Ahmed, I (2020) Considerations and principles for conducting a participatory capacity and vulnerability analysis (PCVA) for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 12(4), pp. 371-386. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: While there are many such toolkits on community-based participatory methods, the key considerations and principles of conducting a participatory capacity and vulnerability analysis (PCVA) are less covered, yet they are central to the effective conduct of a PCVA, the reason why this paper focuses on such issues. Design/methodology/approach: This paper is derived from a toolkit that was produced for Oxfam Australia. Disasters and climate change are major drivers of poverty and significantly affect the communities that development programs of Oxfam Australia aim to assist. Recognising the importance of building its organisational capacity to address these risks, Oxfam Australia initiated and commissioned the production of a PCVA toolkit to support disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation programs; the production of the toolkit was led by the author. The methodology of producing the toolkit consisted of discussions with experts and a review of similar toolkits. Findings: Details of the PCVA process and how to conduct one in a community setting are provided including PCVA concepts, briefing, logistics and management and principles of working with communities. Importantly, the different stages of conducting a PCVA are explained, and some selected tools are presented as illustrative examples. In conclusion, the importance of the PCVA considerations and principles are reaffirmed vis-à-vis the sensitivity and soft skills required in a low-income developing country setting. Originality/value: The participatory development approach, which the toolkit follows, has been widely advocated for the past few decades and most non-governmental organisations involved in community development espouse this approach. Consequently, a wide range of participatory development toolkits have been developed, many of which relate to disasters and climate change. The PCVA toolkit discussed in this paper draws on the repertoire of toolkits already available and used over a long time. Nonetheless, effort was given to assembling a range of tools that were most suitable for the purpose of this particular PCVA toolkit. Instead of focussing on the tools, which are available from the freely downloadable toolkit and available in the public domain, in this paper, the PCVA process and its main principles are explained, and the key considerations to carry out an effective PCVA is discussed. Perhaps even more than the actual tools, these considerations and an understanding of the PCVA principles are significant because they underpin the utilisation of the toolkit.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | capacity analysis; climate change; community-centred; developing country; disaster risk reduction; vulnerability analysis |
| Index terms: | community-based, developing country, community-centred, community development, program, methodology, vulnerability, toolkit, climate change, briefing, disaster risk reduction, poverty, Australia, adaptation, income, non-governmental organization, organizational capacity |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, scope management, climate science, user focus, political science, environmental hazards, communities and social development, sociology, community engagement, development economics, Geography, software systems, research methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Ethics, International Construction, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here