26 | INTERPRAEVENT 2016 – Extended Abstracts IP_2016_EA254
INTRODUCTION
Zoning Maps, Local Development Plans and Hazard Maps play important roles in disaster risk reduction (DRR). All three address and steer spatial and land use development and influence the dimension of risk. The project ‚GIAClim‘ (Damyanovic et al., 2014) explored from a gender+ perspective how and which people do or are able to get involved in the related planning and implementation processes in Austria and which instruments hold potentials for a gender+-sensitive participation process in DRR.
METHODS
In a case study of a debris flow in a village of the municipality of Trieben in Styria/Austria in 2012 the interdisciplinary project team applied the 4R-method (Damyanovic/Reinwald/Schneider 2005)combined with spatial analyses and qualita- tive interviews with stakeholders.
DEFINING GENDER+
Gender is a key structuring factor of society which provides the basis for the subordinate position of half of the population, it has a biological compo- nent that cannot be changed, and it has proved to be, among the many possible factors for discrimina- tion, the most resistant to change across time and space (Sanchez, 2013: 330). Women and men are affected by natural disasters in different ways (e.g.
Weber, 2005; Mehta, 2007, LeMasson, 2013). But women, like men, are not a homogenous category.
Moreover the intersection of gender with other structuring factors of society as age, race, physical ability, the socio-economic status, ethnic back- ground and other aspects determine the risks of individuals and communities. Additionally, due to the socio-economic, social, cultural, environmental and spatial circumstances people‘s capacities and competences in terms of dealing with the impact of
natural disasters can vary (e.g. Le Masson 2013).
Therefore, within the project ‚GIAClim‘ and this paper the term ‚gender‘ is defined in a more comprehensive way as ‚gender+‘ and includes the differences within individuals and groups in terms of age, race, their phase of life, life situation, physical ability, social and cultural background (Verloo et al., 2011).
RESULTS
In the case study of Trieben (as well as in almost all other Austrian municipalities) all three instru- ments, the Hazard Maps, the Zone Maps and Local Development Plans in Austria, did not apply a gender+ perspective. In terms of the representation of women and men as well as different groups of people the following can be stated: the Austrian Service for Torrent and Avalanche Control (WLV) which compiles the Hazard Maps and implements mitigation measures is male dominated; women are underrepresented in the municipal council which plays by law an important role in the elaboration of the Zoning Map and Local Development Plan.
Although in the case study, women are present in key positions e.g. the head of the WLV and the person who drafted the Zoning Map and Local Development Plan are women.
In terms of formal stakeholder involvement, apart from the legally obligatory minimum information on the planning process no other form of active, official participation of the local stakeholders has taken place. That entails that certain groups of people - e.g. citizens that do not own property or land in the municipality - tend not to get involved in the planning process although the law would enable them to do so. Furthermore, citizens with a weak socio-economic background, educational disadvantages, reduced mobility and young adults are facing obstacles in the decision making process
A gender+-sensitive analysis of local planning
instruments in the context of natural disasters and disaster risk management in Austria
Britta Fuchs1; Doris Damyanovic1; Florian Reinwald1; Julia Eisl2
RISK GOVERNANCE AND POLICIES (OBJECTIVES, STRATEGIES, COMMUNICATION)
INTERPRAEVENT 2016 – Extended Abstracts | 27
which can entail a lack of information and risk awareness.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the case study, of the three planning instruments the Local Development Plan would hold the most potential for a gender+-sensi- tive approach in communicating risks to different groups of people since it already takes into account socio-economic circumstances and prognosis. It could link social aspects with the Hazard Map, which is per definition an area-based expert opin- ion on potential hazards. The socio-economic information presented in the Local Development Plan could make gender+-differences in terms of vulnerabilities and capacities on a small local scale visible. In general, a gender+-sensitive participation process could also be used as a means of knowledge transfer between the different planning instru- ments, between other processes like village renewal projects, between generations as well as between women and men. In consequence, this could foster self-provision and individual responsibility as well as the use of the capacities and competences of men and women in DRR in an efficient and fair way.
REFERENCES
- Damyanovic D., Fuchs B., Reinwald F., Pircher E., Allex B., Eisl J., Brandenburg C., Hübl J. (2014).
GIAKlim - Gender Impact Assessment im Kontext der Klimawandelanpassung und Naturgefahren.
Endbericht von StartClim2013.F. Institute of Landscape Planning, BOKU, Vienna.
- Damyanovic D., Reinwald F., Schneider G. (2005).
Manual for the Input of Gender Mainstreaming Examples into the Good Practise Database. Institute of Landscape Planning, BOKU, Vienna
- Le Masson V. (2013). Exploring disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation from a
gender perspective. Insights from Ladakh, PhD diss.
Brunel University School of Health Sciences and Social Care.
- Mehta M. (2007). Gender Matters. Lessons for Disaster Risk Reduction in South Asia. Internation- al Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu: ICIMOD.
- Sànchez de Madariaga I. (2013). Looking For- ward, Moving Beyond Trade offs. In Sànchez de Madariaga, I., Roberts, M. (Eds.): Fair Shared Cities.
The Impact of Gender Planning in Europe.
Ashgate:Farnham. 325-334.
- Weber G. (2005). Gender, Klimawandel und Klimapolitik, Über Fallstricke bei einer integrativen Betrachtung Diskussionspapier 01/05 des Projektes
„Global Governance und Klimawandel,
http://www.sozial- oekologische-forschung.org/
intern/upload/literatur/Weber05_Gender- Klima- politik.pdf, (14 September 2010).
- Verloo M. et al. (2011). Final QUING Report, Institute for Human Sciences. Vienna: http://www.
quing.eu/. (31 March 2015).
Figure 1. The case study area St.Lorenzen/Austria(ILAP 2013)
KEYWORDS
gender aspects; spatial planning; hazard map; Austria; decision making process
1 Institute of Landscape Planning, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, AUSTRIA, britta.fuchs@boku.ac.at 2 Institute of Mountain Risk Engineering, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna
