将传统知识和地方知识纳入减少灾害风险政策:尼泊尔、印度和孟加拉国的启示

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Prakash Kumar Paudel , Sital Parajuli , Rajiv Sinha , Meena Bohara , Md. Anwarul Abedin , Basanta Raj Adhikari , Suraj Gautam , Rabin Bastola , Indrajit Pal , Henry P. Huntington
{"title":"将传统知识和地方知识纳入减少灾害风险政策:尼泊尔、印度和孟加拉国的启示","authors":"Prakash Kumar Paudel ,&nbsp;Sital Parajuli ,&nbsp;Rajiv Sinha ,&nbsp;Meena Bohara ,&nbsp;Md. Anwarul Abedin ,&nbsp;Basanta Raj Adhikari ,&nbsp;Suraj Gautam ,&nbsp;Rabin Bastola ,&nbsp;Indrajit Pal ,&nbsp;Henry P. Huntington","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Traditional and local knowledge (TLK) can be instrumental in mitigating the risks of disasters. There are calls to prioritize such knowledge to promote community resilience against disasters. This study examines the integration of TLK into disaster risk reduction (DRR) policies in Nepal, India and Bangladesh using a qualitative content analysis. We evaluated the level of integration in three components: policy priority, policy governance, and policy integration. Policy priority included five criteria and showed that India has better integrated TLK into national policies, followed by Nepal, and Bangladesh. None of the countries met our criteria for policy governance. Nepal and India emphasize community-based disaster management, combining traditional knowledge with modern technologies. However, policies are silent about the pathways of such integration, the governance mechanisms have no provision for community participation, nor are any integration tools proposed to promote such practices. Overall, the DRR policies have acknowledged the need to engage with TLK, but much more work is needed to prioritize TLK integration, which requires integration tools (e.g., legal, economic and institutional) and resources.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating traditional and local knowledge into disaster risk reduction policies: Insights from Nepal, India and Bangladesh\",\"authors\":\"Prakash Kumar Paudel ,&nbsp;Sital Parajuli ,&nbsp;Rajiv Sinha ,&nbsp;Meena Bohara ,&nbsp;Md. Anwarul Abedin ,&nbsp;Basanta Raj Adhikari ,&nbsp;Suraj Gautam ,&nbsp;Rabin Bastola ,&nbsp;Indrajit Pal ,&nbsp;Henry P. Huntington\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103825\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Traditional and local knowledge (TLK) can be instrumental in mitigating the risks of disasters. There are calls to prioritize such knowledge to promote community resilience against disasters. This study examines the integration of TLK into disaster risk reduction (DRR) policies in Nepal, India and Bangladesh using a qualitative content analysis. We evaluated the level of integration in three components: policy priority, policy governance, and policy integration. Policy priority included five criteria and showed that India has better integrated TLK into national policies, followed by Nepal, and Bangladesh. None of the countries met our criteria for policy governance. Nepal and India emphasize community-based disaster management, combining traditional knowledge with modern technologies. However, policies are silent about the pathways of such integration, the governance mechanisms have no provision for community participation, nor are any integration tools proposed to promote such practices. Overall, the DRR policies have acknowledged the need to engage with TLK, but much more work is needed to prioritize TLK integration, which requires integration tools (e.g., legal, economic and institutional) and resources.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112400159X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112400159X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统和地方知识(TLK)有助于减轻灾害风险。人们呼吁优先考虑这些知识,以提高社区的抗灾能力。本研究采用定性内容分析法,考察了尼泊尔、印度和孟加拉国将传统知识和地方知识纳入减少灾害风险(DRR)政策的情况。我们从政策优先性、政策治理和政策整合三个方面对整合程度进行了评估。政策优先性包括五项标准,结果表明印度将传统知识更好地融入了国家政策,其次是尼泊尔和孟加拉国。没有一个国家符合我们的政策治理标准。尼泊尔和印度强调以社区为基础的灾害管理,将传统知识与现代技术相结合。然而,这些政策对这种融合的途径只字未提,治理机制也没有规定社区参与,也没有提出任何融合工具来促进这种做法。总体而言,减灾政策承认有必要与传统知识相结合,但要优先考虑传统知识的整合,还需要做更多的工作,这需要整合工具(如法律、经济和制度)和资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Integrating traditional and local knowledge into disaster risk reduction policies: Insights from Nepal, India and Bangladesh

Traditional and local knowledge (TLK) can be instrumental in mitigating the risks of disasters. There are calls to prioritize such knowledge to promote community resilience against disasters. This study examines the integration of TLK into disaster risk reduction (DRR) policies in Nepal, India and Bangladesh using a qualitative content analysis. We evaluated the level of integration in three components: policy priority, policy governance, and policy integration. Policy priority included five criteria and showed that India has better integrated TLK into national policies, followed by Nepal, and Bangladesh. None of the countries met our criteria for policy governance. Nepal and India emphasize community-based disaster management, combining traditional knowledge with modern technologies. However, policies are silent about the pathways of such integration, the governance mechanisms have no provision for community participation, nor are any integration tools proposed to promote such practices. Overall, the DRR policies have acknowledged the need to engage with TLK, but much more work is needed to prioritize TLK integration, which requires integration tools (e.g., legal, economic and institutional) and resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信