International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT

(IJDRM)
ISSN (printed edition) 2620-2662

ISSN (electronic edition) 2620-2786
SCIENTIFIC-PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY FOR DISASTER RISK
MANAGEMENT, BELGRADE, THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT
(IJDRM)
Vol. 1 • № 1
Belgrade, 2019
PUBLISHER
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management,
Belgrade, the Republic of Serbia
E-mail: disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com
Website - www.upravljanje-rizicima.com
EDITORIAL BOARD
Editor-in-Chief
Assist. Prof. Vladimir M. Cvetković, PhD, vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs

Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50,
11040 Belgrade, Serbia
International editorial board
Professor Rajib Shaw, PhD

Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Cam-
pus (SFC), Japan, shaw@sfc.keio.ac.jp.
Professor Kevin Ronan, PhD

Clinical Psychology School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, CQUniversity,
Rockhampton, Australia, k.ronan@cqu.edu.au.

Professor & Director, Naim Kapucu, PhD
School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida, 4364 Scorpius Street,
USA, kapucu@ucf.edu.

Full professor Eric Noji, MD, MPH, DTM&H(Lon), PhD
Distinguished University Professor and Senior Consultant in Emergency Medicine,
King Saud University Hospitals and College of Medicine, Washington, D.C., USA,
eric@eknoji.com.
Full Professor Igor Khripunov, PhD

Center for International Trade and Security School of Public and International Af-
faires University of Georgia in Athens (UGA) 120 Academic Building, Athens, GA
30602, USA, igokhrip@uga.edu.

Damon P. Coppola,
Disaster Management Specialist, Pacific Disaster Center, and Principal, Shoreline
Risk, Hawaii, USA, dcoppola@shorelinerisk.com.

Prof. Dr. Eng. Alexandru Ozunu, PhD
Dean of the Faculty of Environmental Science and Engineering, “Babeş-Bolyai” Uni-
versity, Romania, alexandru.ozunu@gmail.com.

Prof. Dr. Dimitar Dimitrov, PhD
Head of National and Regional Security Department, Dean of Faculty
‘Economics of Infrastructure’ at University of National and World Economy (UNWE),
Sofia, Bulgaria, dimdim@unwe.bg.

Assoc. Prof. Rositsa Velichkova, PhD
Department Hydroaerodynamics and Hydraulic machines,Technical university of
Sofia, 1000 Sofia, 8 Kl. Ohridski Ave, Bulgaria, rositsavelichkova@abv.bg.

Full Prof. Miroslav Vesković, PhD
European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Inter-institutional, International Re-
lations and Outreach, Brussels/Belgium, Miroslav.VESKOVIC@ec.europa.eu.

Assoc. Prof. Rita Mano, PhD
Department of Human Services, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa 31995,
Israel, ritamano@research.haifa.ac.il.

Assoc. Prof. Igal M. Shohet, PhD
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Structural Engineering, Beer-
sheba, Israel, igals@bgu.ac.il.

Assist. Prof. Blaz Komac, PhD
Head of the Department of natural hazards, Anton Melik Geographical Institute
ZRC SAZU, Slovenia, blaz@zrc-sazu.si.

Prof. Caroline Brassard, PhD
Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore, dr.cbrassard@gmail.com.

Prof. Lamiaa A Fiala, Mbbch, MPH, DrPH, MSc.Edu, PhD
Public Health & Preventive Medicine Community Medicine Dept. Faculty of Medi-
cine, Suez Canal University Ismailia, Egypt, lamiaafiala@yahoo.com.

Giulia Roder, PhD
Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, University of Padova,
Agripolis, viale dell’Università 16, 35020 Legnaro, Italy, giu.roder@gmail.com.

Assoc. Prof. Adem Ocal, PhD
Independent researcher, Ankara, 06500, Turkey, ocadem@gmail.com.

Assoc. Prof. Aleksandar Ivanov, PhD
Faculty of Security-Skopje, University of Bitola , Macedonia, akademec@gmail.com.
Juel RanaKutub
Faujdarhat Cadet College Faujdarhat, Sitakundu, Chittagong 4616, Bangladesh, juel-
rana63@yahoo.com.
Full Prof. Slavoljub Dragićević, PhD

University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski Trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade,
Serbia sasa@gef.bg.ac.rs.
Assist. Prof. Ivan Novković, PhD

University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski Trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade,
Serbia novkovic.ivan@gmail.com.
Full Prof. Stanimir Kostadinov, PhD

University of Belgrade Faculty of Forest, Kneza Viseslava 1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia,
stanimir.kostadinov@sfb.bg.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Vladimir Jakovljević, PhD

University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel-
grade, Serbia vjakov@fb.bg.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Marija Jevtic, MD, PhD

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Public Health of Vojvodina,
Serbia, marija.jevtic@uns.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Boban Milojković, PhD

Academy of Criminalistic and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196, Belgrade,
Serbia boban.milojkovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Želimir Kešetović, PhD

Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel-
grade, Serbia, zelimir.kesetovic@gmail.com.
Assoc. Prof. Jasmina Gačić, PhD

University of Belgrade Faculty of Geography, Studentski trg 3/III, 11000 Belgrade,
Serbia jgacic@orion.rs.
Assoc. Prof. Jovana Nikolov, PhD

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Phyiscs, Faculty of Sci-
ences University of Novi Sad, Serbia, jovana.nikolov@df.uns.ac.rs.
Full Prof. Srđan Milašinović, PhD
University of Criminal Investigation and Police Studies, Belgrade, Cara Dušana 196,
Belgrade, Serbia, srdjan.milasinovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Dragan Mlađan, PhD

Belgrade, Serbia, dragana.mladjan@kpa.edu.rs.
Prof. Dejan Bošković, PhD

Belgrade, Serbia, dejan.boskovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Full Prof. Aleksandra Ljuština, PhD

Belgrade, Serbia, dejan.boskovic@kpa.edu.rs.
Ana M. Petrović
Research Associate of the Geographical Institute „Jovan Cvijić“ of the Serbian Acad-
emy of Sciences and Arts
Marina Filipović, PhD candidate

University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Bel-
grade, Serbia fmarina@fb.bg.ac.rs.
Editorial secretary
Katarina Andrić
English Language Editor and Proof-Reader

Petar Marković
Printed by
Neven, Belgrade
Ordering:
Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Management
Belgrade, Serbia
Fax/faks: +381 (0)1 425 77 94
E-mail: disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com
PDF version of the journal

www.upravljanje-rizicima.com
Published twice a year

TABLE OF CONTENS
XUESONG GUO, NAIM CAPUCU

Examining Stakeholder Participation in Social Stability Risk Assessment for Mega Projects
using Network Analysis ��1
ALEKSANDRINA V. MAVRODIEVA, DYAH S. BUDIARTI, ZHOU YU, FEDERICO A. PASHA,

RAJIB SHAW
Governmental Incentivization for SMEs’ Engagement in Disaster Resilience
in Southeast Asia �� 32
ADEM OCAL
Natural Disasters in Turkey: Social and Economic Perspective �� 51
KUMIKO FUJITA, RAJIB SHAW

Preparing International Joint Project: use of Japanese flood hazard map in Bangladesh �� 62
VLADIMIR M. CVETKOVIĆ
Risk Perception of Building Fires in Belgrade �� 81
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-31 1
UDC: 005.35:005.334
005.311:519.852
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.1
Research article
Examining Stakeholder Participation in Social

Stability Risk Assessment for Mega Projects
using Network Analysis
Xuesong Guo 1, Naim Kapucu 2,*
1
School of Public Policy and Administration, Xi’an Jiaotong University Xi’an,
Shaanxi, P.R.China; guoxues1@163.com
2
School of Public Administration, University of Central Florida
Orlando, Florida, USA; kapucu@ucf.edu
* Correspondence: kapucu@ucf.edu
Received: 22 October 2018; Accepted: 3 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: The paper examines stakeholder participation of social stability risk assessment
for mega projects in China from a network perspective, with participatory decision-mak-
ing in a political system discussed. From this analysis, we developed and tested hypoth-
eses on stakeholder participation in social stability risk assessment. Using data obtained
through content analysis, we established network on each compulsory procedure in so-
cial stability risk assessment to test the hypotheses. Additional impactful factors were
discussed using singular value decomposition method in the study. We also provided
practical implications and suggestions for policy and practice in the article.
Keywords: stakeholder participation; social stability risk assessment; affiliation networks;

network analysis.
1. Introduction
Stakeholder participation is a fundamental and critical stage of decisoion-mak-

ing for mega projects (Erkul et al., 2016). In China, various mega projects have
been carried out (Liu et al., 2016b), and many conflicts occurred due to ineffec-
tive stakeholder engagement (Liu et al., 2016a; Moore & Warren, 2006). Recent
examples include Nu River Dam, Yuanmingyuan Lake Drainage scheme, and
Dalian Paraxylene Projects (Liu et al., 2016a; Moore & Warren, 2006). Chinese
government began implementing Social Stability Risk Assessment (SSRA) on
mega project to provide a framework within which more stakeholder participa-
tion can take place (Dong, 2011; Li et al., 2012b, c; Shen, 2014; Zhang & Tong,
2015). However, controversies on effectiveness of stakeholder participation exist
(Ma & Du, 2014). Some public representatives note limited opportunities to get
involved in SSRA (Liu, 2016) and some critics state the assessment processes are
2 International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-31
subject to manipulation by powerful government enterprises, giving grassroots

representatives little or no voice (Liao & Liu, 2016; Lu, 2016; Xu, 2013).
The purpose of this research is to examine stakeholder participation in
SSRA, building on and contributing to participatory decision making scholar-
ship. Although the issues on this topic have been discussed extensively (Black-
stock et al., 2007; Lawrence, 2006; Reed, 2008; Tatenhove & Leroy, 2003), stake-
holder participation in SSRA has not been analyzed until relatively recently (Liu
& Li, 2013; Liu et al., 2016b). Specially, stakeholder participation in China might
be different from that developed within the context of western democracies. In
this study, we test the hypotheses on stakeholder participation in SSRA through
network analysis, as it provides substantial contribution to methodology of stake-
holder participation assessment.
2. Literature Review & Background
Although benefits of stakeholder participation on conflicts identification, mitiga-

tion, and resolution (Brunsting et al., 2011; Li et al., 2012a; Poetz, 2011; Yang &
Pandey, 2011) are confirmed (Reed, 2007; Reed et al., 2007), effective stakehold-
er participation is still challenging, especially in a political seting in a develop-
ing-nation (Bryson et al., 2015; Fazey et al., 2010; Thabrew & Ries, 2009). Some
attempts were made to discuss the effectiveness of stakeholder participation in
policy and decision making (Bardach, 1998; Beierle, 2002; Blackstock et al., 2007;
Brody, 2003), with some evaluation methods proposed (Beierle, 2002; Rowe &
Frewer, 2000). Chess and Purcell (1999) evaluated the extent to which ‘‘process’’
and ‘‘outcome’’ goals were achieved. Blackstock et al. (2007) argued that the eval-
uation should be participatory with stakeholders selecting and applying the eval-
uation criteria. Koontz (2005) evaluated the extent to which stakeholder partic-
ipation influenced the local farm preservation policy. Sultana and Abeyasekera
(2008) claimed participation led to greater uptake of conservation measures and
fewer conflicts. Beierle (2002) concluded that more intensive participatory pro-
cesses are more likely to yield higher quality decisions. Scholars also stated that
the criteria should be satisfied for effective stakeholder participation (Fiorino,
1990; Smith et al., 1997), and developed various evaluation criteria (Brody, 2003;
Chase et al., 2004). Criteria-based evaluation is undoubtedly valuable (Rowe &
Frewer, 2004a), but challenges still exist. Most of the criteria are procedural rath-
er than substantive (Middendorf & Busch, 1997) in that they relate to what makes
for effective processes rather than how to measure effective outcomes.
On the other hand, networks have been used as an alternative perspective
for stakeholder analysis and organizational coordination (Aaltonen et al., 2010;
Abbasi & Kapucu, 2016; Cameron et al., 2008; Prell et al., 2009). From this per-
spective, Gattringer et al. (2014) discussed collaboration among stakeholders.

Pira et al. (2016) presented an Agent-Based Model to mimic participatory de-
cision-making process where stakeholders, linked by social network, exchange
opinions in order to find a shared and transitive collective decision.
3. Theoretical Insights and Hypotheses
In the research, stakeholder participation is defined as a process where stakehold-

ers (individuals, groups, and organizations) take active roles in making decisions
affecting them (Rowe & Frewer, 2004b; Wandersman, 1981). Since stakeholders
have different perceptions on the problem definition, policy outcmes, and poten-
tial solutions (Kapucu, & Garayev, 2011; Koppenjan & Klijn, 2010), collabora-
tions and coordinations are required, leading to the need for stakeholders to op-
erate in the context of networks (Marin & Mayntz, 1991; Marsh & Rhodes, 1992).
In Chinese governance structure , decision-making on mega project also re-
quires coordination among various stakeholders (agencies dispersed over various
government levels and sectors, state-owned companies, private business, citizens,
and activists) in interactive processes (Li et al., 2012b, c; Mertha, 2009; Weber &
Khademian, 2008). Network is defined as “structures of interdependence involving
multiple organizations or parts therof ” (O’Toole, 1997). Network analysis can be ap-
plied in examining the stakeholder participation in decision making as a theoretical
framework as well as a method (Kapucu et al., 2014; Koppenjan & Klijn, 2010). The
network perspective, despite cultural and institutional differences, was applied in this
study as a framework (Liu et al., 2016a; Zheng et al., 2010). Social Network Analysis
(SNA) was applied as method for stakeholder engagement analysis (Borgatti et al.,
2012; Harshaw & Tindall, 2005) in the context of SSRA, as this method can test the
hypotheses and facilitate discussions on improving stakeholder participation.
According to the guidance released by central authorities (General Office of
Chinese Communist Party Central Committee, 2015), the procedures for stake-
holder participation in SSRA can be structured in early program development
and late implementation stages. The early stage includes the following three pro-
cedures:
(1) Organization and Coordination: Stakeholders (or their representatives) pre-
pare the propsals (issues) for discussion, determine the agenda and involved rep-
resentatives collaboratively.
(2) Collaborative Decision: Stakeholders (or their representatives) determine
the level of social stability risk and make decision (the mega project can be ap-
proved or not) accordingly.
(3) Supervision and Guidance: Stakeholders (or their representatives) super-
vise and guide the participatory processes to ensure the assessment is conducted
legitimately.
The one procedure included in late stage is Accountability. Accountability is
used as a feedback procedure, stakeholders (or their representatives) observe
outcomes of the decisions, learn lessons and identify the organizations or indi-
viduals who should be held accountable in case of wrong decision (see Figure 1).
Input Political System Output
Demands Supervision and Guidance
Decisioons
Support Policies
Organization and Coordination Collaborative Decision
Feedback
Accountability
Figure 1. Process of Stakeholder Participation in SSRA
In the figure above, we view the successive procedures as political system.

According to Easton (1979), the system should manage to maintain a steady flow
of support. The demands and supports are transformed into issues through Or-
ganization and Coordination. Then the issues are discussed through specific proce-
dures (Collaborative Decision, Supervision and Guidance) to form authoritative deci-
sions. More importantly, dynamic decision-making tasks arise during project life
circle and a sequential decisions are required to make. Each decision affects the
circumstances or state in which later decisions are made (Mackinnon & Wearing,
1985). Therefore, the decision tasks have the following characteristics: (a) they
require a series of decisions rather than a single decision, (b) these decisions are
interdependent and (c) the environment changes as a consequence of both the
decision-makers actions as well as other external factors (Edwards, 1962; Erkul
et al., 2016). So, such tasks involve ‘‘circular causality’’ (Diehl & Sterman, 1995).
Therefore, a feedback loop is involved and play important role, ensuring that the
decision can be adjusted to adapt with “environment” (Easton, 1957).
To achieve effective and efficient feedbacks, stakeholder participation in SSRA
should be holistic and continual throughout the whole participatory process
(Reed et al., 2006; Stewart et al., 1984). So, stakeholder participation is required
to be integrated with the project circle (Sequeira, 2010). Aside from engagement
in early stage (Mazmanian & Nienaber, 1979; Reed et al., 2006; Stewart et al.,
1984), stakeholders may also be involved in monitoring and evaluating outcomes

of decisions (Estrella & Gaventa, 2000). We propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1: Stakeholders participation varies in different procedures, in-
cluding Organization and Coordination, Collaborative Decision, Supervision and
Guidance, Accountability.
Since a long-term participatory process (Gunderson & Holling, 2002) is in-
volved in SSRA, iterative and two-way learning between participants is critical
(Chase et al., 2004; Johnson et al., 2004). Stakeholders involved in different stages
may differ and the real outcomes of decisions will emerge after some time, so the
stakeholders / decision makers must respond appropriately to the policy results
of preceding procedures (Kleinmuntz, 1985; Kleinmuntz & Schkade, 1993). In
practical terms, it is critical for stakeholders of high participation levels to be
active from early to late stage. Hence, stakeholders/decision makers must occupy
core positions in early stage and understand the importance of participation in
late stages. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: Compared to stakeholders at peripheral positions, stakeholders
at core positions in early stage might not hold high participation level in late stage
(i.e., accountability).
Additionally, we discuss issues of SSRA in the context of Chinese polit-
ical system (Lawrence & Martin, 2012). Grassroots organizations have limited
voice in Chinese traditional hierarchical governance structure (Mertha, 2009).
This may make it challenging to motivate grassroots representatives to engage
in SSRA, especially when they are asked to respond to proposals they perceive
are finalized (Zhu et al., 2014). Given this background, we examine whether the
high-level grassroots participation in decision-making on mega project has been
achieved in SSRA, as seen in the following proposed hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3: High-level grassroots participation in decision-making on mega
projects has been observed in SSRA.
The Chinese governance structure is still characterized as hierarchical and cen-
tralized (Bruce et al., 2009; Larson & Soto, 2008). Following a top-down mode (Lar-
son et al., 2007), higher level governments may have adequate authority and mobili-
zation capacities to achieve more intensive participatory decision (Pohlner, 2016). On
the other hand, the gradual opening of spaces for participation from the bottom up
has emerged and challenges the traditional mode (Tan & Zhou, 2015), and may lead
to active grassroots participation (Blomquist et al., 2010; Larson & Soto, 2008). Given
this context and our research interests in SSRA, we examined whether higher level
governments can achieve more intensive stakeholder participation than grassroots
governments in SSRA with the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4: Compared to local levels, higher levels governments can
achieve more intensive stakeholder participation in SSRA.
4. Design
Using “actor” to denote stakeholder (or representative), we applied affiliation

network method for network establishment (Borgatti & Everett, 1997; Hu et al.,
2014). A link between two actors was identified if they were engaged in identi-
cal procedure of an SSRA event. Then, we established four networks based on
the four successive compulsory procedures, including Organization and Coordi-
nation Network (OC-N), Collaborative Decision Network (CD-N), Supervision
and Guidance Network (SG-N), and Accountability Network (AC-N).
First, we calculated index on each network, including density, average geo-
desic distances, compactness and the number of ties, to achieve comparisons on
activeness of the networks (Hypothesis 1) with some powerful and important ac-
tors discussed using centrality measures. Second, we measured actors’ partici-
pation levels in different procedures, indicated by different networks, through
core/periphery structure analyses. Selecting the actors occupying core positions
as ones with high participation levels in each network, we compared their partici-
pation levels in different stages (Hypothesis 2). Following similar methods, we also
discussed grassroots participation level (Hypothesis 3). Third, we analyzed core/
periphery structures of SSRA events in the networks and SSRA events occupying
core positions were identified as the ones with more intensive stakeholder par-
ticipation. Considering the levels (higher level or local level) of governments in
charge, we compared intensiveness of stakeholder participations achieved by gov-
ernments of different levels (Hypothesis 4). We also discussed active network using
Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) method with influential factors concluded.
UCINET was the software used for network analysis (Borgatti et al., 2012).
5. Data Collection
Focusing on SSRA events (Appendix 1) in the city of Xi’an, a metropolis in the

central area of China, we conducted content analyses based on Report on SS-
RA(R-SSRA). As archived official document, R-SSRA records the complete and
detailed information on each SSRA event, e.g., all the involved stakeholders (or
their representatives). Reviewing R-SSRA, we identified the stakeholders involved
in each procedure of every SSRA event. To exemplify the format of collected data,
we show the data on a SSRA event (Land Requisition Project Mega for Hua Neng Power
Plant Construction) in Table 1.
Table 1. Data on Land Requisition Project Mega for Hua Neng Power Plant Construction
Procedure Involved Stakeholders

Organization and Coordination PDR, MDI, JUB, COC
Collaborative Decision PDR, MDI, EPA, MPA, HCA, DRA, SMA,
HRA, APS, PDT, JBU, RAC
Supervision and Guidance HCA, SMA, JBU, COC
Accountability SBC, SMA, JBU
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations.
The applied method can be seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Method Applied in the Research

Results and Discussions

Four networks, including OC-N, CD-N, SG-N, and AC-N, are shown in Figure 3.
(a) OC-N
(b) CD-N
(c) SG-N
(d) AC-N
Figure 3. Networks on procedures in SSRA

Note: see Appendix 1 and 2 for codes and abbreviations
Index on each network are shown in Table 2. The results indicate that CD-N
is much more active than other ones in terms of the highest density, shortest av-
erage geodesic distances, highest compactness and the most number of ties. It is
hard to say that stakeholder participations in different stages are equally active;
therefore, Hypothesis 1was supported.
Table 2. The Index on Networks
Network Density Average Geodesic Distance Compactness Number
of Ties
OC-N 0.2320 1.450 0.775 116
CD-N 0.4538 1.055 0.972 236
SG-N 0.2688 1.221 0.815 129
AC-N 0.2406 1.467 0.790 77
Subsequently, we used centrality measures to identify powerful and important
actors, as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Centrality of Networks

Actor OC-N CD-N SG-N AC-N
PDR 0.300 0.300 0.200 N/A
RDI 0.300 0.300 0.100 N/A
MCI 0.500 0.500 0.200 N/A
AAA 0.100 0.200 0.150 0.100
FAA 0.050 0.150 0.100 0.150
EPA 0.100 0.550 0.300 N/A
MPA 0.100 0.550 0.250 0.050
HCA 0.450 0.650 0.400 0.250
DRA 0.800 1.000 0.250 0.200
SMA 0.300 0.750 0.600 0.150
PCD 0.150 0.350 0.250 N/A
HRA 0.450 0.450 0.200 N/A
DLR 0.500 0.900 0.650 0.250
APS 0.150 0.600 0.300 0.250
DER 0.100 0.100 N/A N/A
EAA 0.100 0.100 0.100 N/A
PDT 0.250 0.650 0.200 0.250
JBU 0.200 0.400 0.350 0.400
LAO 0.100 0.300 0.300 0.300
WRA 0.100 0.150 0.150 0.050
DET 0.050 0.100 N/A 0.100
SBU 0.050 0.050 N/A N/A
SBC 0.200 0.500 0.400 0.500
CAA 0.150 0.520 0.350 0.250
COC 0.250 0.650 0.650 0.600
RAC N/A 1.000 N/A N/A
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations. The top ten actors identified according
to their degree of centrality measures in each network are marked as grey.
We notice that HCA and DLR possessing land resources are the most influ-
ential actors in all the networks. As an authoritative coordinating agency, COC
also plays an important role in all the networks. COC is as not only an agency in
charge of public resources coordination, but also the main issuer of official docu-
ments on mega project approval and regulation. Therefore, authorities’ coordina-

tion, supports and approvals are critical besides for physical resources. Further-
more, we examined the extent to which stakeholders get involved in SSRA events
through core/periphery structure analyses (Borgatti & Everett, 2000, p. 375), as
shown in Figure 4. Based on the results, we can clarify positions of actors in each
network, as shown in Table 4.
(a) OC-N (b) CD-N

(c) SG-N (d) AC-N
Figure 4. Core/Periphery Structures of Networks

Note: see Appendix 1 and 2 for codes and abbreviations
Table 4. Positions of Actors in Networks

Actor OC-N CD-N SG-N AC-N
PDR × √ × N/A
RDI × √ × N/A
MCI √ √ × N/A
AAA × × × ×
FAA × × × ×
EPA × √ × N/A
MPA × √ × ×
HCA √ √ √ ×
DRA √ √ × N/A
SMA × √ √ ×
PCD × √ × N/A
HRA √ √ × ×
DLR √ √ √ ×
APS × √ × ×
DER × × N/A N/A
EAA × × × N/A
PDT × √ × ×
JBU × √ √ √
LAO × × × ×
WRA × × × ×
DET × × N/A ×
SBU × × N/A N/A
SBC × √ × √
CAA × √ × ×
COC × √ √ √
RAC N/A √ N/A N/A
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations. √indicates that the actor is in core posi-
tion and ×indicates that the actor is in periphery position.
HCA and DLR occupy core positions in OC-N, CD-N and SG-N, while
JBU and COC occupy core positions in CD-N, SG-N and AC-N. The fact that
HCA and DLR play central roles in OC-N, CD-N and SG-N suggest the two
actors play central roles in assessing social stability risk. Yet, JBU and COC are
core actors in AC-N whereas HCA and DLR occupy peripheral positions. This
suggests that it is difficult for the actors at core positions in early stage to hold
high participation level in late stage. So, Hypothesis 2 was supported, revealing
fragmentation or gaps (Zhu, 2012) existing in the feedback loop. Some actors
(e.g., HCA and DLR) playing important roles in early stage occupy peripheral
positions in the late stage. And it is difficult for them to see the real outcomes of
the decisions and respond to the environment appropriately.
MCI, DRA, SMA, HRA and SBC are also important actors, because they
occupy core positions in two networks. RAC, representing grassroots represen-
tatives, has the highest centrality scores and occupies core position in CD-N
(see details in Table 3 and 4). But grassroots representatives only get involved
in one network (CD-N) and cannot be engaged in any other important or core
work, e.g., agenda setting. This suggests their involvements are limited. Al-
though grassroots representatives have chances to get involved in collaborative
decision, their absences in other networks reduce the participation level. There-
fore, hypothesis 3 was partially supported.
Moreover, core/periphery structures on SSRA events are also demonstrated,
as shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Positions of SSRA Events in Networks
SSRA Event OC-N CD-N SG-N AC-N

A √ √ √ √
B √ × × √
C × × × ×
D √ × × √
E √ × √ √
F √ √ √ √
G √ × √ √
H √ √ √ √
I × × √ √
J √ × √ √
K √ × × √
L × × √ ×
M √ × √ √
N √ √ √ √
O × × × √
P × × × ×
Q × × √ ×
R × √ × ×
S √ × √ √
T √ × √ ×
Note: see Appendix 1 for codes. √indicates that the event is in core position and
×indicates that the event is in periphery position.
We observed that A, F, H and N occupy core positions in all the networks. It

suggests that more intensive stakeholder participations were achieved in the four
SSRA events. Meanwhile, C and P are in periphery positions in all the networks
indicating stakeholder participations in the two SSRA events were the least in-
tensive. A, F, H and N are in the charge of higher-level governments (typically
ministries in central government or departments in provincial governments),
while C and P are in the charge of county governments. Higher-level govern-
ments have more authority, and can mobilize enough resources to achieve more
intensive stakeholder participation. So, hypothesis 4 was supported. Since mega
projects can promote local economic development and employement, grassroots

governments may actively apply for the projects and compete with other ones. In
terms of grassroots governments, the economic benefits of mega peojetcs usually
outweigh SSRA, which aims at social conflicts resolution rather than economic
development, in the current government performance evaluation. In practical
terms, the chosen representatives seldom truly represent the affected communi-
ties. And the end results are usually that decisions can’t meet the demands of the
affected people, casuing local oppositions to mega projects.
Accordingly, we show the results of hypotheses testing in Table 6.
Table 6. Results of Hypotheses Testing

Hypothesis Result
Hypothesis 1 Supported
Hypothesis 3 Partially Supported
Since CD-N is the most active network, in which grassroots representatives

get involved, we conducted further discussions based on it. We explored the fac-
tors contributing to collaborative decision though SVD with the singular values
shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Singular Values Derived in CD-N
Factor Value Percent CUM % Ratio PRE CUM PRE
1 12.204 26.0 26.0 3.171 0.325 0.325
2 3.848 8.2 34.2 1.068 0.115 0.440
3 3.602 7.7 41.9 1.106 0.101 0.541
4 3.257 6.9 48.8 1.107 0.082 0.623
5 2.942 6.3 55.1 1.007 0.067 0.690
6 2.922 6.2 61.3 1.111 0.066 0.756
7 2.630 5.6 66.9 1.099 0.054 0.810
8 2.394 5.1 72.0 1.093 0.044 0.854
9 2.191 4.7 76.6 1.150 0.037 0.891
10 1.905 4.1 80.7 1.081 0.028 0.919
11 1.762 3.8 84.5 1.269 0.024 0.943
12 1.388 3.0 87.4 1.115 0.015 0.958
13 1.245 2.7 90.1 1.150 0.012 0.970

14 1.083 2.3 92.4 1.092 0.009 0.980
15 0.992 2.1 94.5 1.170 0.008 0.987
16 0.848 1.8 96.3 1.290 0.006 0.993
17 0.657 1.4 97.7 1.144 0.003 0.996
18 0.574 1.2 98.9 1.425 0.003 0.999
19 0.403 0.9 99.8 3.831 0.001 1.000
20 0.105 0.2 100.0 N/A 0.000 1.000

Note: CUM % represents Accumulative Percent, PRE represents Percent of Re-
duced Error and CUM PRE represents Accumulative Percent of Reduced Error.
The accumulative percent of reduced error (54.1%) suggests the top three
factors can be selected as main ones, which are summarized and discussed
based on varimax loadings (see details in Table 8).
Table 8. The Loadings for the Top Three Factors

Actor in Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
CD-N
PDR 0.129 0.147 0.081
RDI 0.105 0.412 -0.441
MCI 0.187 0.429 0.263
AAA 0.081 0.069 0.030
FAA 0.059 -0.020 -0.055
EPA 0.202 -0.090 0.531
MPA 0.204 0.141 -0.179
HCA 0.241 0.345 0.433
DRA 0.362 -0.012 -0.042
SMA 0.277 0.238 -0.219
PCD 0.123 0.245 0.215
HRA 0.169 0.112 0.408
DLR 0.330 -0.131 -0.018
APS 0.225 -0.325 -0.071
DER 0.044 0.153 0.058
EAA 0.044 0.153 0.058
PDT 0.240 -0.343 -0.010
JBU 0.154 -0.200 0.058
LAO 0.115 0.034 0.158
WRA 0.058 0.135 0.177
DET 0.045 0.040 0.103
SBU 0.024 0.086 -0.043
SBC 0.190 0.309 0.115
CAA 0.211 0.029 0.033
COC 0.245 -0.124 0.165
RAC 0.362 -0.012 -0.042
Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations.
In terms of factor 1, HCA (0.241), RAC (0.362), SMA (0.277), DLR (0.330)
and PDT (0.240) are listed as top actors. Since they are all governmental agencies,
whose authorities are important to support stakeholder participation, we define
factor 1 as “authority”. RDI (0.412) and MCI (0.429) can be listed as top actors in
terms of factor 2. Acting as the third-party institutions, RDI and MCI play more
and more important roles following outsourcing contracts with authorities. They
conduct data analysis, stakeholder interviews using professional techniques to
improve the effectiveness of stakeholder participation. Hence, we define this fac-
tor as “the third-party institutions”. EPA (0.531), HRA (0.408) and HCA (0.433)
are listed as top ones in terms of factor 3. They usually focus on the supporting
measures, e.g., environmental protection, employment, relocation etc. Therefore,
we define the factor as “supporting measures”. Overall, the factors contributing
to collaborative decision include Authority, Third-Party Institutions (TPI) and
Supporting Measures.
In the current context of China, authority is still vital to advance stakehold-
er participation. Stakeholder participation in SSRA is more participatory deci-
sion-making activity, which is dominated by government and involves various
stakeholders versus autonomous actions of citizens. Recently, more businesses
in SSRA have been outsourced to TPI, which works as participation facilitator
(Marks, 2008). Highly skilled TPIs are essential to improve effectiveness of stake-
holder participation in SSRA. This also implies that more social/market forces
are being introduced to this area. Factor of “supporting measures” suggests that
living needs of affected populations should be the a core issue in SSRA.
6. Conclusion
Using data collected through content analysis, we discussed some issues on

stakeholder participation in SSRA, with hypotheses tested. Overall, we found that
different types of stakeholder participations are not conducted and developed
evenly in SSRA. Minority actors, which possess critical resources or are in charge
of public resources coordination, are the most influential actors in all the net-
works.
Moreover, we observed some fragmentations or gaps in the participatory
process. First, it is difficult for the actors at core positions in early stage to hold
high participation level in late stage. This reveals the barriers for effective learning
and accountability. Second, grassroots representatives have get involved actively,
although only in CD-N. Third, we observed that the higher-level governments
can achieve more intensive stakeholder participation in SSRA due to possessing
more authorities and resources. Yet, grassroots governments usually face much
more actual problems, such as weak institutions, insufficient funds, and compet-
ing interests for the mega projects. So, stakeholder participation is always ignored
intentionally or unintentionally at grassroots level.
Subsequently, we examined CD-N, the most active network, through iden-
tifying main influential factors through SVD. The results show “authority” is
essential for effective stakeholder participation. Hence, we suggest SSRA is a
government-led consulation with stakeholders rather than autonomous actions
of citizens. This is very different from stakeholder participation in western de-
mocracies. The results on TPI also highlighted the importance of participation
facilitator.
Network analysis offers a unique opportunity to study the stakeholder par-
ticipation in SSRA. Howerever, it does not provide detailed explanation of the
cases we observed. The next research step is to conduct an in-depth intervoews
to understand network formation and dynamic changes. And future research
should focus on solutions to facilitate stakeholder participation, e.g., SSRA facil-
itated by TPIs.
References
Aaltonen, K., Kujala, J., Lehtonen, P., & Ruuska, I. (2010). A stakeholder network
perspective on unexpected events and their management in international
projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 3(4), 564-588.
Abbasi, A. & Kapucu, N. (2016). A Longitudinal Study of Emerging Networks in
Response to Natural Disasters. Computational and Mathematical Organiza-
tion Theory, 22(1), 47-70.
Bardach, E. (1998). Getting agencies to work together: The practice and theory of manage-
rial craftmanship. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Beierle, T. C. (2002). The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Analysis,
22(4), 739-749.
Blackstock, K. L., Kelly, G. J., & Horsey, B. L. (2007). Developing and applying
a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological
Economics, 60(4), 726-742.
Blomquist, W., Dinar, A., & Kemper, K. E. (2010). A framework for institutional
analysis of decentralization reforms in natural resource management. Society
& Natural Resources, 23(7), 620-635.
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1997). Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social
Networks, 19(3), 243-269.
Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2000). Models of core/periphery structures. Social
Networks, 21(4), 375-395.
Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., & Freeman, L.C. (2012). Analyzing Social Networks.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Brody, S. D. (2003). Measuring the effects of stakeholder participation on the
quality of local plans based on the principles of collaborative ecosystem
management. Journal of Planning Education & Research, 22(4), 407-419.
Bruce, J. W., Knox, A., Sikor, T., & Müller, D. (2009). Structures and stratagems:
making decentralization of authority over land in africa cost-effective. World
Development, 37(8), 1360-1369.
Brunsting, S., Best-Waldhober, M. D., Feenstra, C. F. J., & Mikunda, T. (2011).
Stakeholder participation practices and onshore CCS: lessons from the
Dutch CCS case Barendrecht. Energy Procedia, 4(1), 6376-6383.
Bryson, J.M., Crosby, B.C., & Stone, M.M. (2015). Designing and implementing
cross-sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration
Review, 75(5), 647-663.
Cameron, B. G., Crawley, E. F., Loureiro, G., & Rebentisch, E. S. (2008). Value
flow mapping: using networks to inform stakeholder analysis. Acta Astro-
nautica, 62(4-5), 324-333.
Chase, L.C., Decker, D.J., & Lauber, T.B. (2004). Public participation in wildlife
management: what do stakeholders want? Society & Natural Resources, 17,
629-639.
Chess, C., & Purcell, K. (1999). Public participation and the environment: do
we know what works? Environmental Science & Technology, 33(16), 2685-2692.
Diehl, E., & Sterman, J. D. (1995). Effects of feedback complexity on dynamic
decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62,
198–215.
Dong, L. (2011, April 22). Optimizing mechanism of social stability risk assess-
ment. People’s Daily. p.3 (in Chinese).
Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Poli-
tics, 9(3), 383-400.
Easton, D. (1979). A System Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Edwards, W. (1962). Dynamic decision theory and probabilistic information pro-
cessing. Human Factors, 4, 59–73.
Erkul, M., Yitmen, I., & Celik, T. (2016). Stakeholder engagement in mega trans-
port infrastructure projects. Procedia Engineering, 161, 704-710.
Estrella, M., & Gaventa, J. (2000). Who counts reality? Participatory Monitoring and
Evaluation: a literature review. IDS Working Paper 70, Institute of Develop-
ment Studies, Brighton.
Fazey, I., Kesby, M., Evely, A., Latham, I., Wagatora, D., & Hagasua, J. E. (2010). A
three-tiered approach to participatory vulnerability assessment in the Solo-
mon Islands. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 713–728.
Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of
institutional mechanisms. Science Technology & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243.
Gattringer, R., Hutterer, P., & Strehl, F. (2014). Network-structured university-in-
dustry-collaboration: values for the stakeholders. European Journal of Innova-
tion Management, 17(3), 272 - 291.
General Office of Chinese Communist Party Central Committee (2015). Guidance
on Improving Mechanisms of SSRA. Retrieved on April, 13, 2015 from http://
www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2015/content_2847873.htm.
Gunderson, L., & Holling, C.S. (2002). Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in
Human and Natural Systems. Washington: Island Press.
Harshaw, H. W., & Tindall, D. B. (2005). Social structure, identities, and values: a
network approach to understanding people’s relationships to forests. Journal
of Leisure Research, 37(4), 426-449.
Hu, Q., Knox, C. C., & Kapucu, N. (2014). What have we learned since Septem-
ber 11, 2001? A network study of the Boston marathon bombings response.
Public Administration Review, 74(6), 698-712.
Johnson, N., Lilja, N., Ashby, J.A., & Garcia, J.A., (2004). Practice of participatory
research and gender analysis in natural resource management. Natural Re-
sources Forum, 28(28), 189-200.
Kapucu, N., & Garayev, V. (2011). Collaborative decision-making in emergen-
cy and crisis management. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(6),
366-375.
Kapucu, N., Hu, Q., & Khosa, S. (2014). The state of network research in public
administration. Administration & Society, 0095399714555752 (ahead of print).
Kleinmuntz, D. N. (1985). Cognitive heuristics and feedback in a dynamic deci-
sion environment. Management Science, 31(6), 680-702.
Kleinmuntz, D. N., & Schkade, D. A. (1993). Information displays and decision
processes. Psychological Science, 4(4), 221-227.
Koontz, T. M. (2005). We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collabora-
tive stakeholder participation on land use policy. Policy Studies Journal, 33(3),
459–481.
Koppenjan, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2010). Managing Uncertainties in Networks: a Network
Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making. London: Routledge.
Larson, A. M., Pacheco, P., Toni, F., & Vallejo, M. (2007). The effects of forestry
decentralization on access to livelihood assets. Journal of Environment & De-
velopment, 16(3), 251-268.
Larson, A. M., & Soto, F. (2008). Decentralization of natural resource governance
regimes. Environment and Resources, 33(33), 213-239.
Lawrence, A. (2006). “No personal motive?” volunteers, biodiversity, and the
false dichotomies of participation. Ethics Place & Environment, 9(3), 279-298.
Lawrence, S. V., & Martin, M. F. (2012). Understanding China’s political system.
Current Politics & Economics of South Southeastern & Central Asia, 20(3), 1191-
1195.
Li, T. H. Y., Ng, S. T., & Skitmore, M. (2012a). Conflict or consensus: an inves-
tigation of stakeholder concerns during the participation process of major
infrastructure and construction projects in Hong Kong. Habitat International,
36(2), 333-342.
Li, T. H., Ng, S. T., & Skitmore, M. (2012b). Public participation in infrastructure
and construction projects in China: From an EIA-based to a whole-cycle
process. Habitat International, 36(1), 47-56 (in Chinese).
Li, W., Liu, J., & Li, D. (2012c). Getting their voices heard: Three cases of public
participation in environmental protection in China. Journal of Environmental
Management, 98(1), 65-72.
Liao, X., & Liu, B. (2016). The dilemma and regulation of social stability risk assess-
ment in major policy decisions—a study based on the short-lived medical re-
form in Chongqing. Chinese Public Administration, (1):27-36 (in Chinese).
Liu, S. (2016). Problems in current social stability risk assessment. Modern Infor-
mation on Economy, 24, 77-78 (in Chinese).
Liu, Y., Li, Y., Xi, B., & Koppenjan, J. (2016a). A governance network perspective
on environmental conflicts in China: findings from the Dalian paraxylene
conflict. Policy Studies, 37(4), 314-331.
Liu, Z. Z., & Li, W. J. (2013). National risk management structural framework in perspec-
tive of China social stability risk assessment. In Proceedings of 2013 IEEE Inter-
national Conference on Grey Systems and Intelligent Services (pp. 330-334).
Washington DC, U.S.: IEEE Computer Society.
Liu, Z. Z., Zhu, Z. W., Wang, H. J., & Huang, J. (2016b). Handling social risks in
government-driven mega project: an empirical case study from west China.
International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), 202-218.
Lu, W. (2016). The social stability risk assessment of tuition adjustment in
Guangdong public universities. Chinese Public Administration, (1): 23-26 (in
Chinese).
Ma, B., & Du, P. (2014). Topics and methods in social stability risk assessment for
major decision making. Journal Harbin Institute of Technology, 16(1), 35-40 (in
Chinese).
Mackinnon, A. J., & Wearing, A. J. (1985). Systems analysis and dynamic decision
making. Acta Psychologica, 58, 159–172.
Marks, R. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a
literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431.
Marin, B., & Mayntz, R. (eds) (1991). Policy Networks: Empirical Evidence and Theo-
retical Considerations. Colorado: Westview Press.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R.A.W. (eds) (1992). Policy Networks in British Government.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mazmanian, D.A., & Nienaber, J. (1979). Can Organizations Change? Washington,
DC: Brookings Institution,.
Mertha, A. (2009). Fragmented Authoritarianism 2.0: Political Pluralization in
the Chinese Policy Process. The China Quarterly, 200, 995–1012.
Middendorf, G., & Busch, L. (1997). Inquiry for the public good: democratic par-
ticipation in agricultural research. Agriculture & Human Values, 14(14), 45-57.
Moore, A., & Warren, A. (2006). Legal advocacy in environmental public partic-
ipation in China: raising the stakes and strengthening stakeholders. China
Environment Series, 8, 3-23.
O’Toole, L.J. (1997). Treating networks seriously: practical and research-based
agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review, 57(1), 45-52.
Olander, S. (2007). Stakeholder impact analysis in construction project manage-
ment. Construction Management and Economics, 25(3), 277-287.
Pira, M. L., Inturri, G., Ignaccolo, M., Pluchino, A., & Rapisarda, A. (2016).
Finding shared decisions in stakeholder networks: an agent-based ap-
proach. Physica A Statistical Mechanics & Its Applications,466, 277–287.
Poetz, A. (2011). What’s your “position” on nuclear power? an exploration of con-
flict in stakeholder participation for decision-making about risky technolo-
gies. Risk Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 2(2), 1-38.
Pohlner, H. (2016). Institutional change and the political economy of wa-
ter megaprojects: china’s south-north water transfer. Global Environmental
Change, 38, 205–216.
Prell, C., Hubacek K., & Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder analysis and social network
analysis in natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources, 22(6),
501-518.
Reed, M. S. (2007). Participatory technology development for agro-forestry ex-
tension: an innovation-decision approach. African Journal of Agricultural Re-
search, 2(8), 334-341.
Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a
literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417-2431.
Reed, M. S., Dougill, A. J., & Taylor, M. J. (2007). Integrating local and scientific
knowledge for adaptation to land degradation: Kalahari rangeland manage-
ment options. Land Degradation & Development, 18(3), 249–268.
Reed, M. S., Fraser, E. D. G., & Dougill, A. J. (2006). An adaptive learning process
for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communi-
ties. Ecological Economics, 59(4), 406-418.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: a framework for
evaluation. Science Technology & Human Values, 25(1), 3-29.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004a). Evaluating public-participation exercises: a re-
search agenda. Science Technology & Human Values, 29(4), 512-556.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004b). Evaluation of a deliberative conference. Science
Technology & Human Values, 29(1), 88-121.
Sequeira, D. (2010). Stakeholder Engagement : A Good Practice Handbook for Compa-
nies Doing Business in Emerging Markets. Washington, DC: International Fi-
nance Corporation.
Shen, Q. (2014). A comparative analysis of social stability risk assessment and
public-participated investigation of EIA. Environment & Development, 15(1),
41-43(in Chinese).
Stewart, T. R., Dennis, R. L., & Ely, D. W. (1984). Citizen participation and judg-
ment in policy analysis: a case study of urban air quality policy. Policy Scienc-
es, 17(1), 67-87.
Smith, L. G., Nell, C. Y., & Prystupa, M. V. (1997). Forum: the converging dy-
namics of interest representation in resources management. Environmental
Management, 21(2), 139-146.

Sultana, P., & Abeyasekera, S. (2008). Effectiveness of participatory planning for
community management of fisheries in Bangladesh. Journal of Environmental
Management, 86(1), 201-13.
Tan, R., & Zhou, T. (2015). Decentralization in a centralized system: project-based
governance for land-related public goods provision in China. Land Use Poli-
cy, 47, 262-272.
Tatenhove, J. P. M. V., & Leroy, P. (2003). Environment and participation in a con-
text of political modernization. Environmental Values, 12(2), 155-174.
Thabrew, L., & Ries, R. (2009). Application of life cycle thinking in multidisci-
plinary multi-stakeholder contexts for cross-sectoral planning and imple-
mentation of sustainable development projects. Integrated Environmental As-
sessment & Management, 5(3), 445–460.
Wandersman, A. (1981). A framework of participation in community organiza-
tions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 17(1), 27-58.
Weber, E. P., & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challeng-
es, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administra-
tion Review, 68(2), 334-349.
Xu, W. (2013). The current problems existing in social stability risk assessment.
Studies on Local Finance, 8(12), 16-20 (in Chinese).
Yang, K., & Pandey, S. K. (2011). Further dissecting the black box of citizen par-
ticipation: when does citizen involvement lead to good outcomes? Public Ad-
ministration Review, 71(6), 880-892.
Zhang, L., & Tong, X. (2015). Social stability risk assessment of major policy deci-
sion: the problem, response and improvement. Jiangsu Social Sciences, 4, 7-16
(in Chinese).
Zheng, H., Jong, M. D., & Koppenjan, J. (2010). Applying policy network theory
to policy-making in China: the case of urban health insurance reform. Public
Administration, 88(2), 398-417.
Zhu, D. (2012). Policy gap, risk origin and social stability risk assessment. Com-
parative Economic & Social Systems, 2(5): 20-23 (in Chinese).
Zhu, Z. W., Li, W. J., & Zhao, X. X. (2014). Research on the affecting factors of
public participation willingness in social stability risk evaluation. Journal of
Xian Jiaotong University, 34(2), 49-55(in Chinese).
Appendices
Appendix 1 SSRA Events Used for the Research

Government in
Charge Time for
Code SSRA Event Imple-
mentation
Land Requisition Project Mega Central Government

for Hua Neng Power Plant Con-
A struction 2015.11
Land Requisition for Natural City Government

Gas Conduit Construction
B 2015.8
Residents Displacement and Re- County Government

settlement for Electronic Facili-
C 2015.7
ties Construction (North)
Residents Displacement and Re- County Government

settlement for Electronic Facili-
D 2015.6
ties Construction (South)
Land Requisition and Residents City Government

Displacement for Railway Con-
E 2015.5
struction
Residential Area Reconstruction Provincial Govern-

Project (East) ment
F 2015.4

Displacement for Modern Agri-
G 2015.4
culture Park Project
Land Requisition and Residents Central Government

Displacement for Modern Circu-
H lar Economy Park Project 2015.3

Displacement for Modern Agri-
I 2015.1
culture Park Project(West)

Displacement for Reservoir
J 2015.1
Project

Displacement for the National
K 2014.11
Road Project

Displacement for National Gra-
L 2014.6
nary Project(North)

Displacement for Cargo Railway
M 2014.5
Project
Land Requisition and Residents Central Government

Displacement for Hydropower
N Plant Project 2014.2
Land Requisition for Natural City Government

Gas Conduit Transportation and
O 2013.11
Distribution
County Government
Land Requisition for Natural
P 2013.4
Gas Conduits Connection
City Government
Land Requisition for Power
Q 2013.4
Sub-station Project (East)
City Government
Land Requisition for Power
R 2013.3
Sub-station Project(South)
City Government
Land Requisition and Residents
S Displacement for National Gra- 2012.8
nary Project(South)

Displacement for Metro Project
T 2011.10
(Line No.1)
Appendix 2 Involved Actors Common to SSRA Events
Actor Abbreviation
Project Developer PDR
Research & Development Institution RDI
Management Consultancy Institution MCI
Agriculture Administrative Agency AAA
Forestry Administrative Agency FAA
Environmental Protection & Monitoring EPA
Agency
Municipal Planning Agency MPA
Housing Construction Agency HCA
Development & Reform Agency DRA
Social Stability Maintenance Agency SMA
Public Complaint Division PCD
Human Resources & Social Security Agency HRA
Department of Land & Resources DLR
Administration of Production Safety APS
Department of Ethnic Minorities & Reli- DER
gions
Education Administrative Agency EAA
Police Department PDT
Judicial Bureau JBU
Legislative Affairs Office LAO
Water Resources Agency WRA
Department of Economy & Trade DET
Statistical Bureau SBU
Supervision Branch of Communist Party SBC
Committee
Comprehensive Administrative Agency CAA
General Office of Government/ Communist COC
Party Committee
Representative of Affected Community RAC
UDC: 005.334:334.713(6-13)
005.35
Research article DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.2
Governmental Incentivization for SMEs’

Engagement in Disaster Resilience in
Southeast Asia
Aleksandrina V. Mavrodieva*, Dyah S. Budiarti, Zhou Yu, Federico A. Pasha, Rajib Shaw
1
Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus
5322 Endo, Fujisawa, Kanagawa Prefecture 252-0882, Japan; almavrodieva@gmail.com; dyahs.
budiarti@gmail.com; zhouyukeio@gmail.com; federicopasha@gmail.com; shaw@sfc.keio.ac.jp.
* Correspondence: almavrodieva@gmail.com;
Received: 14 November 2018; Accepted: 3 December 2018; Published: 28 March 2019
Abstract: The resilience of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) is regarded as a precon-
dition of sustainable development both at the local and the national levels, as they are the
providers of the main portion of jobs in the market, contributing an average between 57
to 97% of national employment in the ASEAN countries. At the same time, SMEs are the
most vulnerable businesses as a result of financial, technological, and administrative lim-
itations, where the majority of SMEs lack even basic knowledge on disaster preparedness
and response techniques. The current study argues that governments have a particular-
ly important role in mobilizing SMEs disaster resilience through developing adequate
policies and legislation, and through providing the necessary infrastructure and invest-
ment climate for SMEs to thrive, focusing particularly on Indonesia, the Philippines and
Thailand. The research tries to present the current level of SME involvement in each of
the three countries and to identify relevant gaps and opportunities. This paper does not
include an extensive list of recommendations but tries to focus on some of the basic tech-
niques which governments can and should employ in their efforts towards economic and
community resilience, arguing that a number of appropriate incentives would be bene-
ficial in engaging SMEs as one of the vital parts of private sector. structured abstracts: 1)
Introduction; 2) Methods; 3) Results; 4) Conclusions and implication
Keywords: Small and Medium Enterprises (SME), Private Business, Disaster Response, Disaster Pre-
paredness and Resilience, Government Incentives, Southeast Asia, Business Continuity.
1. Introduction
The resilience of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) is regarded as a

precondition of sustainable development both at the local and the national lev-
els, as they are the providers of the main portion of jobs in the market, con-
tributing an average between 57 to 97% of national employment in the ASEAN
countries (Villarroel et al., 2013; ADPC, 2017). Furthermore, they operate in
various economic sectors both in rural and urban areas, and have the advantage
of developing close links with the community (ASEAN and Secretariat, 2015;
ADPC, 2017). Therefore, the ability of SMEs to respond to disasters is crucial for
the recovery of the community economic fabric in affected areas. At the same
time, SMEs are the most vulnerable businesses due to financial, technological,
and administrative limitations (Picard, 2017). Developing innovative disaster
risk measures in planning, such as utilizing cutting-edge technology, are diffi-
cult to achieve due to insufficient funds and capacities (UNISDR, 2013). Most of
the time SMEs lack even basic knowledge on disaster prevention and response
techniques, such as the development of Business Continuity Plans (BCPs) or
conducting safety and first aid trainings for their staff (Samantha, 2018; Zhang,
Lindell, & Prater, 2009).
A particular problem for engaging SMEs in disaster resilience efforts rep-
resents the fact that a large number of companies in Southeast Asia function
in the informal economy to avoid paying taxes. In the aftermath of disasters
those companies are excluded from government support programmes, render-
ing them the most vulnerable group of SMEs (Villarroel et al., 2013). Having
in mind SMEs importance for community and economic resilience, and at the
same time their high vulnerability, such businesses require special support from
the government in strengthening their resilience to disasters. Governments have
a particularly important role in mobilizing SMEs disaster resilience through
developing policies and legislation and through providing the necessary infra-
structure and investment climate for SMEs to thrive, as well as through direct in-
tervention during pre and post disaster activities (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015).
The current paper will, therefore, focus on some of the ways local and national
governments can support and regulate further this process through providing
incentives for SMEs to engage in DRR, especially in the developing countries of
the Southeast Asia (SEA) region.
The paper will focus on three countries from SEA, namely Indonesia, the
Philippines and Thailand, presenting the current level of SME involvement in
each of them. Some gaps and opportunities have also been identified and dis-
cussed later in the text. This paper does not include an extensive list of recom-
mendations but tries to focus on some of the basic techniques which govern-
ments can and should employ in their efforts towards economic and community
resilience, arguing that a number of appropriate incentives would be beneficial
in engaging this vital and vulnerable part of the private sector, which are the
SMEs.
2. Focus on Southeast Asia, SMEs, and Incentives
Southeast Asia (SEA), as the most natural disaster-prone region in the

world, is continuously suffering from a range of different intensity disasters
(Gupta, 2010; Rampangilei, 2016). As its location sits in several plates and lies
between two oceans (Indian and Pacific Oceans), this region has been prone
to earthquakes, volcano eruptions, tsunami and seasonal typhoons. More than
50% of global disaster mortalities occurred in SEA in the ten-year period be-
tween 2004 and 2014 and caused economic losses of US$ 91 billion. Within this
region, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand are among the countries that
have experienced some of the gravest economic damages based on their Aver-
age Annual Economic Loss (AAL), amounting to respectively US$ 926 million,
US$284 million, and US$272 million (Gupta, 2010). In order to seek ways to
diminish the economic losses caused by disasters in these volatile conditions,
the current research will focus namely on the above mentioned countries. This
research has opted to focus on small and medium-size enterprises, or SMEs,
because of their huge significance in the economies of these countries and their
links to communities. SMEs represent around 88-99% of private companies and
provide significant percent of all national employment (around 52-97%) within
all economic sectors in both rural and urban areas in the region. SMEs contrib-
ute to 30-35% of GDP on average, yet their share in total exports is still small
(about 10-30%), which means they require additional support for development
and promotion towards strengthening their business (ADPC, 2017).
Furthermore, SMEs are important for the creation of social capital in re-
storing the ruptured social fabric in communities after disaster. By reopening
local businesses and making spaces for social bonding in affected communities,
SMEs attract people back to the area, as well as new investment, necessary to
rebuild the affected areas. In a wider context, strong SMEs can also endorse na-
tional resilience to shocks by expanding and diversifying the domestic economy.
Thus, reducing the sole dependency on large companies or only on few sectors,
and engaging SMEs has the potential to improve the protection of a wide-base
of labor force from certain shocks in specific sectors and fluctuations in inter-
national markets (Villarroel et al., 2013). “SME” has a different definition in
the three countries of focus, generally categorising them based on their capital
size. Indonesia and the Philippines categorise SME into three types: micro, small,
and medium enterprises. Meanwhile, Thailand only has two categories, which
are small and medium enterprises. In addition, the Philippines and Thailand add
more variables in defining SMEs, such as the number of workers involved in the
business. Table 1 below is used to give more clear indication of what SME means
in the different countries:
Table 1: (M)SME Definition across SEA countries (Picard, 2017)
Capital Size (USD) Worker Size

Countries
Micro Small Medium Micro Small Medium
3,740-
Indonesia <3,740 37,400-74,800 - - -
37,400
63,000-
Philippines <63,000 317,000-21,200,000 <9 1-9 9-99
317,000
Thailand
(Services & - <1,561,000 1,561,000-6,244,000 - <50 50-200
Manufacture)
The 2004 tsunami in Indonesia heavily affected the private sector (78% of
total destruction), and 104,500 SMEs were completely wiped-out (Ismail et al.,
2018). Meanwhile, as a result of the 2011 Thailand floods, around 557,637 busi-
ness entities, consisting of 90% SMEs, were hit, resulting in 2.3 million people
losing their jobs (Perwaiz, 2015; Auzzir, Haigh, & Amaratunga, 2018). Lastly, in
the Philippines, the Ondoy typhoon in 2009 caused a total of PhP 111.4 billion in
damages and production losses in the private sector where it was mostly SMEs
that were hit the hardest in the impacted areas (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015).
The direct impacts of disasters affecting SMEs include the complete/partial de-
struction of assets and stock, insecurity of business data and records, and threats
to employees` lives and livelihoods. Meanwhile, the indirect impacts consist of
interruption of the normal production, caused by assets damage and trapped
employees; interruption of products and service delivery, caused by blocked
roads; losing contact with markets, caused by damage of communication in-
frastructure; and supply chain disruption, caused by interruption of products
supplied from upstream industries and shrinkage of products demanded by the
downstream industries or target markets. From a macroeconomic perspective,
this will also cause higher interest rates, labour shortages, and reduced demand
of goods and services (UNISDR, 2015). SMEs’ willingness to invest in innovative

activities related to disaster preparedness can assist the company to protect its
own business (e.g. its vital assets and records). Engagement in disaster manage-
ment could also provide for a stable environment for business (e.g. reduces disas-
ter risk, protects its resources, and reduces social and economic vulnerability).
Such initiatives can protect whole or partial value chains, and improve condi-
tions for customers and staff (e.g. employees` families, property, health and safety
risks). Some other benefits include building reputation and demonstrating good
citizenship; enhancing government relationships, as well as inter-business rela-
tionships; creating possibilities to influence stakeholder perceptions; improving
staff motivation and retention; and providing new business opportunities that
create shared value. In the longer term, this will ensure their business continuity,
competitiveness and sustainability (Izumi & Shaw (ed.), 2015; UNISDR 2015).
There are a number of possible mechanisms for disaster resilience of rel-
evance to SMEs, including corporate social responsibility (CSR), developing
business continuity plans (BCP) and joining partnerships with the public sector
(PPP). These mechanisms increase SMEs’ internal protection and have the po-
tential to contribute to wider community resilience. A step forward in this direc-
tion could be SMEs’ direct assistance to the affected societies through donations,
or awareness raising initiatives. Lastly, enterprises may link their production and
services directly to disaster resilience and become suppliers to humanitarian ac-
tors. An example is the production of special earthquake-resistant laminated
glass for buildings, produced by companies and widely used in construction in
Japan (UNISDR, 2013). To promote, initiate and support SMEs’ engagement in
disaster preparedness and resilience, governments need to provide incentives,
which would be relevant for the targeted companies. “Incentives” are gener-
ally defined as ways to encourage people/groups to change their behaviour or
practices, as a result of receiving a reward for performance improvement (ADB,
2016). In this paper, “incentive” is any effort to persuade (inducement) SMEs in
taking action in improving disaster resilience, for themselves and for the affect-
ed community, provided prior to or in the aftermath of disaster events.
2. Current level of SMEs’ Engagement
Before suggesting some techniques for governments to incentivize the in-

volvement of SMEs in disaster management, it is necessary to discuss the current
level of SME engagement and government initiative within the three nations of
interest. For ease, the data is represented in Table 2 and Table 3 below:
Table 2: Current Condition Disaster Risk Management (DRM)

Policy Framework for SME (ADPC, 2012)
Indonesia Philippines Thailand

DRM institutions
are established as DRM mechanisms
SME and private sector
Extent of Institu- coordinating mecha- are supported by
needs are not considered
tional Application nism to mainstream government financial
specifically in the policy
of DRM in rela- the issues into institutions with
and implementation
tion to SMEs government across specific mandates for
processes for DRM
sectors and at all SMEs.
levels
Extent of DRM The legislative and
MSME development
application in policy mandates of the OSMEP and other
already provides
SME Develop- DRM and CCA systems, SME support institu-
many opportunities
ment and Promo- and the SME promotion tions demonstrated
for information
tion system, do not currently a high capacity to
sharing, training
interact to any signifi- support SME disaster
and incentives for
cant extent at either a recovery following
undertaking risk
policy or operational the 2011 ﬂoods.
assessments
level
Table 3: SMEs Disaster Resilience Survey (ADPC, 2012)
Indonesia Philippines Thailand
Company BCP
14% 6% 21.50%
Availability
Disaster Resilience
10% 41% 33%
Training
Emergency response,
Type of Disaster Disaster Prepared-
evacuation, risk assess-
resilience training Awareness Training ness (including
ment, and emergency
needs drills)
communication
Provision of technical
Needs for Govt. SME financial in- Disaster Insurance
assistance, consultancy
Provision centives from Govt. Mechanisms
services
In a 2016 survey, conducted by the University of Indonesia among 400 rep-

resentatives of small and medium business, respondents were asked about the
type of coping mechanism they use to deal with business disruption. Sixty-three
percent of the companies replied that they are using own savings, 34% were man-
aging through loans, 24% with support from family, and 21% by working more.
Thirteen percent of all, reported that they did not have any coping mechanism
(Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). This picture hardly represents only the situation
in Indonesia. The scenario where SME owners look for funds from relatives and
friends or pawn personal items to recover from disasters is a common one in
Southeast Asia. A survey conducted in Indonesia, Viet Nam, The Philippines
and Thailand revealed that SMEs often resort to loans from friends and family or
informal financing as a result of a combination between a tradition of self-reli-
ance and the lack of official mechanisms that provide affordable and flexible risk
financing (ADPC, 2017, Regional Synthesis Report). Such methods can support
recovery in a one-time crisis, but in a region subject to constant and complex
disasters it cannot be a sustainable mechanism, and it could even exacerbate
already existing issues, destabilizing the economy in the whole community.
When typhoon Haiyan devastated the Philippines, the assessment con-
ducted by the Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP) showed that
businessmen relied mainly on their own resources/savings or loans from private/
informal lenders. The lending rate of informal institutions was twice as high, or
even higher, than the one offered by the bank, but the required collateral and
piles of complicated supportive documentation of banks and formal financing
institutions represented barriers to SMEs. Compared to them, informal lenders
could provide loans quickly, which was quite important for SMEs’ rapid resum-
ing of activities, despite of the higher interest rates (ILO & ECOP, 2015). This is
further confirmed and aggravated by the fact that in the developing economies
of Southeast Asia a large percent of SMEs bypass official registration to avoid
paying taxes and thus do not exist in the official registers of the local and nation-
al government. As a consequence, when a crisis hits, these SMEs do not receive
financial support from the government, as they are non-existent as a legal entity
(Villarroel et al., 2013). This comes to show the importance of government action
to engage SMEs through providing incentives for them to register and employ
risk resilience mechanisms to secure their own survival.
SMEs may not be able to build disaster resilience without support from the
government. Governments’ assistance is essential in building capacity in SMEs
to conduct preliminary risk assessments and develop risk mechanisms, such as
BCP, through both conventional and unconventional education (ADPC, 2015).
Business Continuity Plan or BCP is a set of documented procedures that guide
organizations to respond, recover, resume and restore their business to a pre-de-
fined level of operation, following disruptions such as disasters (Ono, 2014). BCP
is a mechanism very much oriented towards company survival, but its proper
implementation can have impact on a much wider set of actors, benefiting com-
munities at large. BCP is relevant to companies of all sizes and business areas
and are considered one of the cheapest forms of insurance which can be pro-
duced at minimal cost (APEC, 2014).
At the same time, even though it has been estimated that 75 % of compa-
nies without a BCP fail within 3 years of a disaster (UNDP PRRP, 2017), this
practice is still largely absent from company policies. The role of national and
local governments here is especially crucial, as the majority of studies show that
large percentage of small and medium companies are not aware of the concept
at all or do not know how to develop BCPs. Thus, for instance, the 2016 survey,
conducted by the University of Indonesia, showed that 62 % of the participating
companies had not heard of BCP and 32% did not know how to establish one. To
add to this, of those interviewed, only 10% of respondents had ever attended a
workshop or training explaining the concept of BCP and only 9% had attended
a training related to general DRM (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). The rate of
SMEs who had a written BCP was also low in the Philippines (ADPC & DIT,
2016). Findings also showed that awareness levels of Thai SMEs on business con-
tinuity planning (BCP) is relatively low compared to other Southeast Asia coun-
tries (ADPC, 2015). The absence of BCP was assessed to be a common condition
among SEA Countries.
The results of the survey clearly indicated the need for increased dis-
semination of information, training on BCP preparation, and general aware-
ness on the need for BCP. Some of the respondents also mentioned that it
was difficult for them to develop a BCP as they were linking it to higher
costs and resource capacity (ADPC & DIT, 2016). Some efforts have been
taken by the administration of the three mentioned countries. For example,
the Government of Thailand tried to promote the adoption of BCP, when
in 2015, the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, (DDPM) as
the nation’s focal point to carry out disaster management, has revised the
National Disaster Management Plan, incorporating policies for encouraging
the adoption of BCP. It was indicated by the Office of Public Sector Devel-
opment Commission (OPDC) that the government agencies must establish
a team to oversee and protect critical business activities in the midst of a
disaster (ADPC, 2015). These and other efforts, however, still have a limited
effect and outreach and have not reached the desired levels of SME prepared-
ness. Mutual aid agreements among organizations for response during and
after disasters (such as privately-run emergency teams, fire brigades, search
and rescue teams and mutual help associations), could be very beneficial for
small and medium companies as those would allow for sharing the burden
of additional costs and human capital. However, in the three discussed coun-
tries, it was found that such mechanisms mostly do not yet exist (63% in In-
donesia). Such support mechanisms for collaboration so far occur only spo-
radically in some places as found by the ADPC survey report (ADPC, 2017).
4. Government Incentivization Mechanisms
SMEs often see inclusion of disaster risk measures as additional cost and ef-
fort. Governments, therefore, have a crucial role in developing enabling environ-
ment and adequate incentives for SMEs to engage in disaster management. These
incentives generally fall into two types: financial and non-financial. Financial
incentives include grants (intergovernmental, or government to person or com-
pany), tax credits, subsidies, discounts (on prices or insurance premiums), con-
ditional cash transfers or vouchers, bonds and sureties, access to concessional
loans or credits, and others. Meanwhile, non-financial incentives include, but
are not limited to, technical capability and capacity building (providing train-
ing for building risk assessment: training of tradespeople in disaster-resilient
construction, resulting in access to knowledge and access to construction op-
portunities); access to technology (technology transfer resulting in access to new,
locally appropriate disaster-resilient technology); access to information (access
to reliable and credible information about current and future risks, resulting in
informed risk-sensitive decision making); awards or certification endorsement
of good practice (increasing company brand image to society); and participation
of stakeholders (including SMEs and community) in decision making (potential
favourable influence in disaster resilient development) (ADB, 2016; Gall, Cutter,
S.L., & Nguyen, 2014).
Awareness Raising for BCP
Asked what type of incentives would SMEs in Indonesia prefer to see from
the government, 57% responded that they would benefit from receiving techni-
cal assistance and training to cover the knowledge gap. Awareness is, therefore,
an essential part of incentivizing SMEs to develop internal procedures related to
risk mitigation. The same survey showed that while the majority of interviewees
did not have initial knowledge of BCPs and other relevant mechanisms, 82% of
them were willing to participate in a national planning process to support them
to prepare for disasters (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016), which comes to show the
potential for governments and SMEs to work together and improve the relevant
policy and processes.
In the Philippines, the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) cooperated

with external organizations, such as ADPC, and with other agencies to launch
a project on strengthening the disaster resilience of SMEs. It conducted one
Training of Trainers (TOT) in 2016 with 32 participants and four BCP awareness
seminars in four regions of its country (DTI website: https://www.dti.gov.ph/
28.06.2018). The Office of Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion (OSMEP)
of Thailand has also been working with ADPC to hold awareness raising forums
and workshops on BCP. In 2015, OSMEP established the One Stop Service Cen-
ter in five provinces across Thailand, and has further cooperated with ADPC in
developing technical assistance, knowledge dissemination and capacity building
on disaster risk management (ADPC, 2015).
Risk Financing and Insurance
Financing is essential to mitigate and cope with disaster risk. Donors, gov-
ernments and multilateral development banks have gradually scaled up financial
assistance for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation (UNESCAP,
2018). Risk financing can be defined as the deployment of financial tools and
processes to mitigate the impact of events, which have a negative effect on fi-
nancial flows required to support an enterprise. Risk financing may be arranged
in advance (ex-ante) or on the occurrence of an event and identification of the
need (ex-post). The former is generally considered both more efficient and more
effective than the latter (UNESCAP, 2018). Risk insurance is a beneficial risk
transfer mechanism to reduce the economic losses of SMEs caused by disasters
and help them recover quickly. However, unlike some business insurances, such
as fire insurance, business insurance for natural disasters had a quite low pur-
chasing rate. One of the reasons has been the perception of owners that it is an
additional unnecessary cost. Another reason is the absence of tailored insurance
products relevant to smaller companies’ needs. Governments should, therefore,
urge insurance companies to develop targeted insurance products with lower
premiums. Governments should also take the responsibility to strengthen and
promote the adoption and use of this kind of risk insurances (UNESCAP, 2018).
At the same time, the resilience of insurance companies themselves is a
factor affecting the overall resilience of SMEs. Facing the destructive 2011 flood
in Thailand, under the burden of large insurance payouts, insurers and rein-
surers were forced to either withdraw, or increase their premiums, or refuse to
renew contracts, in order to protect their own normal business (ADPC, 2015). In
this case, Thailand already had set up Insurance Pooling Fund, with the initial
capital worth 50,000 million Baht, in accordance with the 2012 Royal Decree on
Insurance Pool Fund. The Insurance Fund was established as a legal entity to
assist the insurance industry in providing insurance coverage for various nat-
ural disasters, particularly in the event of flood, thus increasing the flexibility
and coping capacities of a wide range of businesses (APEC SMEWG, 2014). In
Indonesia, insurance for micro businesses was introduced by the Ministry of
Cooperatives and SMEs in cooperation with OJK (Financial Services Authority)
and Insurance Association. This insurance covers losses caused by natural di-
sasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions. It is targeted for
low-income entities, having a premium of only Rp 40,000 (about 3 USD) per year
and maximum coverage of Rp 5,000,000 (about 360 USD). It may be applied for
protection of business premises, inventories, and business equipment (Japhta et
al., 2016).
Governments can also increase wider community resilience through the
promotion of insurance for individual employees. In the 2016 ADPC survey re-
spondents ranked the “employees were unable to go to work” option first on the
list of reasons for interrupted business operations (ADPC, 2017). Asia Grand-
view Hotel in Coron, the Philippines, was regarded as a good example when Ty-
phoon Haiyan struck. All employees were covered by SSS (pension and calam-
ity assistance) insurance, Philhealth (hospitalization), and Pag-IBIG (housing),
substantially reducing the negative effects of the disaster on the livelihoods of
the employees and on the business itself (ECOP, 2015). Securing and recovery
of records should also be promoted to SMEs. Apart from protecting assets and
employees, the safekeeping of records is of utmost importance for enterprises.
Essential information includes employee records, records of business transac-
tions, customer records, and records of assets (e.g. real-estate property). Losing
such information can delay recovery of operations after a disaster (ECOP, 2015).
Soft Loans
In terms of risk retention, soft loans and credits can also represent incen-
tives. Compared with hard loans, soft loans have more flexible terms for repay-
ment and lower interest rates. What is more, going back to the report conducted
in the Philippines, complicated and lengthy documentation and screening pro-
cess is another barrier for SMEs to resort to formal financial agencies for loans or
credit. A quicker screening and bureaucracy reduction for loan application can
encourage SMEs to return to formal loans for help. In Indonesia, banks were
reported to have decreased credit lending interest rate for SMEs to under 10%
from about 17% (Mardanugraha, ADPC, 2016). In Thailand, SMEs were provid-
ed with loan guarantee of 120 billion Baht in 2011 flood reconstruction by Small
Business Credit Guarantee Corporation (SBCG) (State-owned enterprise under
the owned enterprise under the supervision of the Ministry of Finance). Soft
loans were also provided to build up flood-protection system for business opera-
tors, who installed system for flood protection according with the governmental
regulations (APEC, 2014). In the Philippines, after Super Typhoon Yolanda, En-
terprise rehabilitation financing program targeted for SMEs’ disaster response
was launched. The DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) also assisted SMEs
to receive loans from government banks.
One particular initiative in the Philippines could be emphasized, where the
government established Negosyo Centers under the mandate of Republic Act
No. 10644, and the the Go Negosyo Act of 2013. Negosyo Centers provide one-
stop service for SMEs, including business registration, information acquisition,
and specific governmental support services. This not only improved the public
service for SMEs, bust also helped integrate more SMEs into formal regulation.
The availability of formal company data can contribute to quicker fund distribu-
tion when SMEs apply for loans and credits (Picard, 2017).
Tax benefits
Governments can stimulate SMEs to take some disaster resilience actions

by tax exemptions. In Thailand, tax exemption and reduction measures were
implemented by the Customs Department, Revenue Department, and Board
of Investment for private sectors and SMEs, particularly after the 2011 flood
(APEC, 2014). The financial support from the government significantly limited
the burden on SMEs in the aftermath of the flood. Tax exemption can also be an
incentive to encourage more SMEs to engage in disaster preparedness, instead of
response, which would be a more effective way to limit disaster-related loss. Last
but not least, governments should provide relevant incentives according to spe-
cific needs and priorities. For example, in the Philippines, the local government
requires enterprises to submit hazard assessment and field investigation reports
for the issuance of certificates, as part of assuring implementation of climate
change adaptation. Another case is the promotion of cash for work schemes in-
stead of relief goods after disaster, in order to infuse more cash in reviving local
industries (Ballesteros, Marife M., & Sonny N. Domingo, 2015).
5. Remaining Challenges and Further Opportunities
Despite of the current level of effort in incentivizing SMEs’ engagement in

disaster management in the three countries, a number of gaps and challenges
still remain. Those gaps are mainly related to lack of coordination among gov-
ernment bodies, as well as the lack of SME registration data, lack of hazard risk
data relevant to businesses, and outstanding knowledge and risk financing gaps
(ADPC, 2017). First of all, lack of specifically designated bodies responsible for
SME DRM engagement in national administration would mean that there is no
institutional memory and continuity of the process. The current legislative and
policy mandates of the Disaster Risk Management (DRM) and Climate Change
Adaptation (CCA) systems and the SME promotion system in Indonesia, for in-
stance, are not yet interacting significantly at both policy and operational levels
(ADPC, 2017). A collaborative mechanism between agencies and bodies is need-
ed in building SMEs resilience to disasters. To add to this, most governmental
bodies currently do not have effective monitoring processes to ensure that gov-
ernmental efforts and programmes have indeed improved SMEs’ resilience. This
is crucial in making sure that current programs for SMEs within the respective
countries have been implemented appropriately and have lead to improved con-
ditions for SMEs (ILO & ECOP, 2015).
Secondly, the lack of reliable data on SMEs in the three countries would
mean that it will be difficult to assess if policies have reached all relevant enter-
prises and if the developed policies are adequate and well-suited to the needs of
SMEs. This also refers to the common practice of SMEs to avoid official regis-
tration and taxation. Thus, it is of great importance that governments develop
incentives to specifically target such companies and encourage them to engage
with the system. Such incentives should include supportive, rather than just pu-
nitive, measures, recognizing the needs and vulnerabilities of informal SMEs
(Villarroel et al. 2013). Furthermore, it might be beneficial for governments
to profile and engage with SMEs from the same sector in developing specific
innovative solutions for DRR to tackle concrete problems. This would also en-
hance the cooperation among SMEs and with larger businesses, as well as with
the public sector. Involving SMEs in public-private partnerships could increase
awareness of disaster risk and mutual cooperation, while at the same time pro-
vide new business opportunities for SMEs.
Thirdly, there are still remaining gaps in developing and sharing of hazard
risk data to be used in risk assessments for SMEs. It is crucial to have data on di-
saster and climate risk, including risk mapping, to be available for communities
and SMEs. This includes data publication which is relevant to businesses and
easy to understand by non-experts. The information should also be specific to lo-
cal areas and should be tailored to target different industry sectors. In addition,
cross-referencing local with national data on SMEs would be beneficial for wider
SME disaster risk assessments and in the creation of cross-sectoral cooperation
mechanisms (ADPC, 2017).
Another challenge includes the lack of common organization among SMEs
which infringes their representation in policy and planning processes. Even
though larger industries might have endeavoured in advocating for SMEs’ in-
terests, more efforts in certain sectors are needed to accommodate SMEs’ repre-
sentatives in policy making, including those with women owners and operators
(ADPC, 2017). This can be done by promoting the establishment of business
associations to represent SMEs in certain areas or sectors. There are a few cases,
such as the response during the Indian tsunami and the Great East Japan Earth-
quake, which illustrate the important role of business associations in leading
and informing government-led strategy for disaster recovery (Villarroel et al.,
2013). Moreover, SME’s knowledge of specific risk reducing mechanisms, such
as BCP, appears to be still rather low, though in surveys they have shown in-
terest in receiving more information, training, and incentives to improve their
preparedness and resilience. There are several opportunities which can be used
to close this gap. For example, disaster risk awareness could be integrated into
already existing general business trainings provided by governments and/or pri-
vate sector, natural hazard risk assessments could be included in standard BCP/
BCM procedures, and engagement with larger enterprises could provide mutual
benefits through including SMEs in their supply chain, making SMEs more re-
silient to disasters (ADPC, 2017). In addition, instead of individual or company
BCP, area or group BCP can also be initiated by sector or area to accelerate the
establishment of risk assessment including reduction of the need of expert or
human resources to build the assessment (Ono, 2014).
Lastly, risk financing mechanisms are still widely unavailable or out of
reach for the majority of SMEs (including because of the lack of credit infor-
mation) (ADPC, 2017; Torres, 2015). Currently governments’ initiatives tend
to focus more on SMEs access to capital (ADPC, 2017). However, more flex-
ible small-scale risk financing, such as affordable disaster insurance products
for SME market, are more needed (ADPC, 2017; Villarroel et al., 2013). Support
from government through policies and engagement of private insurance sectors
is a necessary step in improving the preparedness of SMEs (Japhta et al., 2016).
6. Conclusion
As the countries of Southeast Asia lie in one of the most disaster prone
regions of the world, causing losses for millions of dollars each year, building
disaster resilience for businesses and especially for small and medium compa-
nies, is crucial. SMEs, as the major provider of employment and as an important
factor for the overall economic stability in Asia, require the special attention and
efforts of national and local governments. Being the most vulnerable part of pri-
vate sector, due to financial and capacity limitations, SMEs are in need of special
targeted support through policies and legislation, aided by necessary infrastruc-
ture, investment climate, and direct interventions. Governments have, therefore,
a significant role in assisting SMEs to thrive and strengthen their business in the
face of constant disaster risk (Ballesteros & Domingo, 2015). In order to ensure
SMEs engagement in DRM efforts, governments also need to provide a number
of relevant and adequate incentives, focused on reaching long-term sustainable
involvement and solutions.
Current engagement of SMEs in disaster resilience in the three SEA coun-
tries of interest in this paper (Indonesia, Thailand, and Phillipines) is still rela-
tively low. Some of the reasons are rooted in the fact that knowledge of risk man-
agement techniques is largely missing in SMEs. Other reasons include the lack
of coordination among designated administrative bodies responsible for build-
ing resilience in small businesses, or the lack of sectoral SME organization and
representation in local and national policies. Despite of the current low level of
SME engagement, the governments in these countries have been improving their
policies aimed at strengthening SME resilience. Some of these measures include
raising awareness for BCP and other risk reduction mechanisms; promotion of
disaster risk insurance through policies and collaboration between government
and insurance companies (insurance pools fund and low premium disaster in-
surance for SMEs); provision of soft loans (for disaster recovery and flood pro-
tection systems); and tax benefits (tax exemptions before and after disaster for
affected SMEs). However, a number of challenges still remain. Gaps in govern-
ment responsibility, lack of data on SMEs and on hazard risks, lack of sectoral
representation, knowledge gaps, and risk financing unavailability are among the
important issues which require organized national and local effort. Mechanisms
for inter-agency and public-private collaboration, improved SME databases, easy
to understand and to follow administrative registration processes, establishing
and supporting business associations for SMEs and inclusion in planning and
decision making processes are some of the steps which governments can take to
improve SME disaster resilience.
Finally, the potential of SMEs to play a significant role in wider community
resilience needs to be realized and supported. Their close links with the com-
munity and specific expertise could be utilized through coordinated continuous
policies, legislation and incentives. The meaningful inclusion of SMEs into DRR
efforts would guarantee that societies in Asia are better prepared and more re-
silient to crises.
References
Villarroel, M. I., Pyle, J., Ryoko, I., Bhat, M., Fernandez, A., Vatsa, K., Shumba,
O., et al. 2013. Small Businesses: Impact of Disasters and Building Resil-
ience. Analysing the Vulnerability of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterpris-
es to Natural Hazards and Their Capacity to Act as Drivers of Community
Recovery. UNDP Crisis Prevention and Recovery. Retrieved from: https://
www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2013/en/bgdocs/UNDP,%20
2013.pdf, Accessed: 05.06.2018.
ASEAN, and Secretariat. 2015. ASEAN Strategic Action Plan for SME Develop-
ment 2016-2025. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat. Retrieved from: http://www.
smecorp.gov.my/images/pdf/SAP-SMED-Final.pdf. Accessed: 10.06.2018.
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC). 2017. Strengthening Disaster and
Climate Change Resilience of Small & Medium Enterprises in Asia: Indo-
nesia, Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam. Regional Synthesis Report, October
2017, Retrieved from: https://goo.gl/KP23Ek, Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Picard, Mary. 2017. Enabling Environment & Opportunities Philippines Strength-
ening Disaster and Climate Resilience of Small & Medium Enterprises in
Asia: Philippines. ADPC, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http://www.
academia.edu/34920586/ENABLING_ENVIRONMENT_and_OPPOR-
TUNITIES_Philippines_STRENGTHENING_DISASTER_AND_CLI-
MATE_RESILIENCE_OF_SMALL_and_MEDIUM_ENTERPRISES_IN_
ASIA. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). 2013. Private
Sector Strengths Applied: Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction from
Japan. Retrieved from: https://www.preventionweb.net/files/33594_private-
sectorstrengthsapplied2013di.pdf.Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Samantha, Gunathilaka. 2018. The Impact of Natural Disasters on Micro, Small
and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs): A Case Study on 2016 Flood Event in
Western Sri Lanka. Procedia Engineering 212: 744–51. Elsevier. Retrieved
from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.096. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Zhang, Y., Lindell, M. K. and Prater, C. S. 2009. Vulnerability of Community Busi-
nesses to Environmental Disasters. Disasters 33 (1): 38–57. Retrieved from:
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01061.x.a. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Ballesteros, Marife M., and Sonny N. Domingo. 2015. Building Philippine SMEs
Resilience to Natural Disasters. Discussion Paper Series No. 2015-20 (Re-
vised). Philippine Institute for Development Studies. Retrieved from: https://
dirp3.pids.gov.ph/webportal/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1520_rev.pdf.
Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Gupta, Sushil. 2010. Synthesis Report of Ten ASEAN Countries Disaster Risks As-
sessment: ASEAN Disaster Risk Management Initiative. ASEAN. Retrieved
from: http://www.unisdr.org/files/18872_asean.pdf. Accessed: 17.06.2018.
Rampangilei, Willem. 2016. ASEAN Vision 2025 on Disaster Management. ASE-
AN. Retrieved from: http://www.asean.org/storage/2012/05/fa-220416_
DM2025_email.pdf. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
Ismail, Nafesa, Kenji Okazaki, Chiho Ochiai, and Glenn Fernandez. 2018. Liveli-
hood Changes in Banda Aceh, Indonesia after the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsu-
nami. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 28 (June): 439–49.
Elsevier. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.003. Ac-
cessed: 21.06.2018.
Perwaiz, Aslam. 2015. Thailand Floods and Impact on Private Sector. In Disaster
Management and Private Sectors, 231–45. Disaster Risk Reduction. Spring-
er, Tokyo. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55414-1_14.
Accessed: 22.06.2018.
Auzzir, Zairol, Richard Haigh, and Dilanthi Amaratunga. 2018a. Impacts of Di-
saster to SMEs in Malaysia. Procedia Engineering 212: 1131–38. Retrieved
from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.146. Accessed: 21.06.2018.
UNISDR. 2015. Disaster Risk Reduction Private Sector Partnership: Post
2015 Framework-Private Sector Blueprint Five Private Sector Visions
for a Resilient Future, Retrieved from: https://www.preventionweb.
net/files/42926_090315wcdrrpspepublicationfinalonli.pdf. Accessed:
19.06.2018.
Izumi, T. & Shaw, R. 2015. Chapter 1: Overview and Introduction of the Private
Sector’s Role in Disaster Management in Izumi, T. & Shaw, R. (eds.) Disaster
Management and Private Sectors. Challenges and Potentials. Springer Japan
2015. ISSN 2196-4106. DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-55414-1.
Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2016. Incentives For Reducing Disaster Risk
In Urban Areas. Experiences from Da Nang (Viet Nam), Kathmandu Val-
ley (Nepal), and Naga City (Philippines). ADB Philippines. Retrieved
from: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/185616/disas-
ter-risk-urban.pdf. Accessed: 12.06.2018.
ADPC. 2012. Strengthening Disaster and Climate Resilience of Small & Medium
Enterprises in Asia. Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http://
www.adpc.net/sme-resilience-asia/download/THA/IP_CR_Thailand.pdf.
Accessed: 08.06.2018.
Mardanugraha, E. - ADPC. 2016. Disaster Resilience of Small and Medium En-
terprises (SMEs) in Indonesia – Survey Results and Policy Environment.
Presentation at Asian Business Forum 2016. Retrieved from: https://www.
adpc.net/igo/contents/blogs/ABF2016/download/presentation/Day%20
1_20%20Apr%202016/02_Thematic%20Discussion/4.%20PPT_EUGE-
NIA-mcp-rev.pdf. Accessed: 08.06.2018.
International Labour Organization (ILO), Bureau for Employers’ Activities; Re-
gional Office for Asia and the Pacific; Employers’ Confederation of the Phil-
ippines. 2015. Needs Assessment For The Private Sector in The Philippines:
Disaster Preparedness, Response And Recovery. Bangkok, Thailand: ILO.
Retrieved from: https://www.ilo.org/asia/publications/WCMS_368162/
lang--en/index.htm. Accessed: 10.06.2018.
ADPC. 2015. Towards A Resilient Business Community in Thailand. Bang-
kok, Thailand. Retrieved from: http://www.adpc.net/igo/contents/publica-
tions/publications-Details.asp?pid=782#sthash.nt1KncwZ.dpbs. Accessed:
11.06.2018.
Ono, Takahiro. 2014. Area Business Continuity Planning Study by JICA 12. OS-
MEP. 2015. SMEs in Thailand. Shensu-U Jp. Retrieved from: http://ir.acc.
senshu-u.ac.jp/?action=repository_uri&item_id=10333&file_id=15&file_
no=1, Accessed: 12.06.2018.
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). November 2014. How to Promote
Business Continuity Planning to Mitigate the Impact of Disasters. A Guide
for Government Officials, Emergency Preparedness Working Group. Re-
trieved from: https://goo.gl/NBMAuQ. Accessed: 04.07.2018.
UNDP, Pacific Risk Resilience Programme (PRRP). August 2017. The Building
Blocks for Successful Private Sector Engagement. Retrieved from: https://
goo.gl/UanKaS, Accessed: 28.06.2018.
Gall, M, Cutter, S.L., and K Nguyen. 2014. Incentives for Disaster Risk Manage-
ment. IRDR AIRDR Publication No.2). Beijing: Integrated Research on Di-
saster Risk. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.3178.8325.
UNESCAP. 2018. Opportunities for Regional Cooperation in Disaster Risk Fi-
nancing. Retrieved from: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/ES-
CAP_Opportunities_Regional_Cooperation_DRF_2018.pdf. Accessed:
28.06.2018.
Japhta, Rubin, Prashant Murthy, Yopie Fahmi, Anastassiya Marina, and Aarti Gup-
ta, eds. 2016. UKM Yang Dimiliki Wanita Di Indonesia: Kesempatan Emas
Utk Institusi Keuangan Lokal. International Finance Corporation World
Bank Group. Retrieved from: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
en/737221477568795492/UKM-yang-dimiliki-wanita-di-Indonesia-kes-
empatan-emas-untuk-institusi-keuangan-lokal. Accessed: 26.06.2018.
APEC Small and Medium Enterprise Working Group (SMEWG). November
2014. APEC SME Disaster Resilient Policy Framework. Retrieved from:
file:///C:/Users/user/Dropbox/%D0%AF%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B-
D%D0%B8%D1%8F/Keio%20SFC%202018/WGs/WG2/M%20SCE%20
02%2011A_APEC%20SME%20Disaster%20Resilience%20Policy%20
Framework_final_v2ed%20(1).pdf. Accessed: 05.06.2018.
Employers’ Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP). 2015. Retrieved from:
http://ecop.org.ph/. Accessed: 26.06.2018.
Torres, Ted P. 2015. Philippines Lags in SME Lending in ASEAN. Philstar.
Com. September 3, 2015. Retrieved from: https://www.philstar.com/busi-
ness/2015/09/03/1495620/philippines-lags-sme-lending-asean. Accessed:
26.06.2018.
Author Contributions: Author Contributions: A.V.M. was responsible for the over-
all coordination among the authors, for the body and flow of the paper, and for
all editing. She has provided some input in chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5. D. S. B. and
Z.Y. have provided close to equal input in all chapters of the paper. F.A.P. has
provided input related to the country profiles and has prepared all graphs in the
paper. R.S. has provided overall coordination and guidance for the structure,
flow and focus of the paper.
Acknowledgments: The first author is thankful to the Ministry of Education, Cul-
ture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan for the provided schol-
arship to conduct research in the field of disaster risk reduction. The second
and fourth authors are thankful to the Pusbindiklatren Bappenas Programme,
Government of Indonesia, for the provided scholarship. The authors also ac-
knowledge the support received from the Disaster Resilience and Sustainable
Development Program of the Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio
University, Japan, in conducting this study.
Conflicts of Interest: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 51
51-61
UDC: 005.334:504.4(560)
005.35
Review article DOI:https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.3
Natural Disasters in Turkey:

Social and Economic Perspective
Adem Öcal 1
1 Independent Researcher; Assoc. Prof. Dr., PhD
* Correspondence: ocadem@gmail.com
Abstract: Turkey is located in one of the most significant active seismic regions in the
world. The country also is subject to many other natural disasters, that’s why, natural
disasters have been seen in Turkey forever. These events have caused physical destruction
to the death of more than 100.000 people and to the wounding of a lot, and shacked the
country’s economy in the last century. Disasters sources from geological, meteorological,
biological and technological sources, however, the results and effects of disasters involve
of interest to social sciences. In developing the social perspective on disasters, the main
factor is that disasters are effective on human communities. The development of individ-
ual, state and international cooperation mechanisms in combating disasters is a necessity.
In this study, it was aimed to review the sociological, economical and psychological ef-
fects of the disasters, and to call attention to social scientist on the effects of disasters in
Turkey.
Keywords: disaster; earthquake; social impact; flood; hazard; natural disaster; Turkey
1. Introduction
Disaster is defined as an event that transcends local capacity, requires na-

tional or international assistance (Hoyois, Below, Scheuren & Guha-Sapir, 2006),
causes physical, economic and social losses for people who cause great harm and
human death, and interrupts normal life and human activities by disrupting hu-
man activities (Ergünay, 1996). The severity of a disaster is generally measured
by loss of life, injuries, structural damage, social and economic damages resulting
from an event that is the result of a hazardous event. The severity of disasters in
Turkey is generally higher than the mean of the world. Because, Turkey is located
between Europe and Asia with a population reaching more than 80 million. The
growth rate of the population, undergoing a very rapid process of urbanization
in the last 70 years. The ratio of urban population, which was 26% in 1950, had
climbed to 60% by the end of the century, now is about 91%. Also Turkey has
high fertility rate (‰ 2,14) in the World (TUIK, 2016). This high-density popula-
tion brings many problems with such as the increase in the number of buildings
and settlements. However, the weakness of structures against disasters increases
the severity of possible disasters.
While the human factor is more effective in the formation and development
of humanitarian disasters; in natural disasters, it can be seen that natural causes
are more effective. The source of disasters can be originated from geophysical, at-
mospheric, hydrological, climatological or biological factor (Table 1) (EM-DAT,
2018).
Atmospheric events can be observed by humans and sometimes necessary
precautions can be taken without reaching the disaster dimension. The atmo-
sphere of our world is constantly monitored through satellites from sky and by
meteorologists from the ground. However, there is still the possibility of damage
from disasters. Some meteorological events cannot be observed directly because
they occur over a long period of time. For example, the direct observation of de-
sertification, global warming, climate change, and large atmospheric events such
as El Nino-La Nina are quite difficult. Such meteorological events are assessed by
their results. Hydrological disasters can be occurred after severe meteorological
events; however climatological disasters can be caused by lack of some meteoro-
logical factors or carelessness.
Table 1: EM-DAT disaster classifications.

Type Events
Geophysical Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic activities
Extreme temperatures, storms, open air turbulence, acid rain,
Atmospheric icing, sea and lake water levels change, frost, el nino - la nina,
(Meteorological) erosion, storms, air pollution, global warming and climate
change, ozone gas depletion, fog and low visibility distance
Hydrological Floods, landslides, avalanches
Climatological Droughts, wildfires
Biological Epidemic diseases, insect bites
Biological disasters occur more slowly than other disasters. This kind of di-
sasters can be controlled by observing the developmental stages of the harmful
cause. Sometimes biological and technological factors can bring together in some
biological disasters as Bhopal (Broughton, 2005).
Geophysical events as volcanoes and earthquakes take their source from the
depths of the Earth. It is quite difficult to determine the natural events of these
kinds and to determine the time of arrival. The lack of knowledge of the people
on the natural history of place-based events leads to the loss of life and property
in such disasters.
1.1. The features of disasters in Turkey
Turkey is a country which has a high average elevation (1132 m) compared

to Europe, with three sides surrounded by the sea (Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea,
and Aegean Sea). Mediterranean, Continental and Black Sea climate types (simi-
lar to Oceanic climate type) are experienced on the country soil. Also important
air masses of the world (Siberia HP, Asor HP, Island LP and Basra LP) confront
on Turkey. It is possible to observe 4 different seasons in Turkey within a year.
Turkey is constantly facing the danger of natural disasters because of its geo-
graphical features. Disasters such as earthquake, landslides, floods, avalanche,
drought, wildfires, extreme winter conditions and storms are seen in our country.
As seen in Table 2, the most common type of all disaster events in Turkey is the
landslide (32,7%) [6]. Climatological factors, geological structure and elevation
are influential on occurring the landslides in Turkey.
Moreover, since Turkey is a geologically young country the rock fall events
are often seen. Floods are significant natural disasters in Turkey (12,2%). The fact
that Turkey is a higher country than Europe; the variation of weather conditions
in short distance and time can cause floods. Another type of disaster seen in our
country is avalanche (3,8%). There is an avalanche in Turkey, especially in the
eastern part of Turkey. More than one natural disaster can sometimes be experi-
enced at the same time. Apart from the above mentioned disasters, other natural
disasters such as extreme weather conditions (1,7%) are also seen in Turkey (Ta-
ble 2).
Table 2: The number of death and injured people in disasters in Turkey

(1900 - 2018) (TABB, 2018).
Event Death Injured
f % f % f %
Landslide 16223 32,7 36 0,0 41 0,1
Flood 6069 12,2 232 0,2 116 0,2
Earthquake 3368 6,8 95544 95,6 47411 77,2
Wildfire 2256 4,6 41 0,0 42 0,1
Avalanche 1892 3,8 128 0,1 80 0,1
Storm 1816 3,7 264 0,3 326 0,5
Extreme winter conditions 845 1,7 143 0,1 944 1,5
Explosions 601 1,2 256 0,3 1352 2,2
Urban fire 608 1,2 57 0,1 250 0,4
Terror 441 0,9 202 0,2 548 0,9
Traffic accidents 1359 2,7 1128 1,1 7373 12,0
Other* 14097 28,4 1897 1,9 2941 4,8
TOTAL 49575 100,0 99928 100,0 61424 100,0
* Victims are affected by more than one event together or separately
Turkey is located on most important fault zones in the world. It is possible to

collect these fault lines in three main regions: North Anatolia Fault Zone (NAFZ),
South East Anatolia Fault Zone (SEAFZ), and West Anatolia Fault Region (Fig-
ure 1). These fault generations produce severe and deadly earthquakes. Furthermore,
the horst-graben system lies in the west of Turkey and has continuous earthquake gener-
ating capacity (Ambraseys & Finkel, 2006).
Figure 1. Earthquake Regions Map of Turkey (AFAD, 2018).
NAFZ starts from Van province in the east and extends to Tekirdağ in the
west (AFAD, 2018). This fault line is similar to the San Andreas Fault Line in
California. Turkey’s large and very populated settlements are located on this line.
During the historical period there have been devastating earthquakes in this area.
These are the important ones in Istanbul (1509, 1766, 1894), Erzincan (1939,
1992), Varto (1966), Bolu (1957), İzmit (1999) and Düzce (1999). SEAFZ is a
convex belt extending from Antakya to Hakkari counties in the direction of SW-
NE. It is seen severely earthquakes on this fault zone. One of the risky areas in
terms of seismicity in Turkey is Western Anatolia. The Big Menderes, the Little
Menderes and Gediz depressions; Izmit Gulf coast, Bakırçay Basin, Edremit Gulf
coast, Ulubat and Manyas depressions, Bursa, Yenisehir, İnegöl and İznik depres-
sions are located in this earthquake zone (Levy & Salvori, 2000). 96% of Turkey’s
surface area, 99% of the population and 98% of the industrial areas are located in
the first 4-degree earthquake zone considered as risky from the seismic point of
view (Türkoğlu, 2001).
1.2. Social, psychological and economic effects of natural disasters in Turkey

Natural disasters caused considerable loss of lives and property even in re-
cent history of Turkey. As a result of natural disasters, in the last century, approx-
imately 100.000 people died, over 61.424 people injured, over 108.573 buildings
demolished, and over 1.337.521 buildings damaged in Turkey since the begin-
ning of 20th Century (TABB, 2018).
Earthquakes are the most hazardous disasters in Turkey as in the past and for
future. During the known historical period, there have been major earthquakes
that have been damaging to life, causing damage and loss of property. The rate of
earthquakes incidence is 6,8% in the country, but the effect of earthquake is more
than this ration. In the last century, 3.368 earthquakes that have been damaged
and recorded in Turkey (Table 3).
Table 3: The number of damaged and demolished buildings in disasters in Tur-

key (1900 - 2018) (TABB, 2018).
Damaged Demolished
Event
buildings buildings
f % f % f %
Landslide 16.223 32,7 21334 1,6 3638 3,4
Flood 6069 12,2 62400 4,7 507 0,5
Earthquake 3368 6,8 1.238.599 92,6 104.136 95,9
Wildfire 2256 4,6 128 0,0 9 0,0
Avalanche 1892 3,8 1179 0,1 135 0,1
Storm 1816 3,7 3648 0,3 23 0,0
Extreme winter conditions 845 1,7 13 0,0 0 0,0
Explosions 601 1,2 226 0,0 1 0,0
Urban fire 608 1,2 961 0,1 56 0,1
Terror 441 0,9 14 0,0 0 0,0
Traffic accidents 1359 2,7 1 0,0 0 0,0
Others 14097 28,4 9018 0,7 68 0,1
TOTAL 49.575 100,0 1.337.521 100,0 108.573 100,0
Turkey, as it has been in the past, is suffering too much due to natural disas-
ters today. In this sense, the Gölcük Earthquake of 7.4 magnitude, which took
place on 17 August 1999, has been an unforgettable bitter experience for our
country. Only 17.479 people lost their lives in this earthquake and about 43.953
people were injured (Özman, 2000).
The feeling that someone who lives in an earthquake will feel the first mo-
ment is fear and panic. It has been seen that those who suffer from earthquakes
are concerned about their family members, are saddened about the dead and
wounded in the earthquake, and they try to make sense of life again (Cvetković,
Öca & Ivanov, in press) Fear, anxiety, guilt, anger, tension and despair are the
most prominent features of this period [13]. The psychological reactions of the
people living with the earthquake to the events have been researched about the
effects of the people on the depressed people after 1992 Erzincan, 1995 Dinar
and 1999 Izmit earthquakes (Karancı, 1999; Sarp, 1999). After one year of Göl-
cük Earthquake, 1999, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rate was found to
be 43% in the survivors (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou, 2002). In another study
this rate (PTSD) was found to be 25.4% in the survivors living in a tent city after
one year of the disaster (Tural, Coşkun, Önder, Çorapçioğlu, Yildiz, Kesepara,
Karakaya, Aydin, Erol, Torun & Aybar, 2004). On May 1, an earthquake mea-
suring 6.4 occurred, centred in Bingöl and felt in the surrounding cities. Özen &
Sir (2004) measured the frequency of PTSD in Bingöl and found PTSD was to be
25% after 2 months of the earthquake.
Behaviourally, behaviours such as an excessive arousal state, sleeping prob-
lems, changes in appetite, speech disorders, increase in alcohol and drug use,
avoidance of certain stimuli are observed in earthquake victims. In a study con-
ducted 16 months after the 1992 Erzincan earthquake, it was determined that
the subjects living with the earthquake were more nervous and nervous than
those living with the earthquake (Karancı, 1999).
There are also some changes in social situations in people with disabili-
ties. In a survey conducted, 42.8% of the employees were employed before the
earthquake, while after the earthquake this rate dropped to 36.8%. The homes
of some of the victims were completely destroyed in the earthquake, and some
of them were damaged. Most of the earthquake victims have lost their electronic
home appliances (television, dishwasher, washing machine, oven, etc.), while at
the same time they have been deprived of their income from real estate such
as rented houses and shops. These people also stated that they consumed their
deposits in the banks after the earthquake. After disasters, a number of cultural
changes were also observed. The bonds of social assistance have been damaged,
and relative changes have been recorded in religious beliefs. There has been some
increase in divorce requests. After the 1999 Gölcük earthquake, there was a de-
crease in confidence in civil society organizations and in the sentence. Neverthe-

less, there is a growing confidence in civil society organizations such as AKUT
(Kasapoğlu & Ecevit, 2001).
Natural disasters lead to massive economic losses wherever they occur. These
losses can be in the form of direct, indirect and secondary losses. For example,
on 17 August 1999, earthquake-affected area is home to 23% of the country’s
population, and accounts for 34.7% of Gross National Product (GNP) (Pelling,
Özerdem & Barakat, 2002). According to statistics, direct losses in our country
are found to be 1% of Gross National Product due to natural disasters in our
century. Indirect losses are much more (3-4%). Only the earthquakes of August
17 and November 12, 1999 caused 6.1% of the country’s Gross National Income
(GNI) (JICA, 2004). It is estimated that the impact on the public finance of the
depression is about 6.2 billion dollars. This amount of $ 3.5 billion is tempo-
rary and permanent new residential construction and residential construction.
Turkey’s industrial and communications infrastructure has suffered a great loss,
and direct and indirect losses to the depreciated country’s economy amounted
to approximately $ 13 billion (DPT, 1999). It was emphasized that the economic
cost of Gölcük Earthquake in Turkey is 9-13 billion dollars (Özerdem & Barakat,
2000).
Earthquakes also occur elsewhere in the world and lead to heavy material
damage. For example, it was estimated that the property damage in the 1923
Japan (Kanto) earthquake was $ 15.6 billion, and that $ 17 billion in Italy in 1976
was $ 10 billion (Barka, Altunel & Akyüz, 2000).
Discussion and Conclusion
August 17, 1999 Gölcük earthquake revealed the disruptions and shortcom-
ings of the disaster management mechanism implemented in our country for
many years. With this earthquake, critical views on disaster management policies
in our country have been developed. After this date, it is seen that a national level
understanding of the need for more permanent and radical changes in disaster
mitigation in Turkey, rather than post-disaster wound policies, has been reached.
A reflection of the change in disaster management and planning in Turkey is also
seen in the field of education. More and more emphasis has been given to disas-
ter education in widespread and structured education. Disasters can be assessed
through different perspectives in different disciplines. For example, an earth-
quake is essentially a geological event; however, its effects are studied under the
disciplines such as economy, sociology, psychology, geography, history, and law
(Öcal, 2000). The development of a healthy perspective on disasters can eliminate
the harmful effects of disasters, or even destroy them.
Turkey is exposed to disasters today as it has been throughout history due to

its geographical location and features. Since it is not possible to escape disasters,
it is necessary to learn to live with disasters. While the formations of disasters
are generally described by science, they need to be addressed by the social sci-
ences in terms of their consequences and impacts. Disasters in Turkey also have
sociological, psychological, economic, legal, etc. It is understood that there are
various influences from the care and that it needs to be handled by the related
social sciences. It is impossible for a disaster management to be realistic without
considering the social consequences of disasters.
In this study, it was tried to develop a social point of view for the effects
of disasters in Turkey. It is a well-known fact that disasters in our world have
increased quantitatively and their effects have influenced wider masses. There
is a greater need for national and international co-operation in the sense of pre-
paredness and mitigation of disasters than ever. Because events causing disasters
do not accept political and administrative borders. Even states that are struggling
with each other may have to cooperate with disasters in combat.
References
AFAD. (2018). Turkey earthquake regions map. https://www.afad.gov.tr/

en/26735/Turkeys-New-Earthquake-Hazard-Map-is-Published
Ambraseys N.N., Finkel C.F. (2006). Türkiye’de ve komşu bölgelerde sismik
etkinlikler: bir tarihsel inceleme, 1500-1800 [Seismicity of Turkey and adja-
cent areas: a historical review, 1500-1800]. TÜBİTAK Publishing, Ankara.
Barka A, Altunel E, Akyüz S. (2000). Yeryüzü ve Deprem [Earth and earthquake].
Boyut Publishing, İstanbul.
Başoğlu M, Şalcıoğlu E, Livanou M. (2002). Traumatic stress responses in earth-
quake survivors in Turkey. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15(4), 269-276.
Broughton E. (2005). The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review. Environ-
mental Health, 4(1), 6.
Cvetković V.M., Öcal A., Ivanov A. (2019). Young adults’ fear of disasters: a
comparative study among Turkey, Serbia and Macedonia. IJDRR, 35, 101095.
Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı [State Planning Organization]. (1999). Depremin
ekonomik ve sosyal etkileri-muhtemel finansman ihtiyaci kisa, orta ve
uzun vadede alinabilecek tedbirler [Economic and social effects of depres-
sion-possible financing needs measures that can be taken in short, medium
and long term]. Ankara.
EM-DAT. (2018). The international disaster database, centre for research on
the epidemiology of disasters. (accessed on January 25, 2018), http://www.
emdat.be/classification
Ergünay O. (1996). Afet yönetimi nedir ve nasıl olmalıdır? [What is disaster
management and how should be it?]. Erzincan ve Dinar Depremleri Işığın-
da Türkiye’nin Deprem Sorunlarına Çözüm Yolları Arayışları (TÜBİTAK
Deprem sempozyumu) Bildiriler Kitabı (Der. Tuğrul TANKUT), 263-272,
Ankara.
Hoyois P, Below R, Scheuren JM, Guha-Sapir D. (2006). Annual disaster statis-
tical review numbers and trends. Univeriste Catholique de Louvain-Brus-
sels-Belgium. Brussels. www.cred.be.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). (2004). Türkiye’de doğal afetler
konulu ülke strateji raporu [Country strategy report on natural disasters in
Turkey]. Ankara
Karancı A. N. (1999). Depremin psiko-sosyal boyutlari: Erzincan, Dinar ve 17
Ağustos 1999 Marmara Depremleri (Psychosocial dimensions of the Erzin-
can, Dinar and the 17 August Marmara earthquakes). Türk Psikoloji Bülteni,
Volume 5, No 14, 55-58.
Kasapoğlu A, Ecevit M. (2001). Depremin sosyolojik araştirmasi [Sociological
survey of the earthquake]. Sosyoloji Derneği Yayınları, No:8, Ankara.
Levy M., Salvori M. (2000). Deprem kuşaği: deprem nedir? Ne değildir? [Earthquake
zone: what is earthquake? What is not? (Translator T Gürer). Doğan Pub-
lishing, İstanbul.
Öcal A. (2010). Hazard education in 4th to 7th grade social studies courses in
Turkey. Social Studies Research & Practice, 5(1), 87-95. Retrieved from
http://www.socstrp.org/issues/PDF/5.1.8.pdf.
Özen S, Sir A. (2004). Frequency of PTSD in a group of search and rescue
workers two months after 2003 Bingol (Turkey) earthquake. The Journal of
nervous and mental disease, 192(8), 573-575.
Özerdem A, Barakat S. (2000). After Marmara Earthquake: lessons for avoiding
short cuts to disasters. Third World Quaterly, 21, (3), 425-439.
Özmen, B. (2000). 17 Ağustos 1999 İzmit Körfezi Depreminin hasar durumu
(rakamsal verilerle), [17 August 1999 İzmit Golf Earthquake damage assess-
ment], TDV/DR 010-53, Türkiye Deprem Vakfı
Pelling M, Özerdem A, Barakat S. (2002). The Macro- Economic Impact of
Disaster. Progress in Development Studies. 2, (4), 283–305.
Sarp N. (1999). Depremin çocuklar üzerindeki etkileri, çocuklarimiza nasil
yardimci olabiliriz? (The effect of earthquakes on child: How can we help
our children?) Milli Eğitim, Sayı: 144, 25–26.
Tural Ü, Coşkun B, Önder E, Çorapçioğlu A, Yildiz M, Kesepara C, Karakaya I,
Aydin M, Erol A, Torun F, Aybar G. (2004). Psychological consequences of
the 1999 earthquake in Turkey. J. Traum. Stress, 17: 451–459. doi:10.1007/
s10960-004-5793-9
Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK). (2016). Fertility statistic 2015, http://www.
tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21514.
Türkiye Afet Bilgi Bankası [Turkey Disaster Information Bank] (TABB) (2018)
Republic of Turkey, Prime Ministry Disaster and Emergency Management
Authority. https://tabb-analiz.afad.gov.tr/
Türkoğlu N. (2001). Türkiye’nin yüzölçümü ve nüfusunun deprem bölgelerine
dağılışı [The area of Turkey and distribution of population to earthquake
regions]. Ankara Üniversitesi Türkiye Coğrafyası Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi
Dergisi, Volume 8, 133–148.
Yılmaz V. (2004). A statistical analysis of the effects on survivors of the 1999
earthquake in Turkey. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal,
32(6), 551-558.
Conflicts of Interest: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

UDC: 005.8:502.58:556.166(520:549.3)
Research article 005.334
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.4
Preparing International Joint Project:

use of Japanese flood hazard map in Bangladesh
Kumiko Fujita1 and Rajib Shaw2
1 Researcher, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Japan
2 Professor, Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Japan
* Correspondence: kumiko.fujita@gmail.com
Abstract: Both Japan and Bangladesh suffer from floods, and variety of measures
have been developed in each country. In addition to the structural measures such as
embank-ment, non-structural measures such as flood hazard map and warning system
have been developed and used for evacuation effectively in Japan. However, flood
hazard map is not a common measure in Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, different
measures such as raising / elevating their houses with plinth, placing sand bags on
the riverbank and migration are common. The major reason of this difference is
because of the different flood phenomena. For example, the flood phenomena in
Japan is more destructive in short term compared to the flood in Bangladesh
because of the difference of the topography. In Japan, the river velocity is fast
because of the steep river bed, therefore, even one hit is possible to destroy
buildings and deprive of people’s lives sometimes. However, flood in
Bangladesh is not able to destroy buildings and deprive of people’s lives in short
term. Long inundation period such as a few months makes people impossible to
secure food by farming and deprive of human lives by starvation. Thus,
understanding the different flood phenomena is the base of starting project.
However, many researchers and mem-bers in international joint projects start
without noticing the different phenomena and perception toward river and flood.
In addition, understanding the background of each country is also needed, since the
technology for flood disaster risk reduction have been developed under the social
condition of each country. Since the flood in Japan is destructive in short term,
Japanese are afraid of flood, thus flood disaster risk reduction has been
considerable interest for government and local people. Government has been
developing measures and legislation, and local people are cooperative to the
government. However, Bangladeshi are not afraid of flood itself, the flood-conveyed
fertile soil is even welcome by farmers. They pay attention to the duration of flood,
since it is related to the available duration of farming and securing food.
Thus, government and local people in Bangladesh did not choose the way of
controlling the river flow by structural measures like Japan.
In this research, river floods in Bangladesh and Japan are compared for clarifying the
differences. Since social background is also important factor for developing the flood
measures, it is also reviewed and compared, such as land use, population, education and
disaster risk reduction system. Then the possibility of adjusting Japanese hazard map to
the condition in Bangladesh are discussed.
Keywords: Flood Hazard map, Technology transfer, Social background, Japan, Bangladesh
1. Floods in Bangladesh and Japan
Recognizing the difference of rivers and floods in Bangladesh and Japan is

the basic background for starting joint project. Therefore, rivers and floods in
Bangladesh and Japan are compared first.
1.1. Comparison of river speed and slope
Generally, Bangladesh experiences four types of flood, i) Flash Flood, ii)

Rain fed Flood, iii) River Flood, and iv) Coastal Flood (cyclonic storm surges
flood and tidal flood) (Figure 1). This research focuses on iii) river flood, which
are also called as river bank erosion or monsoon flood. River flood occurs along
major rivers during the monsoon from June to September every year. According
to the Bangladesh Water Development Board about 1,200 km of river banks are
actively eroding and about 100,000 people living on the river banks are affected
(Zimmermann et al. 2009).
Figure 1: Flood affected area

Source: arranged from (WMO/GWP 2003)
Bangladesh has the total area of 144,000 km2, and about 10,000 km2 (about
7%) of the total area is covered with water. The area is 820 km from north to
south and 600 km from east to west, and approximately 80% of the area is with-
in 10 meters above mean sea level. Thus, the flood plains make up 80% of the
country, and large areas are annually flooded during the monsoon season from
June to September. Therefore, velocity of the major rivers in Bangladesh is slow.
Figure 2 is the comparison of the slope of major rivers in the world. For example,
the Ganges river in Bangladesh runs slowly.
On the contrary rivers in Japan are very fast and shorter than rivers in Ban-
gladesh. Topography of Japan is rugged with many mountains, gorges, rivers,
lakes, marshes and a complex coastline. The island is long with high mountain
ranges in the center, and rivers flow from the high mountains to coasts. The pre-
cipitation in mountains and hills are high and the distance from the mountains
to coasts is short generally, therefore, the flow is rapid.
Figure. 2: Slope of major river in the world

Source: based on (MLIT 2001)
1.2. Flood inundation period
Rivers in Bangladesh have gentle slope and flow slowly. Though the flood is
the cause of erosion, it does not hit buildings, land and people. As a result, they
are able to live in the inundated place as long as it exists (Figure 3), and there is
enough time to prepare for evacuate / migrate. Sometimes they do not need to
leave their land. However, the erosion affects large area. It deprives people of
their farm land and crop resulting starvation.
Figure 3: Villagers walking flooded path (Sundarganj, Gaibandha in Aug. 2014)
On the contrary, the river flow in Japan is rapid even in dry season if it is
compared to the river flow in Bangladesh. If heavy rains fall in Japan, water
flows from upstream to oceans in short time, and there is high risk to hit people,
buildings, and properties. This phenomenon is called “flood” in Japan. Floods
in Japan are more destructive in short time. Even one hit of flood is possible to
destroy embankment, buildings, etc. and take people’s lives directly. However,
the flood duration is much shorter, within a several hours to a few days in most
cases. Thus the flood duration in Japan and Bangladesh is different.
1. Social background
Understanding social background of each country is also important for suc-

cessful joint project.
1.1. Population density and land use
Bangladesh is densely populated country as Figure 4 shows. Since the coun-

try is flat (Figure 4, right), people are able to live in and cultivate most of the area,
except the south coastal area which is Shunderban Forest, a World Heritage Site,
and the east area next to India and Myanmar which is hilly.
Figure. 4: Bangladesh population density (left )and low elevation topography (right)
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/downloads/maps/lecz/lecz-urban-rural-popu-
lation-estimates-v1/bangladesh-population-density-and-lecz.jpg
Japan is partially densely populated as Figure 5 (left) shows. This is because of

the topography. About 73% of Japan’s area is steep mountainous, volcanic land,
and hills, which locates interior of Japan (Figure 5 right). It is difficult to live in
and around mountain ranges because of frequent mountain disasters such as
landslide, debris flow, flash flood and so on, and especially it is difficult to build
large cities in such steep slope areas. Therefore, less than 10% of the population
live in the rural/mountainous parts.
Figure 5: Japan population density (left) and rugged topography (right)

Source based on: (left) http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/downloads/maps/
grump-v1/grump-v1-population-density/jpndens.jpg
(right) https://www.worldofmaps.net/typo3temp/images/topographie-japan.jpg
Scattered plains and basins among mountains cover only about 27% (Sta-
tistic Bureau, 2016). Japan has three major plains areas all in the main island.
The largest is the Kanto plain with the capital Tokyo. Second is the Yamato plain
with Kyoto and Osaka. Third is the Nobi plain with Nagoya. Tokyo is the larg-
est metropolitan area in the world, and Osaka and Nagoya are the second and
third-largest metropolitan areas in Japan. Throughout Japanese history, these
three plains provided the greatest agricultural potential and served as the eco-
nomic, political and cultural centers. Japan’s population is concentrated in these
three major plains and plains / basins along the south coast, and to a lesser extent
the north coast. Thus, the interior of Japan, which is mountainous are, is practi-
cally depopulated (Figure 6).
Figure 6: A typical mountain village in Reihoku area, Kochi prefecture (left)

and typical greater Tokyo area (right)
https://www.uniquejapantours.com/how-big-is-tokyo/
Therefore, Japan’s habitable and arable area is extremely limited. The habit-
able land, including agricultural land about 12%, is about 33% (Statistic Bureau,
2016) and more than 90% of the population live there. The interior mountain-
ous area is difficult for people to live because of the steep slope topography and
mountain disasters such as debris flow, landslide, and flash flood. Thus, because
of the topography, people in Japan are forced to live in flood plain areas and Ja-
pan’s urban areas is densely populated. Today, about 50% of the population and
75% of properties are located on flood plains, which is about 10% of the country
(Yoshikawa 2011).
1.2. Population
The population is increasing Bangladesh (Figure 7) and it makes people

more difficult to survive the food shortage during floods. Food production is
being disrupted by floods more frequently and more severely than before due to
climate change (Douglas 2009). Climate change is expected to change the fre-
quency, intensity, duration and magnitude of floods (IPCC 2007). It is also likely
to pose problems on food supplies, because Bangladeshi are highly dependent
on the monsoon farming (Shukla 2003). In addition, as the population increase,
more and more people are forced to live in flood risk area. Thus, the increasing
population affects the number of flood victims, and the possibility of starvation
caused by flood is increased.
Japan’s population steadily increased through the 20th century. Because
of the rapid increase, urbanization was accelerated. Foot hill of the mountains
has been also developed where people did not live because the area is moun-
tain disasters-prone area, such as landslide and flash flood. After many years of
slowing population growth, the number of people who live in Japan has begun
to decrease. The fall began in 2004, and it has accelerated since then (Figure 7).
Figure 7: Bangladeshi Population <164.76 million in 2017> and Japanese Popu-

lation <126.79 Million in 2017>
Source: World Bank (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?loca-
tions=BD)
2. Different needs for flood disaster risk reduction
Because of the different flood phenomena in Japan and Bangladesh men-

tioned in section 1, and the different condition depended on the topography in
Japan and Bangladesh mentioned in section 2, the major initial purpose of flood
disaster risk reduction is different. However, the final purpose is the same. It is
saving lives.
In Japan, avoiding destructive direct hit by flood in short term is needed for
saving lives and properties.
In Bangladesh, floods are not destructive and cannot deprive people’s lives in
short term. Though long-term inundation causes difficulty of farming and food
shortage, inundation caused by flood bring following many beneficial effects:
– fertile soil
– increased growth of fisheries
– favorite condition for ecosystem
Figure 8 is the image of comparing flood event in Japan and Bangladesh.

Destructive flood in Japan gives damages on properties and human in a short
term. However, flood in Bangladesh gives both damage and benefits such as fer-
tile soil after long flood / inundation period.
Figure 8: Flood as a short-term event in Japan and a long-term event in Bangladesh
Thus, floods are even considered the benefit especially for agriculture. Since
farmers rely on flood conveyed fertile soil for farming, it is not expected to con-
trol flood totally in Bangladesh. However long-lasting inundation causes the
lack of available farm land and causes food shortage. Then it causes starvation.
Therefore, protecting farm land from long lasting inundation is considered to
secure food and to save lives.
3. Measures for flood in Japan
Protecting lives and properties from floods is essential for Japan to develop
the country. Structural and non-structural measures have been developed for
protecting lives and properties from destructive hit. Self-help, mutual-help and
public-help is also common. In addition, the system of preparedness, occur-
rence, response, recovery have been improved (Figure 9). Now, integrated man-
agement for flood disaster risk reduction is common in Japan.
In preparedness stage, structural measures such as embankment, dams,
reservoirs etc. are prepared by government, and non-structural measures such
as hazard map is also prepared. People are educated how to interpret the local
hazard map. During flood, central and local government provide supports, and
local people receive warning issued by government through leaders of local com-
munities. Then, people are able to evacuate following the hazard map informa-
tion. In addition to the local people, external helps such as NGOs, government,
volunteers are available especially for response and recovery stages.
Figure 9: Flood management cycle of preparedness, occurrence, response and recovery
3.1. Hazard map
Hazard map is effectively used under the integrated management in flood

prone areas in Japan. Flood hazard map is prepared based on the provided in-
formation by central government and issued by cities, towns and villages in Ja-
pan. The local hazard map is distributed to each household. It is also able to
download. It includes the information of (1) possible part of dyke break, (2)
possible inundation area, and (3) evacuation route and place (Figure 10). This
information makes local people easily prepare for the possible local flood. Since
flood in Japan is destructive, in addition to structural measures for protecting
people’s lives and properties, non-structural measure such as evacuation is need-
ed for securing people’s lives. Today, about 50% of the population and 75% of
properties are located on flood plains (Yoshikawa 2011).
Figure 10: An example of flood hazard map (Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, Japan)

https://slideplayer.com/slide/5815374/
Followings are essential condition for preparing and utilizing hazard map.
(1) Ability of including necessary information in hazard map
(2) Ability of updating maps
(3) Ability of interpreting hazard map by local people
(4) Warning system
Detail of each condition is reviewed as follows.
4.1.1 Ability of including necessary information in hazard map -Contents of hazard map
For preparing flood hazard map, following information is needed.

• possible range and extent of flood damage
• flood danger spot
• evacuation shelter
• evacuation route
• disaster-related public organizations (local government offices, fire sta-
tions, police, hospital etc)
Public schools and public centers are designated as evacuation shelters / cen-
ters in most cases. People are able to know the safe evacuation route for avoiding
the destructive direct hit by flood. The duration of the evacuation is several days
in most cases of flood in Japan. Therefore, food for surviving several days are
stocked and conveyed if people evacuate to the designated evacuation shelters /

centers. Expected function of evacuation shelter is not only for accommodation,
but for getting official and several supports. Since there is the system to provide
food, water and some necessary items to stay for several days at shelters, Japanese
local people are able to evacuate with minimum necessaries.
4.1.2 Ability of updating maps -Frequency of updating map
Since flat land is limited in Japan, people have to live in limited flat but flood
prone area. Flood in Japan has possibility to destroy buildings and deprive peo-
ple’s lives. As a result, structural measures to control the flow have been needed
in Japan’s rivers, such as high embankment, for protecting the people’s lives,
assets, infrastructure and buildings. Flood plains are protected by river levees.
River levees are important infrastructures that protect our country’s people and
properties and to prevent such enormous economic and social loss. Japan have a
great many rivers. They are short and disconnected. The river flow is controlled
to flow straight and rapidly from the mountains to the nearest coast, and do
not change the shape (Figure 11). River levee is essential for hazard map, since it
keeps river shape. Therefore, updating map is easy and not frequent.
Figure 11: Japanese river with structural measure for flowing straight and rapidly
Source: based on Sabo in Japan (MLIT)
Rivers in Bangladesh have few structural measures (Figure 12), since small
flood is rather beneficial for farming and so on. Most of the rivers keep natural
condition and people are easily able to access rivers. They live next to rivers and
even in rivers (Figure 13). People utilize and rely on the flood conveyed fertile soil
for agriculture. This natural condition makes it difficult to update map. Since
the shape of the river changes every flood, it is needed to update map every after
flood if they prepare for hazard map.
Figure 12: Bangladeshi river with few structural measure

Source: google map
Figure 13: Living in elevated houses with plinth next to flooded river
(Sundarganj, Gaibandha in Aug. 2014)
4.1.3 Ability of interpreting map
For utilizing the hazard map by local people, people need to read letters
and interpret map. Japan’s literacy rate is about 99%. Map education has been
compulsory in general primary school since 1908. Tanaka says “In the teach-
ing of map-making, (i) the preparation of distribution map for the statistical
map-making became popular in general primary schools, (ii) the national land
map-making using ready-made maps was widely practiced in the teaching of
their native districts, (iii) the field map-making became popular in general pri-
mary schools as a step to the learning of geography” (Tanaka, 1992). Map educa-
tion continues in junior high schools also. Based on this background, Japanese
adults are able to interpret map and utilize hazard map.
However, in Bangladesh the literacy rate of adult (% of people ages 15 and
above) is 73% (WB, 2016), and map education is not common like Japan.
4.1.4 Warning system
Warning and hazard map is well related in Japan. After the warning is is-
sued, people are able to evacuate following the hazard map information such
as evacuation route and shelter. Since the flood speed is rapid, the evacuation
time is limited. Therefore, the warning system have been developed. People are
able to receive information through several media, such as TV, Internet, mobile
phone and local media system.
3.2. External help
External help is also systematically developed. Usually after evacuating to

the designated evacuation centers or shelters, evacuees are able to receive hous-
ing information, food, water, daily necessity etc., since NGOs, government, vol-
unteers and related organizations are well organized and linked.
4. Hazard map in Bangladesh
Various flood hazard map is already introduced to Bangladesh and all over
the world with different names and different approaches such as GIS based haz-
ard map, based on flood affected frequency, based on flood depth and velocity
etc. (Osti 2008). It is technically possible to prepare for hazard map similar to
Japan’s hazard map, however the contents are different. The user is also different.
Local people in Bangladesh do not use hazard map usually. It is used by local
government and not local people. Figure 14 is a hazard map of Dharmapasha
Upzila, Sunamganj district, Bangladesh. Hazard map is not distributed to local

people because of the social background. There is difficulty for local people to
interpret hazard map since literacy rate is about 70% and map education is not
common in Bangladesh, and people are not able to interpret map. In addition,
since there is enough time to prepare for evacuation such as a few weeks, and
inundation period is long like a few months, they rather migrate than evacuate
based on their experience (Fujita 2017). They seasonally move for finding safe
area to live and job. Usually, the linkage with the local government is weak, and
there is no support for migrants to move and settle to new places, except during
emergencies (Martin et al., 2013).
Figure 14: Hazard map: Dharmapasha Upazila

(ULDMPD 2014)
5. Conclusion
For successful use of foreign technology, recognizing different disaster phe-

nomena in each country is the basic and key point. Many countries suffer from
many disasters, such as flood, landslide, volcanic eruption, tsunami, storm etc.
Though these disasters have the same names in many countries, the real phe-
nomena may be different. As the flood phenomena in Bangladesh and Japan
is differently recognized, other disaster phenomena are also different in each
country and area. After recognizing the difference of the phenomena, the social
background is also needed to be compared. Since the technology is developed
based on the social background of the original country, recognizing the different
social background in each country is needed for utilizing the technology.
Figure 15 is the summary of the steps of preparing for research on hazard
map technology transfer from Japan to Bangladesh. In this research paper, flood
is the selected disaster and hazard map is the selected technology. Therefore,
first, flood phenomena are compared. Then prerequired condition for utilizing
selected technology, hazard map, is reviewed.
Figure 15: Steps for transferring hazard map technology
Since the flood phenomena is different in Japan and Bangladesh, the pur-
pose of flood disaster risk reduction is different. Avoiding direct hit by destruc-
tive flood is the major purpose in Japan. For the emergency response, evacua-
tion route and place are the most expected information. Protecting farmland
and living place by long lasting inundation is the major reason for flood risk
reduction in Bangladesh. Therefore, their most expected information are inun-
dation duration and depth. Thus, it is important to know the difference of flood
phenomena, and to clarify the reason /purpose of flood risk reduction before
project start.
For the next step, the social background is needed to be compared for ana-
lyzing the possibility of transferring the selected technology. In case of transfer-
ring Japanese hazard mapping technology, followings are necessary condition.
preparing evacuation shelter and the route
ability of interpreting map by local people
updating maps every after flood
warning / information system
These conditions are not developed for river flood in Bangladesh. Thus,
condition of Bangladesh is not ready for utilizing Japanese type hazard map.
The most important information for the local people in Bangladesh is the
duration of flood, since they may lose arable land and living places. However,
Japanese hazard map do not have the information of flood/inundation duration.
In addition, Bangladeshi local people expect the benefit of flood such as fertile
soil, increased growth of fisheries, and favorite condition for ecosystem. There-
fore, such as showing / predicting long lasting area is more useful using haz-
ard mapping technology. Thus, there is possibility to use the hazard mapping
technology in Bangladesh. In addition, if there are areas where similar flood
phenomenon is seen in Bangladesh, Japan’s hazard map will be used effectively.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

and Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) for their support of SATREPS
Project “Research project on disaster prevention/mitigation measures against
floods and storm surges in Bangladesh”. We also thank Professor Md. Anwarul
Abedin, Department of Soil Science, Bangladesh Agricultural University.
References
Douglas, Ian. (2009). “Climate change, flooding and food security in south Asia.”
Food Security, 1:127-136
Fujita Kumiko, Rajib Shaw, Hajime Nakagawa (2017). “Social Background in

River Erosion Areas Bangladesh: Implication for Japanese Hazard Map-
ping Technology”, Annuals of Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto
Univ. (60) pp701-710 http://www.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/nenpo/no60/ronbunB/
a60b0p39.pdf
IPCC 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. The Fourth Assessment Re-
port, IPCC.
Martin, Maxmillan, Yi hyun Kang, Motasim Billah, Tasneem Siddiqui, Richard
Black and Dominic Kniveton (2013): “Policy analysis: Climate change and
migration Bangladesh” in Working paper 4, An output of research on cli-
mate change related migration in Bangladesh. http://migratingoutofpoverty.
dfid.gov.uk/files/file.php?name=wp4-ccrm-b-policy.pdf&site=354
MLIT (2001): Rivers in Japan, Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport
Osti, Rabindra, Shigenobu Tanaka, Toshikazu Tokioka, (2008),”Flood hazard
mapping in developing countries: problems and prospects”, Disaster Preven-
tion and Management: An International Journal, Vol.17 Iss 1 pp. 104 –113:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09653560810855919
Shukla PR (2003). “Climate Change and India.” University Press India, Hyder-
abad
Statistics Bureau (2016), “Statistical Handbook of Japan 2016” http://www.stat.
go.jp/english/data/handbook/pdf/2016all.pdf
Tanaka, Kohzo (1992) “Map Education in the Taisho Era and the First Half of
the Showa Era” in 新地理 40-2 1992年9月 (in Japanese with English abstract)
ULDMPD 2014, “Upazila Level Disaster Management Plan Development Upa-
zila Dharmapasha, District Sunamganj” Plan Developed by Upazila Disas-
ter Management Committee, Dharmapasha, Sunamganj, Coordinated by
VARD (Voluntary Association for Rural Development)
WMO/GWP (2003) “Integrated Flood Management Case Study -Bangladesh:
Flood Management, World Meteorological Organization and Global Water
Partnership Associated Programme on Flood Management”
World Bank (2016) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.
ZS?view=chart
Yoshikawa Katsuhide (2011) “A Study on the Development and Management
of River Levee Systems” J.Japan Soc. Hydrol. And Water Resour. Vol.24,
No.1, Jan 2011 pp.21-36 (in Japanese with English abstract) https://doi.
org/10.3178/jjshwr.24.21
Zimmermann, Markus, Karl-Friedrich Glombitza and Barbara Rothenberger
(2009). “Disaster Risk Reduction Programme for Bangladesh 2010-2012”.
Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SDC
UDC: 005.334:[351.778.5:614.84(497.11)
005.35
Research article DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/ijdrm.2019.1.1.5
Risk Perception of Building Fires in Belgrade

Vladimir M. Cvetković1*
1
Faculty of Security Studies, University of Belgrade, Gospodara Vucica 50, 11040 Belgrade,
Serbia; vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
* Correspondence: vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
Abstract: Starting from the frequency and seriousness of fire in residential buildings in
the area of Belgrade, this paper presents the results of research on the perception of cit-
izens’ risks of fires in residential buildings. A series of 322 face-to-face interviews were
conducted at the beginning of 2017 in Belgrade. The results of multivariate regressions
of risk perception of building fires show that the most important predictor of perceived
risk of building fires is fear, age, employment status, income level, and marital status.
The remaining variables (e.g., gender, education level, previous experience) did not
have a significant impact. Respondents who have fear, are married, have higher income,
and elderly people perceive the higher level of risk in relation to those who have no fear,
live alone, have lower incomes and younger persons. The results of the research can be
used to improve the level of safety of citizens by raising their awareness of the risks of
fires in housing facilities by designing and using appropriate educational programs and
campaigns.
Keywords: fire risk; perception; building fires; Belgrade.
1. Introduction
The perception of the risk of fires in residential buildings is a significant

and determining dimension of the process of planning the protection and
rescue of people. Lack of awareness about the level of probability and possible
consequences of fire can result in a high level of non-taking preventive measures
by citizens. According to official data obtained from the RS Emergency Situations
Department, the number of fires in 2017 increased by 50 percent compared to
the same period in the previous year. For example, while in 2016 about 3,643
fires were recorded in the area of Belgrade, two years later, in 2018 the number
of fires increased to 5,142 (Secretariat for Administration - Statistics Division).
In order to reduce the level of risk from the occurrence of material and non-
material consequences of fire, it is necessary to continuously improve the level of
preparedness that implies possession of appropriate knowledge on combustion

processes, methods of fire fighting, preventive measures; written or oral response
plans in such situations; evacuation plan; fire alarm devices and fire extinguishers,
etc.
The risk of a fire incident implies potential direct or indirect losses on
social entities or the system, and the risk can be expressed in the form of a
mathematical formula for the probability of the emergence of economic, social
or environmental consequences in a given period of time (Cardona, 2004). On
the other hand, understanding risk includes a lot of uncertainty, and terms
such as risk assessment, risk assessment, and risk analysis are used mixed in the
description of techniques and processes in risk management (Frosdick, 1997).
In theory, the concepts of hazards and risks are intertwined and risk is taken
as a synonym for danger, although the risk besides danger implies additional
elements (Smith & Petley, 2009). In the literature, three main questions about risk
are also mentioned (Garrick, 2008): What can go wrong?; How likely is that to
happen? What are the consequences if this happens? The first question, what can
go wrongly refers to possible scenarios of the event, “risk scenarios”. The second
question relates to testing the likelihood of such scenarios, while the third focuses
on the possible consequences of such scenarios. The meaning of the word “risk”
is conditioned by diverse cultural and ethnic characteristics. For example, Arabic
“risq” means everything that is given from the Lord and from which the lesson
can be learned (Kedar, 1970).
In Latin, “risicum” describes the specific scenario facing the sailor in trying
to avoid dangerous reefs. It is usually used with a negative meaning (Alexander,
2013). Slovic (1993) points out that people react to extraordinary situations that
perceive, and if such perceptions are wrong, then their actions will most likely
be misguided. Kirkwood (1994) emphasizes that there is a difference between
an objective and a scientific risk assessment from one and perceiving the public
about risks on the other. A wider and unprofessional public does not possess
sufficient expertise to comprehend and understand the risks of emergencies.
Scientists use established risk assessment methodologies and are able to rationally,
impartially and objectively identify and assess risks. That is precisely why there
is no matching of subjective assessments of the risk of emergencies that have a
wider public and objective estimates that are alluded to by experts.
2. Literary review
In the literature, there are a number of papers in which the level of readiness
of citizens to respond to disasters and their perceptions of risk is examined
(Cvetković, 2017, Cvetković & Filipović, 2017a, 2017b, 2018, Khan, 2008, Kumar
& Newport, 2007; Simpson, 2008). The results of a certain number of studies show
that there is a link between risk awareness and preventive measures (Cvetković
& Filipović, 2018, Murphy, 2007, Olympia, Rivera, Heverley, Anyanwu, &
Gregorits, 2010 Anyanwu & Gregorits, 2010; Paton 200). In a very interesting
study, Wachinger et al. (2013) explain why some studies on disasters did not find
a connection between risk perception and protective action: occupants perceive
high risks but do not decide to engage in protective action; instead, they believe
the authorities will help them; do not think they have enough resources to engage
in protective actions. Also, there are a lot of theoretical models related to risk
perception and human behavior in emergency situations caused by fires: heuristic-
systematic models, model of transactional stress, model of decision action,
models of reasoned actions, model hazard chain action, security motivation
system etc. (Kinateder, Kuligowski, Reneke, & Peacock, 2014). In literature, there
are different results related to which factors have the impact on the perception of
risk as poorly designed alarm systems may not induce a high enough perceived
risk (Kuligowski, 2011) and visibility or vertical vs. horizontal distance may be
important confounding factors (Kinateder et al., 2014). The results show that
men have lower awareness of risks than women (Cvetković, Roder, Öcal, Tarolli,
& Dragićević, 2018; Firing, Karlsdottir, & Christian Laberg, 2009; Slovic, 2010;
Weber, Blais, & Betz, 2002). When the age is concerned, the results show that
older adults are better at risk assessment than younger adults since they have
to practice risk-related decisions more frequently in their daily lives (Kinateder
et al., 2014; McLaughlin & Mayhorn, 2014; Wilson, Gott, & Ingleton, 2013).
Previous experience is one of the most important predictors; however, in certain
situations, previous experience without personal injuries can reduce the level of
risk perception (Wachinger, Renn, Begg, & Kuhlicke, 2013). Also, in the results of
various studies, the correlation of perception of risk with the emotional state was
confirmed (Mathews & MacLeod, 1985) and knowledge (Cvetković et al., 2019;
Lindell & Whitney, 2000).
3. Methods
In the creation of the questionnaire, a detailed analysis of the results of a large

number of previous research on fires began (Gandit, Kouabenan, & Caroly,
2009; Merino, Caballero, Martínez-de Dios, Ferruz, & Ollero, 2006; Slovic, 1987;
Taylor &Daniel, 1984). As a part of general work, questions were given regarding
demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of citizens: gender (male or
female), age (younger, middle-aged or older), level of education (secondary, higher
or college), marital status , married or single) and employment status (employed
or unemployed), while in the second part there was a question regarding the
assessment of the level of risk of fire in the residential objects. In the course of
2017, 322 citizens were surveyed by multi-point random sampling. In the first
phase, several buildings were selected in the central parts of Belgrade in which
the survey will be conducted. Then, it was decided to conduct interviews with
two household members in apartments (odd numbers). Household members
were selected according to the gender criteria (one female and one male), fulfilled
the condition of adulthood. Compared to the structure of the sample, women
are more represented (59.3%) than men (40.7%). However, if we look at the full
structure of the population, where women are also more represented, it can be
said that the sample is representative. By analyzing the age of the respondents
in the sample, it is noted that the youngest respondents (55.9%) are the most
frequent ones. Compared to the level of education, those with secondary
education (57.7%) are mostly represented. Respondents who were not related
were more represented (43.5%) than those who were in a relationship (27.9%) or
married (27.9%). Regarding the status of employment, there are relatively more
non-employed respondents (53.4%) (Table 2).
Table 2. Basic demographic and socio-economic information about

respondents (n = 322).
Variables Category N %
Men 131 40.7
Gender
Women 191 59.3
Age Younger (18-38) 180 55.9
Middle-aged (39-59) 80 24.8
Older (преко 59) 62 19.2
Secondary School 186 57.7
Level of education College 73 22.6
Faculty 63 19.5
Not in relationship 140 43.5
Marital status In relationship 90 27.9
Married 92 28.5
Employment status Yes 150 46.5
No 172 53.4
After completion of the entry, preliminary analyses and data checks were
carried out in order to eliminate the technical errors that occurred during the data
entry. During the first step, basic descriptive statistical analyses were conducted
with the aim of testing the frequency of individual responses. Multivariate
regression analysis and Pearson correlation were used to identify the extent to
which the perceived risk was associated with the next demographic and socio-
economic variable.
4. Results
When questioned whether they knew or were aware of the risks of fires
in residential buildings, 320 respondents answered with an average rating of M
= 1.84, SD = .363. Out of the total number of respondents, 84.5% pointed out
that there is no risk of a fire in relation to 15.5% who say the opposite. With
a goal to test the central hypothesis of which different factors is predictive
variable in the perception of building fires, a multivariate regression analysis
was used to identify the extent to which perceived risk was associated with the
following demographic and socioeconomic variables: gender, age, education
level, income level, marital status, employment, previous experience and level of
fear. According to Table 2 categories, males, young, low-income people, married,
people with fear and previous experience, have been coded as 1; 0 have been
assigned otherwise. Previous analyses showed that the assumptions of normality,
linearity, multicollinearity, and homogeneity of variance had not been violated.
The results of the multivariate regressions (Table 2) of risk perception of building
fires show that the most important predictor is fear (β=.370), and it explains 37%
variance, then age (β=-0.253), it explains 25.3% variance, employment status
(β=-0.183), it explains 18.3% variance, than income level (β=-0.169), it explains
16.9% variance, income level (β=-0.169), it explains 16.9% variance, marital
status (β=-0.152), it explains 15.2% variance of risk perception of building fires.
The remaining variables (e.g., gender, education level, previous experience) did
not have significant effects. This model (R2=0.182, Adj. R2=.163, F=9.59, t=25.6,
p=0.000) with all mentioned independent variables explains the 16.3% variance
of risk perception of building fires.
Table 2. Multivariate regression analysis results in risk perception of building

fires (N=322).
Predictor Risk perception of building fires

variable B SE β Sig.
Gender -.040 .046 -.055 .379
Age -.244 .085 -.253 .004*
Education level .067 .040 .091 .095
Income level -.124 .040 -.169 .002**
Marital status -.111 .039 -.152 .004*
Employment -.169 .079 -.123 .052
Previous experience .020 .50 .022 .691
Level of fear -.277 .042 -.370 .000**
*p=.05. **p ≤ .01.
A further correlation between risk perception of building fires and age, income
level, marital status and level of fear was also investigated using the Pearson linear
correlation coefficient. Preliminary analyses are carried out to further satisfy the
assumptions about the normality, linearity, and homogeneity of variance. The
results obtained show that there is a correlation between the marital status (r =
.180, n = 322, p < .001), level of fear (r = .308, n = 322, p < .000), income level
(r = -.198, n = 322, p < .000), and age (r = .250, n = 322, p < .000). Respondents
who have fear (M = 1.93, SD =.255) are more likely to perceive the risks of fire
compared to those who do not (M = 1.70, SD =.320). Further analysis of the
results obtained shows that respondents who are in a married (M = 2.35, SD
=.189) are more likely to perceive the risks of fire in residential buildings than
non-married respondents (M = 1.78, SD =.219). Respondents with lower incomes
(M = 1.76, SD = .329) perceive less than the respondents with a higher level of
income (M = 1.90, SD = .389). Compared to the age of the respondents, it was
found that older respondents, in relation to younger respondents, perceived the
risks of fires in residential buildings.
5. Discussion
In the research perception of building fires, the hypothesis that perception of

risk is influenced by certain demographic and socioeconomic factors pointed out
by the results of previous research (Cvetković et al., 2019; Kineder et al., 2014;
Lindell & Whitney, 2000 Mathews & MacLeod, 1985; McLaughlin & Mayhorn,
2014; Wachinger et al., 2013; Wilson et al., 2013). The obtained results show that
the perception of the risk of fire in residential buildings is influenced by fear, the
age of respondents, income level, marital status, while gender, level of education
and previous experience are not. The most important predictor of perception of
risk are fears of disasters that have a decisive importance in the process of risk
assessment (Cvetković, Öcal, & Ivanov, 2019). It can be assumed that respondents
who have real fears from the consequences of fire are more informed and aware
of the risk of the occurrence of such events. For this reason, fears can be a serious
driver of people in taking preventive measures to protect their lives and property
(Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Of course, additional research is needed in terms of the
motivation of people who do not feel fear of fire in residential buildings, in order
to understand the nature of their motivational factors better.
The results showed that respondents in the marital community are more
likely to perceive the risks of fires in residential buildings than those who are
not in a marital union. It can be assumed that respondents who are married care
about the risks and safety of their close person. In addition, it can be pointed
out that respondents who are married discuss such topics more often, which
contributes to a higher level of perception of risk. Further research needs to
be carried out to deepen the nature of the relationship between marital status
and the perception of risk. Compared to the age of the respondents, the results
obtained are in agreement with the results of previous studies (Kinateder et al.,
2014; McLaughlin & Mayhorn, 2014; Wilson et al., 2013). It can also be assumed
that older people, due to their limitations in speed and efficiency of movement,
lower physiological resistance, and rich experience, perceive the risks to a greater
extent in order to be adequately prepared for responding to such situations.
Further research needs to be carried out and examined which are the prevailing
factors of the risk perception difference in young people and the elderly. In the
end, one should not forget the very interesting results of the research, according
to which respondents with lower incomes are less likely to perceive the risks of
fire. It can be assumed that they are burdened with existential issues and that
they are not able to pay attention to other security issues. Of course, in the next
research, it is necessary to examine the more detailed nature and the way of the
impact of the level of income on the perception of risk.
6. Conclusions
Understanding the perception of the risk of fire in residential buildings is a

prerequisite for effective disaster risk management and for improving the safety
of citizens. If citizens do not have awareness of the risks of a fire, it is simply
impossible to expect a high level of their willingness to react in such situations.
The results of the survey clearly show that respondents who have fear, are married,
have higher income, and older people are more likely to perceive the level of risk
compared to those who have no fear, live alone, have lower incomes, and younger
people. In accordance with the results obtained, it is necessary to devise and
implement certain educational programs and campaigns that would primarily
target citizens who live alone, have lower incomes and younger ones. Naturally,
given the generally low level of awareness among all citizens of such risks, it
is necessary to undertake various activities in order to change the situation in
a positive way. The survey that was conducted in 2017 also had its limitations
that looked at the random selection of respondents in several dozen endangered
buildings from the city of Belgrade. In future research, it is necessary to include
housing facilities in different parts of the city so that the sample of the respondents
would be even more representative. The scientific implications of the research
are reflected in the creation of a solid empirical and theoretical knowledge fund
that allows the results to be compared with other similar research carried out
in different social and cultural circumstances and ambiances. The importance
of research for improving the safety of citizens is very high and it is necessary
to undertake certain proactive activities in a shorter period of time in order to
educate and train citizens in time to react in such situations.
References
Alexander, D. E. (2013). Resilience and disaster risk reduction: an etymological

journey. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13(11), 2707-2716.
Cvetković, V. (2017). Krizne situacije – pripremljenost države, lokalne zajednice
i građana. Vojno delo, 69(7), 122-136.
Cvetković, V. M., Öcal, A., & Ivanov, A. (2019). Young adults’ fear of disasters: A
case study of residents from Turkey, Serbia and Macedonia. International
Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 101095. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijdrr.2019.101095
Cvetković, V., Noji, E., Filipović, M., Marija, M. P., Želimir, K., & Nenad, R.
(2018). Public Risk Perspectives Regarding the Threat of Terrorism
in Belgrade: Implications for Risk Management Decision-Making for
Individuals, Communities and Public Authorities. Journal of Criminal
Investigation and Criminology/, 69(4), 279-298.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2017a). Pripremljenost za reagovanje na rizike od
prirodnih katastrofa: Zadužbina Andrejević.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2018). Ispitivanje percepcije rizika o požarima u
stambenim objektima: demografski i socio-ekonomski faktori uticaja.
Vojno delo, 70(5), 82-98.
Cvetković, V., & Filipović, M. (2017b). Pripremljenost za reagovanje na rizike
od prirodnih katastrofa: preporuke za unapređenje bezbednosti
građana. Beograd: Zadužbina Andrejević - Instant system.
Cvetković, V., Kevin, R., Shaw, R., Filipović, M., Mano, R., Gačić, J., &
Jakovljević, V. (2019). Household earthquake preparedness in Serbia – a
study from selected municipalities. Acta Geographica, 59(1).
Cvetković, V., Roder, G., Öcal, A., Tarolli, P., & Dragićević, S. (2018). The Role
of Gender in Preparedness and Response Behaviors towards Flood Risk
in Serbia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
15(12), 2761.
Firing, K., Karlsdottir, R., & Christian Laberg, J. (2009). Social influence in
military leadership training. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 30(8), 709-721.
Gandit, M., Kouabenan, D. R., & Caroly, S. (2009). Road-tunnel fires: Risk
perception and management strategies among users. Safety science, 47(1),
105-114.
Garrick, B. J. (2008). Quantifying and controlling catastrophic risks: Academic Press.
Kedar, B. (1970). Again: Arabic risq, medieval Latin risicum, studi medievali.
Spoleto: Centro Italiano Di Studi Sull Alto Medioevo.
Khan, M. S. A. (2008). Disaster preparedness for sustainable development in

Bangladesh. Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(5), 662-671. doi:
10.1108/09653560810918667
Kinateder, M. T., Kuligowski, E. D., Reneke, P. A., & Peacock, R. D. (2014). A
review of risk perception in building fire evacuation: National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
Kirkwood, A. S. (1994). Why Do We Worry When Scientists Say There
Is No Risk? Disaster Prevention and Management, 3(2), 15-22. doi:
10.1108/09653569410053905
Kuligowski, E. D. (2011). Terror defeated: occupant sensemaking, decision-
making and protective action in the 2001 World Trade Center disaster.
Kumar, T. S. A., & Newport, J. K. (2007). Institutional preparedness and
sustainability of micro finance institutions during post disaster
scenario. Disaster Prevention and Management, 16(1), 21-32. doi:
10.1108/09653560710729785
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 81(1), 146.
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2000). Correlates of household seismic hazard
adjustment adoption. Risk Analysis, 20(1), 13-26.
Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1985). Selective processing of threat cues in
anxiety states. Behaviour research and therapy, 23(5), 563-569.
McLaughlin, A. C., & Mayhorn, C. B. (2014). Designing effective risk
communications for older adults. Safety science, 61, 59-65.
Merino, L., Caballero, F., Martínez-de Dios, J. R., Ferruz, J., & Ollero, A. (2006).
A cooperative perception system for multiple UAVs: Application to
automatic detection of forest fires. Journal of Field Robotics, 23(3-4), 165-
184.
Ozmen, F. (2006). The level of preparedness of the schools for disasters from the
aspect of the school principals. Disaster Prevention and Management, 15(3),
383-395. doi: 10.1108/09653560610669873
Simpson, D. M. (2008). Disaster preparedness measures: a test case development
and application. Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(5), 645-661. doi:
10.1108/09653560810918658
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. science, 236(4799), 280-285.
Slović, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 675-
682.
Slovic, P. (2010). The feeling of risk: New perspectives on risk perception: Routledge.
Taylor, J. G., & Daniel, T. C. (1984). Prescribed fire: Public education and
perception. Journal of Forestry, 82(6), 361-365.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., & Kuhlicke, C. (2013). The risk perception
paradox—implications for governance and communication of natural
hazards. Risk Analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
Wachinger, G., Renn, O., Begg, C., & Kuhlicke, C. (2013). The risk perception
paradox—implications for governance and communication of natural
hazards. Risk analysis, 33(6), 1049-1065.
Weber, E. U., Blais, A. R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude
scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of behavioral
decision making, 15(4), 263-290.
Wilson, F., Gott, M., & Ingleton, C. (2013). Perceived risks around choice and
decision making at end-of-life: a literature review. Palliative medicine,
27(1), 38-53.
Funding: This research was funded by Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster

Risk Management.
Conflicts of Interest: Declare conflicts of interest or state “The authors declare no
conflict of interest.”
92 International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT (IJDRM)
Dear Professor/Researcher,
International International Journal of Disaster Risk Management is a peer-reviewed

(twice a year) journal serves all aspects of disaster studies, policy, and management. It
provides a platform for academics, policymakers and practitioners to publish high-qu-
ality research and practice concerning natural disasters, anthropogenic disasters, comp-
lex political emergencies and crises around the world. The journal crosses and affects
interdisciplinary boundaries to promote communication, collaboration and teamwork
between professions and disciplines to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and pre-
paredness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable deve-
lopment. The journal encourages to the interchange of ideas and experience, to decrease
the risk of disasters and build community resilience within the context of sustainable
development and planetary boundaries.
Journal will cover all aspects of disaster risk management from a global perspective,
including but not limited to:
• Disaster and crisis management theory and practice,

• Risk awareness and assessment,
• Hazard and vulnerability analysis,
• Knowledge development including education, training, research and informati-
on on disasters,
• Public commitment and institutional frameworks, including organizational, po-
licy, legislation and community action,
• Disaster prevention, mitigation, response, recovery planning, policies, and
implementation,
• Promotes the interchange of ideas between practitioners, policy-makers and
academics.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1 93
Submission Process
Authors are kindly invited to submit their formatted full papers. All paper submis-
sions will be blind peer reviewed and evaluated based on originality, Research content,
correctness, relevance to conference and readability. Please read complete submission
and formatting guidelines before submitting your paper.
You can submit your paper through following - disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.

com.
Sincerely,
Editor-In-Chief,
Assist. Prof. Vladimir M. Cvetković, PhD
vladimirkpa@gmail.com; vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs
Disaster Risk Management
The University of Belgrade Faculty of Security Studies, Gospodara Vučića 50, Belg-
rade, Serbia
Founder and Principal of Scientific-Professional Society for Disaster Risk Manage-
ment, Belgrade, http://upravljanje-rizicima.com/.
Journal Website - http://upravljanje-rizicima.com/editorial-board/
Guıdelınes for contrıbutors
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management publication is intended to furt-

her the progress of science by reporting research or reviews. Authors are expected to
follow the publication ethics, and avoid data fabrication and falsification. Plagiarism
constitutes scientific misconduct and is not acceptable. All the submitted articles will be
checked in for plagiarism. So authors and co-authors are expected to have made reaso-
nable attempts to check findings before submitting to our journal for publication. Also,
authors are expected to keep all research data for verification even after the publication.
The failure to keep the data may be regarded as misconduct.
Submission of Manuscripts
Manuscripts are accepted for review with the understanding that the same work
has not been, will not be, nor is at present submitted elsewhere, and that its submission
for publication has been approved by all of the authors and by the institution where the
work was carried out; in addition that any person cited as a personal communication has
approved such citation. Written authorisation may be required at the editor’s discretion.
Articles and any other material published in the International International Journal
of Disaster Risk Management represent the opinions of the author(s) and should not be
construed to reflect the opinions of the editor(s) and the publisher. Authors submitting a
manuscript do so with the understanding that if it is accepted for publication, copyright
in the article, including the right to reproduce the article in all forms and media, shall be
assigned exclusively to the publisher. The publisher will not refuse any reasonable request
by the author for permission to reproduce any of his/her contributions to International
Journal of Disaster Risk Management.
Submit your Manuscripts
All the submissions should be submitted in disaster.risk.management.serbia@gmail.com
Length of paper
The usual length of paper should be restricted to 4.000 words without references.
However, longer paper can be considered by the editorial team, when applicable. Longer
paper will be subjected to a delay in publication.
List of Symbols
The manuscript should contain a list of all symbols used in the paper. They should be
identified typographically for the printer, not mathematically. This list will not appear in
print, but is essential to avoid publication delay.
Footnotes
Text footnotes should be avoided whenever possible. If they must be used, indicate them
by superscript lower-case letters in the text.
References
References are to be listed in the order cited in the text as APA (American Psychological
Association) style. References in the text are to be numbered consecutively in Arabic
numerals, in the order of first appearance. They can be typed in superscripts after punc-
tuation marks, e.g. in below:
APA Examples - Books
Page numbers refer to the relevant page in the Publication Manual of the American Psycho-
logical Association, 6th ed.
Book (p. 203):
Takahashi, S. (2009). The manga guide to statistics. San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press.
Book chapter in an anthology (p. 204):
Vessey, D. (2001). Hey-diddley-ho neighboreenos: Ned Flanders and neighborly love. In
W. Irwin, M. T. Conrad, & A. J. Skoble (Eds.),
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1 95
The Simpsons and philosophy (pp. 202-214). Chicago, IL: Open Court.
Article in a reference book (p. 203):
Chapman, R. (2000). GI Joe. In T. Pendergast & S. Pendergast (Eds.), St. James encyclope-
dia of popular culture (Vol. 2, pp. 229-230).
Detroit, MI: St. James Press.
APA Examples - Periodicals
Journal article with DOI (p. 198):

Shepherd, L. & Kuczynski, A. (2009). The use of emotive imagery and behavioral tech-
niques for a 10-year-old boy’s nocturnal fear
of ghosts and zombies. Clinical Case Studies, 8(2), 99-112.
doi:10.1177/1534650108329664
Journal article with no DOI listed (p. 199):
 If article was retrieved from a print journal:
Mabry, R., & Deiermann, P. (2009). Of cheese and crust: A proof of the pizza conjecture
and other tasty results.
American Mathematical Monthly, 116(5), 423-438.
 If article was retrieved in electronic format:
o Check CrossRef for DOI
 If DOI is found, cite using DOI.
 “If no DOI has been assigned to the content, provide the home page URL
of the journal or of the book or report publisher. If you are accessing the
article from a private database, you may need to do a quick web search
to locate this URL... In general, it is not necessary to include database
information.” (pp. 191-192)
Deno, S. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative.
Exceptional Children,52(3), 219-232. Retrieved from http://www.cec.
sped.org
 Your instructor may ask you to use a modified version of APA style, in
which you include the name of the database instead of the journal home
page or cite articles without a DOI in the print journal format. Check
your assignment or ask the professor.
Magazine article - accessed online (p. 200):
Kushner, D. (2009, September). Tricked-out golf carts swarm Florida communities.
Wired 17(10). Retrieved from
http://www.wired.com/magazine
Magazine article - accessed in print (p. 200):
Reyes, P. (2010, August). Paradise swamped: The boom and bust of the middle-class
dream. Harper’s Magazine, 321(1923), 39-48.
Newspaper article - accessed online (p. 200):
Kepner, T. (2004, October 21). Back from dead, Red Sox bury Yanks and go to series.
The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com.
Newspaper article - accessed in print (p. 200):
Itzkoff, D. (2010, July 20). Banned TV episode has its day on DVD. The New York Times,
pp. C1, C5.
APA Examples - Websites

Entire website (ref.):
To cite an entire website, give the URL of the site in the text of your paper. It is not ne-
cessary to put cite it in the references section. Only include retrieval dates for sites that
change frequently, such as wikis.
Example: The APA style website gives examples of references (http://apastyle.org).
Article on a website (ref.):
Welch, C. (2009, September 9). Web goes nuts for ‘crasher squirrel.’ Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/09/09/minnesota.crasher.squirrel/
Article from an online reference work (p. 205):
Boondoggle. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved from http://
www.m-w.com/dictionary/boondoggle
Tables
Tables should be numbered with Arabic numerals in order of appearance in the text.
Each table should have a short descriptive caption. Table footnotes should be indicated
by superscript lower-case letters.
Figures
Figures should be numbered (with Arabic numerals) in order of appearance and should
have short descriptive captions. Line drawings must be professionally drafted originals,
in black ink, with lettering large enough to be legible after a reduction of 50-60%. Figures
should be designed to fit the proportions of the printed page. Illustrations in colour can
be accepted only if the authors defray the cost.
Offprints
Reprints may be purchased; quotes to be provided by publisher upon request.

CIP - Каталогизација у публикацији
Народна библиотека Србије, Београд
504
614.8.069
International Journal of Disaster Risk Management/Editor-in-Chief

Vladimir M. Cvetković. - Vol. 1, no. 1 (2019) - Beograd: Scientific-
Professional Society for Disaster Risk
Management, 2019 - (Belgrade: Neven). - 24 cm
*Semi-annually.
ISSN 2620-2662 = International Journal of Disaster Risk Management
COBISS.SR-ID 275206924

International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 1, No. 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF

DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT

 ISSN (printed edition) 2620-2662

Assist. Prof. Vladimir M. Cvetković, PhD, vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs

International editorial board

Professor Rajib Shaw, PhD

Professor Kevin Ronan, PhD

Full Professor Igor Khripunov, PhD

Full Prof. Slavoljub Dragićević, PhD

Assist. Prof. Ivan Novković, PhD

Full Prof. Stanimir Kostadinov, PhD

Full Prof. Vladimir Jakovljević, PhD

Full Prof. Marija Jevtic, MD, PhD

Full Prof. Boban Milojković, PhD

Full Prof. Želimir Kešetović, PhD

Assoc. Prof. Jasmina Gačić, PhD

Assoc. Prof. Jovana Nikolov, PhD

Full Prof. Dragan Mlađan, PhD

Prof. Dejan Bošković, PhD

Full Prof. Aleksandra Ljuština, PhD

Marina Filipović, PhD candidate

English Language Editor and Proof-Reader

PDF version of the journal

Published twice a year

XUESONG GUO, NAIM CAPUCU

ALEKSANDRINA V. MAVRODIEVA, DYAH S. BUDIARTI, ZHOU YU, FEDERICO A. PASHA,

KUMIKO FUJITA, RAJIB SHAW

Examining Stakeholder Participation in Social

Keywords: stakeholder participation; social stability risk assessment; affiliation networks;

Stakeholder participation is a fundamental and critical stage of decisoion-mak-

subject to manipulation by powerful government enterprises, giving grassroots

2. Literature Review & Background

Although benefits of stakeholder participation on conflicts identification, mitiga-

spective, Gattringer et al. (2014) discussed collaboration among stakeholders.

3. Theoretical Insights and Hypotheses

In the research, stakeholder participation is defined as a process where stakehold-

Input Political System Output

Demands Supervision and Guidance

Figure 1. Process of Stakeholder Participation in SSRA

In the figure above, we view the successive procedures as political system.

1984), stakeholders may also be involved in monitoring and evaluating outcomes

Using “actor” to denote stakeholder (or representative), we applied affiliation

Focusing on SSRA events (Appendix 1) in the city of Xi’an, a metropolis in the

Procedure Involved Stakeholders

Note: see Appendix 2 for abbreviations.

The applied method can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Method Applied in the Research

Results and Discussions

Figure 3. Networks on procedures in SSRA

Table 3. Centrality of Networks

ments on mega project approval and regulation. Therefore, authorities’ coordina-

(a) OC-N (b) CD-N

(c) SG-N (d) AC-N

Figure 4. Core/Periphery Structures of Networks

Table 4. Positions of Actors in Networks

Table 5. Positions of SSRA Events in Networks

SSRA Event OC-N CD-N SG-N AC-N

We observed that A, F, H and N occupy core positions in all the networks. It

projects can promote local economic development and employement, grassroots

Table 6. Results of Hypotheses Testing

Since CD-N is the most active network, in which grassroots representatives

6 2.922 6.2 61.3 1.111 0.066 0.756

7 2.630 5.6 66.9 1.099 0.054 0.810

8 2.394 5.1 72.0 1.093 0.044 0.854

9 2.191 4.7 76.6 1.150 0.037 0.891

10 1.905 4.1 80.7 1.081 0.028 0.919

11 1.762 3.8 84.5 1.269 0.024 0.943

ISSN (printed edition) 2620-2662