This topic contains 4 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by Liliana Tincu (Ungheni District) 2 years, 8 months ago.
30 April 2016 at 09:57 #8892
The EU guideline for risk assessment mentions different potential “societal functions” that could be the main focus areas of disaster risk management. What societal functions do you use on local level?30 April 2016 at 10:05 #8896
In The Netherlands we have defined six so-called ‘vital interests of the society’ that are considered in the regional risk assessment of the 25 Safety Regions. The first five of them are also used for the National Risk Assessment.
1. Territorial security, defined as the actual or functional loss of use of parts of the Dutch territory for a longer period of time. Functional loss is mainly deemed to mean the loss of the use of buildings, homes, infrastructures and agricultural land.
2. Physical safety, defined as the disruption of the functioning of the people of the Netherlands. This impact is measured in terms of fatal injuries (immediate or premature death), seriously injured and chronically ill, physical suffering in terms of lack of basic necessities of life.
3. Economical security, defined as the disruption of the functioning of the Netherlands as an effective and efficient economy. This is measured in euro’s in terms of repair costs for damage sustained, costs for the disaster relief and loss of income.
4. Ecological security, defined as the disruption of the continued existence of the natural environment in and around the Netherlands. This is measured by the long-term impact on the environment and on nature (flora and fauna), in terms of harm to designated wildlife and scenery conservation areas (Natura 2000), and harm to the environment in the broad sense.
5. Social and political stability, defined as the disruption of the continuing existence of a social climate in which individuals can function undisturbed and groups of people can live together peacefully within the framework of the Dutch democratic constitutional state and shared values. The impact is measured by means of 3 criteria: disruption to everyday life; violation of the local and regional democratic system; and social psychological impact (public rage and anxiety).
6. Safety of cultural heritage, defined as the disruption of the continued existence of the physical remains of the past that are valued by society because of collective memories, national identity, scientific research and/or education of future generations. The value of cultural heritage is explicitly separated from the commercial value. The value instead is measured in terms of uniqueness, loss of national identity, limited possibilities for resto-ration and importance as source for science and education.27 May 2016 at 14:54 #9980
Åshild Steinberg Holmen (Stavanger)
We use these community values (samfunnsverdier):
1. Life and health
2. Nature and environment
4. Social stability
6. Cultural values
These 5 values have been derived from the national methodology in Norway. For Stavanger we have left out national value number 5: national management capabilities and territorial control.15 September 2016 at 17:44 #9979
Manuela Campoli (Regione Emilia-Romagna)
In Forlì we have discussed the societal functions with the local working group. We have compared the approach from the Netherlands, Germany, Norway and the EU risk assessment guideline and the Sendai Framework. We have decided to use 5 societal functions:
1. Human impact
2. Economic impact
3. Environmental impact
4. Cultural heritage impact
5. Political and social impact23 November 2016 at 11:05 #9984
Liliana Tincu (Ungheni District)
Our working group has selected four impact types:
Human impact (negative impact of a disaster on population)
Economic impact (quantification of material and economic losses generated by the occurence of risk phenomenon)
Environmental impact (refers to the area affected by a risk event)
Social and political impact (refers to the persons who cannot make usual family, community, social activities as a result of risk event)