Multi-risk governance for natural hazards in Naples and Guadeloupe

Scolobig, A., Komendantova, N. ORCID:, Patt, A., Vinchon, C., Monfort-Climent, D., Bengoubou-Valerius, M., Gasparini, P., & Di Ruocco, A. (2014). Multi-risk governance for natural hazards in Naples and Guadeloupe. Natural Hazards 73 (3) 1523-1545. 10.1007/s11069-014-1152-1.

Full text not available from this repository.


Technical and institutional capacities are strongly related and must be jointly developed to guarantee effective natural risk governance. Indeed, the available technical solutions and decision support tools influence the development of institutional frameworks and disaster policies. This paper analyses technical and institutional capacities, by providing a comparative evaluation of governance systems in Italy and France. The focus is on two case studies: Naples and Guadeloupe. Both areas are exposed to multiple hazards, including earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, tsunamis, fires, cyclones, and marine inundations Cascade and conjoint effects such as seismic swarms triggered by volcanic activity have also been taken into account. The research design is based on a documentary analysis of laws and policy documents informed by semi-structured interviews and focus groups with stakeholders at the local level. This leads to the identification of three sets of governance characteristics that cover the key issues of: (1) stakeholders and governance level; (2) decision support tools and mitigation measures; and (3) stakeholder cooperation and communication. The results provide an overview of the similarities and differences as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the governance systems across risks. Both case studies have developed adequate decision support tools for most of the hazards of concern. Warning systems, and the assessment of hazards and exposure are the main strengths. While technical/scientific capacities are very well developed, the main weaknesses involve the interagency communication and cooperation, and the use and dissemination of scientific knowledge when developing policies and practices. The consequences for multi-risk governance are outlined in the discussion.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Natural hazard governance; Technical and institutional capacities; Stakeholder cooperation and communication; Qualitative evaluation tool; Comparative analysis
Research Programs: Risk & Resilience (RISK)
Risk, Policy and Vulnerability (RPV)
Bibliographic Reference: Natural Hazards; 73(3):1523-1545 (September 2014) (Published online 25 March 2014)
Depositing User: IIASA Import
Date Deposited: 15 Jan 2016 08:50
Last Modified: 27 Aug 2021 17:24

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item