Nakasu, T; Bula-Or, R; Anantsuksomsri, S; Duangkaew, S; Prathumchai, K; Positlimpakul, K and Kawasaki, A (2022) Measuring capacities and protecting communities: Strengthening regional resilience in the flooded industrial area in Thailand. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 13(2), pp. 163-179. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to measure the capacities and identify the vulnerabilities of the communities to contribute to their flood disaster risk management. Design/methodology/approach: Questionnaire-style surveys and interviews in the four target communities and 25 critical facilities have been used. Their flood experience is also collected to explore the practical risk management solutions and preserve those as their local assets. Findings: Findings show the capacity gaps among the target communities. For instance, the relatively populated urbanized communities tend to have high capacities. On the other hand, the not-so-populated farmer-based communities have low capacities, tending to focus more on droughts than floods, and lack scientific information. This research also identifies vulnerability groups and critical facility locations on the map with narratives. Originality/value: The findings enable the communities to clarify their updated capacities, examine the vulnerabilities, identify the risks with possible hazard information and guide them to cope with flood risk to protect them with self, mutual and public help. This study can contribute to other industrial parks/estates in Thailand and anywhere in the world as an insightful reference to build resilient industrial complex areas.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | 2011 flood; capability; capacity; disaster response; industrial area; local community; vulnerability |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, vulnerability, strengthening, methodology, narrative, survey, capacity gap, disaster risk, interview, drought, risk management, Thailand, disaster response |
| Subjects: | risk assessment, data collection methods, structural engineering, management, research methods, Geography, qualitative and interpretive research, financial risk, emergency and crisis management, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Sustainability, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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