses of behavioral theories to better understand performance. Universal lessons learnt are summarized for survey design. Second, theoretically based preparedness studies for floods, earthquakes, epidemics, and terrorism are reviewed to assess the conceptual requirements for a ‘multi-hazard’ preparedness approach. The development of an online preparedness self-assessment and learning platform is discussed.

It is unlikely that cost–benefit approaches will be effective in identifying investments that support gender equality without a relevant " social framing ". Criteria for a " social framing " are lacking, yet cost–benefit approaches often guide investment decisions for disaster risk and environmental management. Mainstream approaches typically do a poor job identifying and characterizing costs and benefits, and often fail to address distributive concerns (i.e., how costs and benefits may be distributed throughout society, to whom, etc.). Gender-blind investments may project responsibility for equality " problems " onto one sex, potentially augmenting gender inequalities and disaster risk. This article examines evidence from the gender, disaster, and development literature to identify distributive concerns and criteria for an equitable " social framing " for economic evaluations. Primary distributive concerns identified regard assumptions of women's homogeneity, agency, " active " participation, and the influence of customary practice and displacement on disaster vulnerability. The need for a " gender-responsive " " social framing " that considers the needs of men and women in relation to one another is evident. Second, cost–benefit studies focused on gender equality concerns are reviewed and the " social framing " is critiqued. Results show most studies are not " gender-responsive ". Women's health concerns, often exacerbated by disasters, are sidelined by assumptions regarding distributive concerns and reductive outcome measures.

Men, Masculinities and Disaster, edited by Elaine Enarson and Bob Pease, London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2016, ISBN: 9781138934177, 246 pp.

This edited volume builds on substantial insights from gender and disaster scholarship around the world, most of which has focused on women’s perspectives and women’s disadvantage, to explore in greater depth the diversity of men’s experiences during disasters, both from natural hazards or ‘human-made’ hazards. Employing lessons learned or identified from women’s studies, the work does not assume that men and masculinity are homogenous or stagnant categories. Rather, it illuminates how intersecting factors such as age, race, sexuality, ethnicity, class, and (dis)ability affect men during disasters in a variety of different social contexts – in the home, community, workplace, and institutions – and provides a better understanding of how exactly gender inequalities are (re)produced during disasters. Utilising research on men and masculinities undertaken during different types of disaster, and in different geographical locations, the influence of different social cultures and attitudes to risk is evidenced. This book additionally delivers timely new theoretical insights regarding gender-based violence, and the gendered nature of climate change impacts.

Limited free copies of full review available in the link corresponding to this post.

COVER Home Repair (COVER) is a non-profit organization, based in White River Junction, Vermont. They work with low-income homeowners in the Upper Valley to improve accessibility to their houses, lower their energy bills, and increase comfort levels. COVER’s building serves as office space, storage, and a second-hand home goods store. Their current historic building has several drawbacks, which include some of the same difficulties that they help local homeowners to combat: crippling energy bills and declining thermal comfort. In fact, COVER spent nearly $10,300 on energy in 2017. Given that every dollar COVER saves on energy goes to bettering the lives of Upper Valley residents, our group is dedicated to reducing the undue burden that the cost of energy places on the organization

Riparian zones are one of the most productive ecosystems in the world, but are at risk due to agricultural expansion and climate change. To maximize return on conservation investment in mixed-use landscapes, it is important to identify the minimum intact riparian forest buffer sizes to conserve riparian ecosystem services. The minimum riparian forest buffer width necessary to maintain tropical river water quality remains unclear, and there is little analysis of effective riparian buffer lengths. Also, in studies on the effect of land use on river water quality globally, there is little standardization in the area where land use is analyzed. Here, these challenges were addressed in the Osa Peninsula in southwestern Costa Rica. Water quality parameters and social variables were sampled at 194 locations across the region. For each sample, land use was calculated in nine different riparian buffer sizes and at the sampling location. Riparian forest cover had a positive effect on water quality parameters, while agricultural cover had a negative effect. The longer the length of the buffer considered, the greater the relative support for influencing water quality (1000 m > 500 m > 100 m). All buffer widths yielded similar support within each length class. These results indicate that length of riparian forest buffers, not width, drives their ability to conserve water quality. While wide and long riparian forests are ideal to maximize the protection of river water quality and other ecosystem services, in landscapes where that is impractical, the 15-m-wide riparian forest buffers that are supported by Costa Rican legislation could improve water quality, providing that they are at least 500 m long. The results also indicate the importance of methodological standardization in studies that monitor land use effects on water quality. The authors propose that studies in similar regions analyze land use in riparian zones 15-m-wide by 1000 m upstream. Conserving and restoring narrow, long riparian forest buffers could provide a rapid, economical management approach to balance agricultural production and water quality protection.