People with Disabilities and Disasters

Stough, Laura M.; Kelman, Ilan

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63254-4_12

Cited by 43 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Disaster research focused on persons with disabilities may not include compounding vulnerabilities or additional barriers they may face, such as being a child with disability, women with disability, or a little girl with disability. Stough and Kelman 2018;King et al 2019) and variability in terms used to address people with disabilities in planning documents (Kailes and Enders 2007;Priestley and Hemingway 2007). The SFDRR may have a variable rate of inclusion for people with disabilities globally.…”

Section: Definitions and Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While most of the research on intersectionality is focused on employment, health, and education, there is the potential that intersectionality may be a factor in further marginalization during disasters. The research highlighted in this article suggests that children and older adults with disabilities, as well as individuals with a disability and specific health issues may not be included during the implementation of disaster risk reduction policies (Pickering et al 2017;Grant 2018;Stough and Kelman 2018). Therefore, considerations of the potential intersectionality of vulnerability dimensions should be included in disaster risk reduction policies, procedures, and strategies as well (Bennett et al 2017;Castro et al 2017;Maini et al 2017;Lunga et al 2019).…”

Section: Definitions Of Disasters and Disabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this article, ''ability'' is framed as a social construct, not a medical one. As a social construct, one's ability is correlated with external social factors, which fail to consider the needs of all people with varying abilities (Davis et al 2013;Kelman and Stough 2015;Stough and Kelman 2018). This is different from the medical construct, which views disabilities as defects or sicknesses to be cured.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Five Years Later: Assessing the Implementation of the Four Priorities of the Sendai Framework for Inclusion of People with Disabilities

Bennett

2020

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efforts to reduce disaster risk around the world should purposefully consider the needs of potentially vulnerable populations, including people with disabilities. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR) is one of the few global disaster-related frameworks with a focus on people with disabilities. The objective of this article is to assess the inclusion of people with disabilities in disaster risk reduction strategies worldwide since the establishment of SFDRR as gleaned from research. Several studies were reviewed to observe how the four priorities were implemented and operationalized in various countries to reduce the risk for people with disabilities. Findings indicate that initial applications of the SFDRR have compelled purposeful actions, but there is still room for improvement regarding people with disabilities. The results conclude that slight variations on the definitions of disaster or disability may increase marginalization. Three key themes emerged: (1) the intersectionality of disability with other dimensions of vulnerability warrants focused consideration; (2) enhanced disaster preparedness requires more attention in order to empower people with disabilities; and (3) negative cultural attitudes need to shift to enable purposeful inclusion of people with disabilities. Additional studies on the global investments made are encouraged to share lessons learned regarding the integration of people with disabilities.

show abstract

Section: Definitions and Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Definitions Of Disasters and Disabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Five Years Later: Assessing the Implementation of the Four Priorities of the Sendai Framework for Inclusion of People with Disabilities

Bennett

2020

Int J Disaster Risk Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The social vulnerability perspective has been used to investigate a number of socially marginalized groups experiencing disaster: People living in poverty, the elderly, children, members of racial minorities, language-minority groups, people with disabilities, those with mental health issues, or single parents all have been identified by disaster researchers as particularly susceptible to hazards (Morrow, 1999;Peacock et al, 1997;Peek & Fothergill, Phillips & Morrow, 2007;Stough, 2009;Stough & Kelman, 2018). Members of these groups share commonalities including a lack access to economic and social resources, limited autonomy and power, and low levels of social capital (Morrow, 1999).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework: Social Vulnerability To Disastermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, tornados disproportionately kill and injure poor people who are living in trailer homes because they cannot afford other housing. Similarly, earthquakes and hurricanes disproportionately affect people who are elderly and with disabilities as they often need assistance in evacuating from these hazards (Stough & Kelman, 2018). Researchers point out often it is not one single factor of vulnerability, such as poverty, race/ethnicity, or disability, rather the interaction of multiple factors, which lead to disproportionate disaster effects (Finch, Emrich, & Cutter, 2010;Phillips & Morrow, 2007;Peek & Stough, 2010).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework: Social Vulnerability To Disastermentioning

confidence: 99%

Seven school-related disasters: Lessons for policymakers and school personnel

Stough

Kang

Lee

2018

EPAA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students are highly dependent on the emergency planning and evacuation decisions made by policymakers and school personnel when disasters occur. The purpose of this study was to examine selected cases of school-related disasters, highlighting how factors of the school context intersected with natural hazards and subsequently affected schoolchildren. Purposeful maximal sampling was used to select school-related disaster cases for their geographical diversity, different instructional contexts, and types of initiating hazards. Among these, seven cases with broad considerations pertaining to educational policy and safe school environments were selected. A within-case analysis was conducted of each case, followed by a cross-case thematic analysis. Six overarching factors were found in the thematic synthesis of the findings. First, school safety practices apply anytime children are under the supervision of school personnel, making knowledge of emergency procedures across multiple types of school settings essential. Second, elements that place schoolchildren at risk also place school personnel at risk. Third, teachers and school administrators need to be well-trained and knowledgeable enough to make independent decisions in emergency situations. Fourth, children must know emergency procedures so they may take independent action, given teachers are also at-risk during disasters. Fifth, most school disasters can be prevented through safe school construction. Finally, it is the responsibility of policymakers to ensure schools are safe learning environments for children. By participating in and advocating for a culture of preparedness, educational policymakers can better protect schoolchildren, as well as school personnel, in disaster situations.

show abstract