Multi-hazard risk assessment in small island developing states : the case of Labasa, Vanua Levu, Fiji Islands

Abstract

SIDS are amongst the most vulnerable groups to hazards such as tropical cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, volcanism and flooding. With the changing climate, the intensity and frequency of hazards have increased leading to constant disaster events. People are often not only exposed to an individual hazard but to multiple hazards simultaneously or in short succession to each other. Disasters strike before people are able to recover from previous ones. This is also very relevant to entire countries: disaster events can put extreme pressures on government resources and logistical capabilities. When there is not enough time to recover from a disaster before the next already strikes countries can get to the edge of their economic viability. It is no surprise that the notion of multi-hazard is gaining momentum and recognition coupled with great concerns due to severe threats arising from climate change. Individuals, communities and governments need to prepare for multiple occurrences of disasters. Examples from Pacific Islands show, how urgent such perspective is: very soon after COVID-19 showed first impacts in March 2020 Fiji and its people were exposed to Tropical Cyclone Harold in early April 2020, the second strongest TC that ever was recorded in this part of the world. Eight months later Fiji experienced TC Yasa, which was even stronger. With 6,000 (TC Harold) / 23,000 (TC Yasa) in evacuation centers social distancing required by COVID-19 protection was just not possible. Later in 2022 the SARS-CoV-2 virus was first recorded in Tonga, when international emergency operations provided support to the country that had suffered a damaging volcanic eruption. Before Tonga had recorded a single COVID-19 cases. A multi-hazard risk assessment is crucial to investigate the relevance of concepts that see specific vulnerabilities. In a systematic literature review scientific publications were identified that conduct such multi-hazard risk assessment. The study then focuses on such social science assessments and approaches on multi-hazard exposure and relates them to community engagement, government policies and resource allocations. This introduces a multi-level perspective from local, regional to national perspectives and actions. The study found that multiple hazards have great relevance to people living in Labasa. However, the concept of multi-hazard was never part of disaster management legislation. It recently has been included in policy frameworks, where it mainly focuses on early warning systems. There are institutional, financial, technical, and capacity challenges to the current disaster management. To enhance multi-hazard perspectives in DRR the study recommends to engage communities to a greater extend in disaster management policy formulation. There is a need to have a distinct orientation to the protection from multiple hazards to ensure effective disaster management and to provide better security to individuals and communities.