Community resilience to disasters in Botswana

Abstract

Communities in Botswana have suffered from floods, drought, wild-land fires, windstorms, and heavy rains . The perpetual losses suffered by Batswana motivated the need for research to identify and analyse factors that make communities vulnerable and non-resilient to disasters. The aim of the research was to investigate the res ilience and adaptability of communities to disasters in the South East Administrative District, Botswana. This was achieved by undertaking a documented investigation and analysis of hazards and risks, vulnerabilities, and capacities prevalent in three communities (Ramotswa, Otse, and Mogobane) and appraising the perceptions and conduct of exposed individuals and communities. Furthermore, this field study of communities in the South East District was conducted in 2013 using both qualitative and quantitative research method. The increasing frequency of disaster worldwide (and in Botswana) is complicated further by human induced hazards and climate change. It is estimated that 170 million people worldwide were affected by disasters in 2001 and it is further predicted that by 2025, over half of the people living in developing countries will be highly vulnerable to floods and storms. As such, poverty and vulnerability have been found to account for 98% of those killed and affected by natural disasters in developing countries. Both qualitative and quantitative research paradigms, the disaster risk reduction and Hyogo Framework for Action inform all aspects of this study. The paradigms and framework provided the context for constructing the research questions and the research methodology. The study was organized in two phases. The first phase was qualitative where 88 participants, 6 (six) focus groups, and 26 key informants were interviewed to understand their perception of hazards and risks, vulnerability, and resilience and their experiences of disasters. In addition, it was intended to identify prevalent hazards and assess the impact of disasters on the life of community members, as well as existing disaster policies in the district. Focus group discussions and interviews with participants and key informants were conducted. The second phase was quantitative where 3567 (94%) respondents completed the questionnaires to establish the extent of the problem and its scope, and to describe prevalent resilience characteristics. The crisis, stress, social constructivism and resilience theories and the ecological perspective provides the analytical lens for the interpretation of data from participants, respondents, key informants, and focus groups discussions. A key result from the analysis is that communities are vulnerable and are constantly under disaster threat. Although there is a district disaster management committee, it is only active during emergency response and does not address the pre- and post disaster activities. As such, communities, families, and individuals lack fundamental knowledge, skills, and techniques that would enhance their resilience to disasters. After reflecting on the issues that make them vulnerable, the participants, key informants, focus groups, and respondents proposed disaster resilient measures for their communities and /or district. In addition, the social workers and community members proposed a radical shift from being reactive to adopting proactive measures to disaster and to empower themselves to reduce disaster related risks. This study raises arguments for the need to adopt a disaster risk reduction measures designed and implemented alongside community development projects. In particular, that it is necessary to train action teams (social workers, community leaders, disaster related committees, and volunteers) that would keep communities informed and alert about hazards in their physical environment and guiding them to act accordingly during emergencies.