Strategic Guidelines and Methodological Approach to Risk in Urban Contexts in Central America

One of the aims of the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies (IFRC), as stated in the Strategy 2020, is to strengthen community
resilience as a means to reduce casualties and damages caused by disasters. The
IFRC is implementing actions aimed specifically at urban contexts, as well as many
other stakeholders working with humanitarian aid and development cooperation.
Experience in recent years has shown that urban risk reduction strategies demand
specific approaches which, in many cases, differ from the methodologies and
tools proven to work in rural or semi-urban contexts. The reason is that urban
—and more specifically, urban communities— have different dynamics and socioeconomic
relationships.

There is much debate on the conceptual analysis of urban risk and how to address
it in different contexts, especially since it is possible that the DIPECHO VII Regional
Project will be implemented by the IFRC in Central America. This conceptual analysis
has studied and discussed the basic aspects that impact the manifestation of risk
and vulnerabilities of territories in cities, including the inseparable relationship
between the urban and rural ecosystems, city/urban dynamics and entropies,
sociocultural aspects in these spaces, human resource concentration, economic
and financial activities, power relationships, and decision-making processes in large
cities. Results and conclusions based upon these analyses have been published in
a separate document.

Apparently, what differentiates risk in urban spaces is that it deals with a phenomenon
that takes place in a group of social relationships related to production, distribution,
and consumption set in an artificial, dynamic, integrated and dense scenario. Cities
have high volumes of construction, population and vital lines; they are connected
through multiple links which result in a different intensity in the risk construction
process. This results in a unique risk typology for each urban conglomerate (some
conclusions from the conceptual analysis document by Carlos Delgado Rodríguez).
Throughout the different areas of inquiry that led to substantiate this workn1 there
was consensus that the conceptual framework for risk being used and developed
until now does not need changes to explain the urban risk category. Rather, it
is agreed that the distinction between urban and non-urban risk is merely for
clarification purposes and to determine the geographic location of the word.
However, other elements that distinguish risk in urban spaces have been identified.

Undoubtedly, population density, with its extreme manifestation being precarious
overcrowding, is one of the most relevant elements since it creates a high
concentration of vulnerabilities in a small space. Geographically, city overcrowding levels are more relevant to the characterisation of its risk levels than to the total
population size. Additionally, other elements identified include power relationships,
decision-making capabilities, intense commercial and productive relationships,
and the presence of institutional stakeholders and of the civil society impacting
the generation —or reduction— of risk in cities and urban zones. The IFRC was
particularly interested in the extensive debate that resulted from the topic of
community and urban culture, where it was stated that certain social capacities
inherent to rural areas, such as solidarity, sense of ownership, interpersonal and
community relationships, are not as visible in urban territories.

One of the main conclusions from these spaces of collective thinking is that urban
risk requires an approach different to the non-urban approach; that strategy design
and implementation, programmes and projects have to vary depending on the
urban context, and that there is need for extensive revision of current risk reduction
tools and methodologies if they are to be effectively implemented in these contexts.
In-depth discussion and consensus on the approach and strategic guidelines to
be adopted when dealing with urban risk reduction are included in the following
complementary analysis to the theoretical-conceptual analysis. When compiling
the outcome of the conceptual, strategic and methodological analyses, the
proposal seeks to change the expression urban risk to ‘risk in urban spaces’ or
‘risk in urban environments.’ This change will clarify and limit risk to specific urban
territories. In order to better understand the strategic guidelines, this analysis
begins by describing the main risk-generating factors and includes lessons learned
and considerations from the most recent urban interventions in Central America.