Table 2.

Proto-indicators for integrated disaster risk management (IDRM)

Proto-indicators	Description	Sources
Sectoral integration (Horizontal)
Sectoral integration	Public and private sectors, civil society, and academia work closely together and create opportunities for collaboration.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2019, 2022a); Blümel et al. (2021)
Multi-sectoral national platforms	There are institutionalized groups (that is, platforms, roundtables) where actors from different sectors meet and discuss, and eventually collaborate in producing public policies for DRR.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2015); Gopalakrishnan and Okada (2007)
National inter-institutional bodies	Inter-institutional bodies (inter-agency or inter-ministerial), articulating two or more institutions from different areas: for example, inter-ministerial group for disaster risk reduction.	Wisner (2011); Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2015, 2019)
Resources for IDRM	Strong political commitment to promote and integrate DRR into development and climate programming: governments assign resources (financial and human).	UNISDR (2005); Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2015, 2019)
IDRM in the private sector	Integration of the private sector in disaster risk reduction efforts through promotion of business opportunities.	UN-IDNDR (1994); UNDRR (2015, 2019, 2022a)
DRR planning in the health sector	Promoting the goal of “hospitals safe from disaster” by ensuring that all new hospitals are built with a level of resilience that strengthens their capacity to remain functional during disasters.	UNISDR (2005); Blümel et al. (2021)
Critical infrastructure	Collaboration among developers and managers of critical infrastructure to avoid disruption of basic services that amplify disaster impacts.	UNISDR (2005); UNDRR (2022a)
Interdisciplinary research and science	This includes multi-hazards and interdisciplinary risk assessments.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNISDR (2005); Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2019, 2022a)
Science-policy nexus	Science for policy making and practice within DRR frameworks is developed through different mechanisms: for example, scientific evidence-based decision making takes place within governmental and legislative institutions.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2015); Alcántara-Ayala (2021); Blümel et al. (2021); Bueb et al. (2021)
Transdisciplinary disaster risk science	Scientists and research institutions acknowledge the importance of incorporating different type of knowledge and social groups in risk assessments.	Wisner et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); Alcántara-Ayala et al. (2019)
Perspective on gender, age, disability, and cultural backgrounds	A gender, age, disability, and cultural perspective is integrated in all DRM/DRR policies and practices.	UNISDR (2005); UNDRR (2015)
Participation and ownership	DRM/DRR endeavors are subjected to active participation and appropriation by people at-risk along with their organizations.	Zhang et al. (2004); Shi (2012); Ranke (2016); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
New divisions of labor and modes of cooperation	Development of new institutional forms (including new modes of cooperation between actors) that deal with disaster risk from a systemic approach.	Wisner (2011); Voss and Dittmer (2016)
IDRM institutionalization	Sustainable institutions and legal structures where representation of pivotal disaster risk stakeholders and the management by civil and political society are guaranteed. Here, integration, coordination, and concertation of social actors of differentiated territorial levels are “transversal” requirements for IDRM.	Zhang et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
Holistic understanding of disaster risk	Understanding of disaster risk as a (dynamic and systemic) multi-dimensional phenomenon: for example, recognition that disasters are not “natural” in official documents.	Zhang et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2015, 2019)
Disaster risk governance	DRM/DRR overarching efforts are strengthened first and foremost within the scope of regulatory frameworks and mechanisms of implementation.	Zhang et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2015); Alcántara-Ayala et al. (2019); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
DRR into development and planning	Integration of DRR principles into development policies and planning instruments at all government levels.	UNISDR (2005); Shi (2012); UNDRR (2015); Rosendo et al. (2018)
Synergies between DRR, SDGs, and climate change strategies	Integration of DRR into concrete SDGs and/or climate change strategies and mechanisms: for example, disaster risk-informed poverty reduction campaigns.	UNISDR (2005); Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2015, 2019); Rosendo et al. (2018); Botzen et al. (2019); Wang et al. (2021)
Spatial/hierarchical integration (vertical)
Multi-scalar cooperation	Standards, groups, studies, or similar synergies between actors (or within) on DRM at different geographical scales or territorial levels.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2015, 2019); Alcántara-Ayala et al. (2019)
Multi-scalar EWS	Institutional capacities ensure that early warning systems (EWS) are well integrated into governmental policy and decision-making processes (culture) as well as emergency management systems at both national and local levels.	UNISDR (2005); Shi (2012); UNDRR (2019); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
Data integration	Integration of disaster risk-related data within national official statistics, this includes data from all DRM phases.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNDRR (2015, 2019); Lemiale et al. (2020); Blümel et al. (2021)
Scaling-up/articulation of DRR	Coordination of national DRR with international and/or major regional organizations (for example, European Union), especially with the United Nations system with emphasis on prevention.	UN-IDNDR (1994); Zhang et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); Shi (2012); UNDRR (2015, 2019)
International integration	Stronger linkages, coherence, and integration of DRM into the humanitarian assistance (both as donor and as receiver: for example, National Post-Disaster Needs Assessments). This includes efforts on supporting DRR through sustainable development assistance.	Zhang et al. (2004); UNISDR (2005); Wisner (2011)
Understanding the complexity of “territories”	Use of theories, methods, and models of analysis (quantitative/qualitative) aimed at the understanding of “territories, territoriality and habitability.” It considers their different dimensions and scales for the assessment of people’s conditions: experiences, resources, assets, capabilities, potentials, and requirements in terms of social welfare, as an inescapable—and irreplaceable—device for the reduction and management of risks.	Wisner (2011); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
Temporal integration
Integration across DRM phases	DRM activities and mechanism articulate throughout the DRM phases with special emphasis on prevention and preparedness.	UN-IDNDR (1994); Zhang et al. (2004); UNISDR (2005); Shi (2012)
Culture of prevention	There is a “culture of prevention” among organizations, institutions, and actors: for example, implementation of risk-informed approaches to development and planning, and avoiding disaster risk creation and impact amplification.	UN-IDNDR (1994); Zhang et al. (2004); UNISDR (2005); Wisner (2011); Shi (2012); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
Recognition of distant root causes of disaster risks	Acknowledgment (in official documents) of the causal chain of disasters and risks that begins with distant “root causes,” spatially and temporally. This includes how disaster risks are transmitted through “dynamic pressures” such as weak government, unplanned urbanization, and so on, so shaping “unsafe conditions.”	Wisner et al. (2004); Wisner (2011); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
Reduction of multi-dimensional vulnerabilities	Acknowledgment of the multi-dimensional nature of disaster vulnerability, as well as mechanisms to reduce social, economic, and environmental vulnerabilities to disasters.	Wisner (2011); UNDRR (2015); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)
IDRM as process (not an output)	Recognition of the dynamic and systemic nature of DRM/DRR, and its intrinsic relationship to development processes. This applies to both rural and urban systems, and it implies that IDRM is seen as a process and not as a product, while sustainability is sought throughout time.	UNISDR (2005); Ikeda et al. (2006); Shi (2012); UNDRR (2015); Alcántara-Ayala et al. (2019); Alcántara-Ayala (2021)