Salvaraji, L.; Toha, H. R.; Mohd Aris, N.; Hanafi, N. S.; Kumareswaran, S.; Abd Razak, M. F. and Ibrahim, M. F. (2026) A community-based disaster risk management framework for chemical emergency preparedness in Johor, Malaysia. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 17(3), pp. 389-405. ISSN 1759-5908
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) framework is to enhance community resilience in Johor by empowering residents as self-reliant first responders. It aims to provide locals with the necessary knowledge and resources for self-sufficiency during initial disaster phases, while establishing robust communication and coordination protocols with multiple agencies. By synchronizing local action with formal emergency services, the framework intends to create a seamless, multilevel response system that minimizes vulnerability during the critical onset of a crisis. Design/methodology/approach – This study employed a Participatory Action Research design within a CBDRM framework in four local communities in Johor Bahru, Malaysia from 2019 to 2023. By synthesizing administrative records with qualitative experiential insights, the methodology facilitated "bottom-up" knowledge production through participant observation and group discussions. The process followed four iterative cycles – preparation, risk assessment, planning and validation. Finally, a SWOT analysis evaluated implementation, addressing systemic barriers to ensure the framework's replicability and transferability for future initiatives. Findings – Findings indicate that Johor's CBDRM framework successfully institutionalized community participation within public health preparedness. Collaborative risk mapping and simulation drills improved operational readiness and cross-sector trust. A SWOT analysis revealed that while bottom-up design fostered significant self-reliance, funding constraints and infrastructure gaps remain critical barriers. Overall, the study demonstrates that aligning local knowledge with formal agency protocols creates a scalable, resilient model capable of bridging the coordination gap during the initial phases of a disaster. Originality/value – This study offers a novel contribution by institutionalizing a CBDRM framework specifically within a public health system to manage complex chemical and technological hazards. Unlike traditional models focused solely on natural disasters, this research demonstrates the feasibility of codesigning localized response protocols for industrial risks. By integrating a structured SWOT analysis with participatory digital mapping, the study provides a unique, scalable methodology for bridging the coordination gap between grassroots residents and formal emergency agencies, establishing a replicable blueprint for multi-hazard resilience in rapidly industrializing regions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cbdrm; community resilience; disaster risk management; emergency response plan; multiagency collaboration |
| Index terms: | coordination, implementation, agency, risk assessment, mapping, public health, local knowledge, natural disaster, emergency response plan, methodology, disaster risk, Malaysia, action research, validation, funding, observation, community-based, community participation, community resilience, collaboration, vulnerability, emergency preparedness |
| Subjects: | sociology, data collection methods, social equity, research methods, management, safety engineering, Geography, contractual arrangements, environmental health, financial risk, environmental hazards, health safety and environment, professional development, communities and social development, spatial and geospatial analysis, participation process, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Research Practice, Information Management, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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