single-dr.php

JDR Vol.15 No.7 pp. 868-877
(2020)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2020.p0868

Material:

Transdisciplinary Approach for Building Societal Resilience to Disasters – Interpreting the Processes of Creating New Knowledge in the Context of Knowledge Management –

Senro Kuraoka*,†, Youb Raj Paudyal**, and Khamarrul Azahari Razak***

*Research and Development Center, Nippon Koei Co., Ltd.
2304 Inarihara, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 300-1259, Japan

Corresponding author

**National Reconstruction Authority, Kathmandu, Nepal

***Disaster Preparedness and Prevention Center, Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Received:
June 5, 2020
Accepted:
September 1, 2020
Published:
December 1, 2020
Keywords:
transdisciplinary approach, explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge, disaster risk reduction
Abstract

Past disasters may indicate that scientific knowledge is not necessarily incorporated in the decision-making process of disaster risk reduction (DRR). The 21st Technical Committee (TC21) of the Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council (ACECC) was established in 2016 to promote transdisciplinary approach (TDA). The TDA seeks for systematic organizational structures and processes that make all disciplines and sectors work together to make scientific knowledge become integral part of the decision-making process. The TC21 performed a session at the 2019 World Bosai Forum held in Sendai city, Japan. The presentations commonly touched on the issues of how to create and transfer new knowledge of DRR through the TDA. As a follow-up, the authors reviewed the presentations and studied the processes of creating new knowledge in terms of “modes and cycles of knowledge.” Two novel cases are presented in this article, for which experts of natural and social sciences teamed up to engage with the local communities to recover and/or enhance resilience. This article gives two main takeaways. First, one of the important commonalities of these two cases is the processes of externalizing the tacit knowledge, which refers to unrecorded experiences, feelings, and insight. Externalization is the crucial process without which the combination with the contemporary explicit knowledge would be difficult. Second, the new knowledge itself does not implement DRR. We need the know-hows to turn the new knowledge into action of DRR. A broad range of know-hows are required, such as establishing the organizational structures, funding schemes, and training programs. The future challenge, therefore, is to design a TDA that will integrate and implement these know-hows.

Cite this article as:
Senro Kuraoka, Youb Raj Paudyal, and Khamarrul Azahari Razak, “Transdisciplinary Approach for Building Societal Resilience to Disasters – Interpreting the Processes of Creating New Knowledge in the Context of Knowledge Management –,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.15, No.7, pp. 868-877, 2020.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] K. Takeuchi and S. Kuraoka (Eds.), “Transdisciplinary Approach (TDA) for building Societal Resilience to Disasters,” The 21st Technical Committee (TC21) of the Asian Civil Engineering Coordinating Council (ACECC), 2019.
  2. [2] S. Matsuura and K. A. Razak, “Exploring transdisciplinary approaches to facilitate disaster risk reduction,” Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol.28, No.6, pp. 809-822, 2019.
  3. [3] I. Nonaka, “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational knowledge creation,” Organization Science, Vol.5, No.1, pp. 14-37, 1994.
  4. [4] A. Badpa, B. Yavar, M. Shakiba, and M. J. Singh, “Effects of knowledge management system in disaster management through RFID technology realization,” Procedia Technology, Vol.11, pp. 785-793, 2013.
  5. [5] O. Toinpre, T. Gajendran, and J. Mackee, “A conceptual frame using ‘knowledge’ as a lens for deconstructing the Sendai Framework Priority 1: Understanding Disaster Risks,” Procedia Engineering, Vol.212, pp. 181-189, 2018.
  6. [6] J. Weichselgartner and P. Pigeon, “The Role of Knowledge in Disaster Risk Reduction,” Int. J. Disaster Risk Science, Vol.6, No.2, pp. 107-116, doi: 10.1007/s13753-015-0052-7, 2015.
  7. [7] A. Rahman, A. Sakurai, and K. Munadi, “Indigenous knowledge management to enhance community resilience to tsunami risk: lessons learned from Smong traditions in Simeulue island, Indonesia,” IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol.56, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/56/1/012018, 2017.
  8. [8] A. Suciani, Z. R. Islami, S. Zainal, Sofiyan, and Bukhari, ““Smong” as local wisdom for disaster risk reduction,” IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol.148, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/148/1/012005, 2018.
  9. [9] G. Mansingh, K.-M. Osei-Bryson, and H. Reichgelt, “Chapter 12: Knowledge sharing in the health sector in Jamaica: The Barriers and the enablers,” K.-M. Osei-Bryson, G. Mansingh, and L. Rao (Eds.), “Knowledge Management for Development, – Domains, Strategies and Technologies for Developing Countries,” pp. 199-213, Springer, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-7392-4, 2014.
  10. [10] M. Alavi and D. E. Leidner, “Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research Issues,” MIS quarterly, Vol.25, No.1, pp. 107-136, doi: 10.2307/3250961, 2001.
  11. [11] A. R. Khan, A. T. Khan, and S. Razzaq, “Conceptualizing local knowledge and disaster management,” Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) Paper, ID: 63378, UTC, 2015.
  12. [12] National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal, “Nepal Earthquake 2015: Post Disaster Needs Assessment,” “Executive Summary,” 2015.
  13. [13] National Reconstruction Authority, Government of Nepal, “Community Based Reconstruction Committee Directives,” 2016.
  14. [14] Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), “Building on community strength for “earthquake-resilient houses” to Nepal,” 2019, https://www.jica.go.jp/english/news/field/2019/20191007_01.html [accessed November 16, 2020]
  15. [15] Central Bureau of Statistics, National Planning Commission, Government of Nepal, “National Population and Housing Census 2011 (National Report),” 2012.
  16. [16] S. L. Cutter, A. Ismail-Zadeh, I. Alcántara-Ayala, O. Altan, D. N. Baker, S. Bricenõ, H. Gupta, A. Holloway, D. Johnston, G. A. McBean, Y. Ogawa, D. Paton, E. Porio, R. K. Silbereisen, K. Takeuchi, G. B. Valsecchi, C. Vogel, and G. Wu, “Global risks: Pool knowledge to stem losses from disasters,” Nature, Vol.522, Issue 7556, pp. 277-279, 2015.
  17. [17] F. Tongkul, “The 2015 Ranau Earthquake: Cause and impact,” Sabah Society J., Vol.32, No.2015, pp. 1-28, 2015.
  18. [18] F. Tongkul, “Active tectonics in Sabah – Seismicity and active faults,” Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia, Vol.64, pp. 27-36, doi: 10.7186/bgsm64201703, 2017.
  19. [19] S. M. S. A. Razak, A. Adnan, M. R. C. Abas, W. S. Lin, N. Z. Zainol, N. Yahya, A. N. Rizalman, and M. E. Mohamad, “A Historical review of significant earthquakes in region surrounding Malaysia,” Proc. of Int. Conf. on Durability of Building and Infrastructures, 2018.
  20. [20] M. A. Asmadi, “Landslide Susceptibility Mapping using Remotely Sensed Data in Kundasang, Sabah,” Master Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 2018.
  21. [21] H. H. M. Yusoff, K. A. Razak, F. Yuen, A. Harun, J. Talib, Z. Mohamad, Z. Ramli, and R. A. Razab, “Mapping of post-event earthquake induced landslides in Sg. Mesilou using LiDAR,” IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol.37, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/37/1/012068, 2016.
  22. [22] S. L. Cutter and M. Gall, “Sendai targets at risk,” Nature Climate Change, Vol.5, pp. 707-709, 2015.
  23. [23] A. T. Ismail-Zadeh, S. L. Cutter, K. Takeuchi, and D. Paton, “Forging a paradigm shift in disaster science,” Natural Hazards, Vol.86, No.2, pp. 969-988, 2017.
  24. [24] L. J. Wood, J. B. Bryan, and M. S. Helen, “Chapter 6: When Disaster strikes...How communities cope and adapt: a social capital perspective,” C. D. Johnson (Ed.), “Theory, Measurement and Outcomes,” Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2013.
  25. [25] G. Roder, T. Ruljigaljig, C.-W. Lin, and P. Tarolli, “Natural hazards knowledge and risk perception of Wujie indigenous community in Taiwan,” Natural Hazards, Vol.81, No.1, pp. 641-662, doi: 10.1007/s11069-015-2100-4, 2016.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Sep. 19, 2021