Talk:Disaster risk reduction

Updated definition and many other edits (April 2023)

I have added the current definition (it is actually from 2016/2017) and made some readability and other improvements on areas of research, etc and made linkages to other articles we have been improving on climate change adaptation and climate risk (see WikiPedia SDG 13 projecthttps://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/SDGs/Communication_of_environment_SDGs).

I aim to ask other experts for comments and feedback and/or improve other sections myself : update the planning/policy part based on the Sendai mid term review document and information on costs and financing from AR6 . Richarit (talk) 13:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for tackling this article. I've just removed a whole bunch of text that was unsourced, outdated, not encyclopedic or not relevant. If you disagree with any of those removals just let me know. EMsmile (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree with this, although there was a bit I added at the top of disaster research section on the different sub fields (the subfields + links to them seemed much better than listing only generic methods here). I also considered deleting this whole section, but then I saw that 'disaster research' used in various templates redirects to the DRR page, so thought maybe better leave in the research subsection. What do you think ?

Agree with the other removals of unsourced cases or country experiences. The Sendai mid term review has a section on progress at a regional level which could be a good source. Richarit (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I made some edits based on comments from one expert, creating a sustainable development/SDG sub section. They also pointed out a few places where citations are missing. I also added one further paragraph to the lead based on the main text. Richarit (talk) 15:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

American or British English

As per WP:ENGVAR we are meant to keep the English language variety that was dominant when we got here. @User:Richarit: would you say it was mainly American or British English when you started? If it's not clear, or 50:50 then I think we could settle for British English. EMsmile (talk) 14:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Looking at an older version from 2013 it seems that it was British English (e.g. "organisation"), so I will mark it as such now. EMsmile (talk) 14:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes I think the main contributor is British and wrote in British English Richarit (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Poverty, Justice, and Human Capabilities

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2023 and 23 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): D0T1ro (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by DStrassmann (talk) 14:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am editing this article for a university class. I am planning to restructure the "Development of the Concept" section so that it includes more of a history about how the term became popular, and add more international policies to its section. I also will go through the inline citations to make sure they are formatted correctly, and add more pictures and graphs throughout the article. For more information, please go to my sandbox D0T1ro/Disaster risk reduction. D0T1ro (talk) 01:34, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Proposed Edits and Deletions

Hi, I am considering removing the "Definition" Section, as it is already included in the lead. Does anyone have an opinion on this? I could instead move the definition from the lead and keep the section, but both seems unnecessary. D0T1ro (talk) 21:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with your proposal: the lead is meant to be a summary of the article, therefore it makes sense that important things (like a definition) appears in the lead and also in the main text. See also here: WP:LEAD. Thanks for asking. EMsmile (talk) 07:27, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Having said that, it would indeed be more elegant if the content about the definition is briefer, more summarised in the lead than in the main text. Having exactly the same wording in both places might be sub-optimal. EMsmile (talk) 07:28, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion and help, I will keep that in mind! D0T1ro (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

I am expanding the topics previously listed under "other international initiatives" and making them each their own subsection of "international policy." This means I am taking away the current "other international initiatives" section, but that could easily be re-added to include new initiatives outside of those previously listed. D0T1ro (talk) 22:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Creating a list of relevant vocabulary whose understanding is important to fully comprehend DRR policies. This includes: resilience, vulnerability, disaster management, mitigation, etc. D0T1ro (talk) 18:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I think climate change adaptation is an important area which is not included at all with the present edits. DRR and CCA have shared goals, strategies and intervention measures (and very similar vocabularies). I am wondering why this section was removed (?) Richarit (talk) 17:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I totally agree that CCA is super important and should be connected into this article. The previous section was almost entirely an excerpt from the separate CCA wikipedia article, and so I was hoping to get around to that section and rewrite it in a way that wasn't directly from the other article, and then add a link to the other wikipage as well. Unfortunately, I just totally have not gotten around to that part yet (I meant to put it into the "effects of climate change on hazards" section and completely forgot)! I do still have a copy of the original section if you would prefer me to copy that back into the article before making the changes (or just keeping the original format), that is totally understandable and I could do that. D0T1ro (talk) 01:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I think it is good to use excerpts in general because it keeps wikipedia consistent and lets us build on what is already there rather than rewriting (unless something is really bad). Then we can focus more on what is missing, out of date or incorrect. And on writing about why that concept/approach is relevant for DRR.

Finding good WP articles can be difficult however... There are other relevant articles on CCA, climate change vulnerability, climate resilience and natural disasters, climate information services (some are more polished than others). I have added an image that we also used in WP climate risk in the definition section - does that fit and look ok to you ?

For sure there is more to say on CCA than what we had in the excerpt. If you want to do that it is fine with me. There are a few other gaps and out of date things in the article also Richarit (talk) 19:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for adding the image! I will put an excerpt on CCA back in, and then potentially edit more in the future. D0T1ro (talk) 05:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Review of Contribution

Overall, good job on your contributions to the article! In specific, your contributions in adding content to subsections like “International policy” improve the overall flow of the article. Similarly, your list of sources and contextualization of data provides a neutral tone to the article that is especially important in Wikipedia. My two biggest suggestions would be to use information from the second and third sentences in rewriting the first sentence to include a more useful definition of the term “Disaster risk reduction”. For the rest of your contribution, consider adding quotations when extracting data even after sourcing in sections like "Effect of climate change on hazards" Once again, great job on your contribution, and good luck on your future edits! Jme312 (talk) 00:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I would add on to Jme312's review: Overall, the article does well in presenting its content with a concise title and well-written section headers. The introductory sentence provides a clear definition of the topic, and the content and edits made are cohesive, ensuring the lead offers a precise summary of the main text. However, there are areas for potential improvement. It might be beneficial to emphasize the "issues and challenges" by moving it up a section. Additionally, I would increase internal links from other articles pointing to this one to enhance the article's connectivity. One significant area needing attention is the article's readability. The prevalent use of jargon might make it challenging for readers unfamiliar with the topic of climate change. Lastly, visually enriching the article with more illustrations, especially in sections like "resilience and vulnerability" and "issues and challenges," would further enhance its appeal and comprehension. But once again overall good job! Squinn10 (talk) 03:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Agree good job! Yet a few things could be improved. Section headings - 'Definitions' is quite a long section which also includes discussion of the concepts and how they are operationalised. Some terms like CCA (and sustainable development?) are also missing here. We could consider breaking this into two sections, one with just the definitions and one explaining the concepts.. 'Effects of climate change on hazards' this is a good addition but it introduces too many ideas at once (human impacts of hazards, sustainable development and SDGs) into a more biophysical section. 'International policies' - I don't think policies is the right word as these are all international frameworks/agreements (whereas policies are what the countries are doing) alternatively it could say international governance. One other thing, cited sources are not always the best ones and in some parts just sound wrong eg. "In the context of disaster risk reduction, vulnerability is the ability to respond and recover from some sort of hazard". We should ideally use IPCC, UNEP, UNDRR. Richarit (talk) 18:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the tips! I agree that a few more definitions should be added and that the citations are sometimes rather messy, and I will work to address that in the next few days. For the climate section, would you recommend I move the sustainable development/sdg information to the definition or international section? D0T1ro (talk) 01:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Great to hear! I think the SD section looks quite ok as part of the definitions and scope (it was actually suggested by an expert that we include sustainable development planning earlier because it is a more generic link beyond just climate change; and the same comment for resilience). Following this, it is very good to have a climate section. A simpler title might work better - effects of climate change on disaster risks? Considering that vulnerability is also changed as well as hazard potential. SDGs can be discussed separately under international governance because it is UN-led.

A few things missing are: more recent statistics on disasters and their costs, national or international assessments of disaster risks, and the progress in implementing DRR strategies (from the mid-term SENDAI UNDRR report or from CRED database) and examples. Richarit (talk) 22:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

I used some statistics information from the Midterm report, but will go back and make sure that the report itself is emphasized as well! Also, as my class assignment (purpose of me editing this page) is almost finished, I had just planned to change a bit more of the climate change section (including the title, good idea!), add a short example of United States DRR policy, and properly cite the lead to try and remove the broom. I would be happy to continue to work on the page after my specific coursework is finished, but you seem to have a lot more expertise in this subject, if you would rather continue on with these edits instead (?) D0T1ro (talk) 21:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your additions @D0T1ro Great job! I am also working on a project that has a fixed timeframe. In the project we have specialist editors who can check the articles for improving the wording and any errors. Since you are coming to the end of your assignment, (and I have also used up most of my time) we can ask them to check this article when we are ready - say end of November ?

Project info (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/SDGs/Communication_of_environment_SDGs) and a related set of instructional videos https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLT0ycVwr8x5dZM2Ubud58KZMJi63FkUOq

I am planning to add a bit on the financing and costing of DRR as that section is weaker I think, but not on the other sections. If you come across any other DRR policy documents/examples or risk assessments could you add those, please ?

If you are keen to do more work afterwards, what about looking at one of the other articles such as natural disaster or Sustainable development - suggesting since you have already contributed to these topics within DRR. These articles have more editors actively working on them, so it could also be more interesting and a good way to learn! Richarit (talk) 17:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

End of November sounds like a great time for the project edit! I will be sure to stay on the look out for extra policy examples to add in the meantime. Also, thank you for the suggestions for moving forward! D0T1ro (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Update: I see that in the meantime, User:Richarit has added content to the sections on costs and financing which is great. I think User:D0T1ro has finished their student assignment and has moved on. Pity but thank you nevertheless! EMsmile (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Strengths and weaknesses of the article now

I came here with the intention to only improve the readability of the lead but I've now made some other changes as well:

• I've moved some content to a newly created "history" section.
• I've moved some content to the disaster article where it fitted better.
• I have weeded out some repetition, and removed some content from the governance section (too much relying on two primary sources).
• I've made the lead longer (by moving some content from the costs and financing sections up to the lead).
• I've also tried to simplify the language of the lead to bring its reading ease score up. I've also changed around the images and picked a different one for the lead now. However, it might still not be the best one for the lead. Does anyone have suggestions for a better one?

Also, User:Richarit what do you see as the remaining weaknesses of the article? I am also pinging User:D0T1ro who did good work but I fear we have lost them now as they haven't continued to edit after their student assignment ended (?). Pity! EMsmile (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)