Implementation of Community-Based Landslide Hazard Mitigation Measures
Authors` main point
The authors have discussed a number of points with regards to the topic. To begin with, Holcombe and Anderson point out that the forecasts of the current climate change suggest more hurricanes, as well as severe rainfall events which results to increased landslides and high magnitudes. Landslide risk is caused by a number of preparatory factors which include vegetation, slope geometry, groundwater regimes, soil and geology and surface water. Additionally, triggering mechanisms such as seismic events and rainfall also result to landslide risk.
Secondly, the authors point that the region is highly vulnerable to landslides due to the fact that there are informal and unplanned housings on the landslide-prone areas. According to Holcombe and Anderson, this changes loading and hydrology, geometry, housing, as well as adding to the risk of landslide facing those already in the susceptible societies. Risk, in the physical environment can be expressed as follows: the risk of landslide equals the likelihood of the landslide (the hazard) happening multiplied by the impact of the hazard to the economy, people or even property. This indicates that, for one to reduce the risk of landslides in the communities, it is important to minimize the susceptibility of communities to the hazard, reduce the hazard (landslide) or perform the two. In the past, policy statements by major stakeholders encompassed a pre-caution for disaster risk reduction, as well as an incorporated facet of sustainable development. Basically, the questions that arise at this level are addressed at either the national or the regional level as part of adaptation to climate change or disaster risk reduction. It is evident from the authors that there have been several mitigation strategies to minimize the landslide risk.
In this paper, Holcombe and Anderson have focused on the merits of a hazard (landslide) risk reduction method that is community-based. The discussed approach mainly focuses Management of Slope Stability in Communities (MoSSaiC). MoSSaiC is a programme that was established in the Caribbean in 2004. This methodology focuses on such questions as the cause of the instability of a hillside and the way the government as well as community can be engaged in the design, as well as the enforcement of mitigation measures. The authors point out that the institutional scale at which the program is started and the spatial scale of the hazard which should be addressed at a level controlling the risk should be resolved simultaneously. So as to deliver, the question of how can a triumphant methodology be used effectively both the government and the communities. In this paper, the authors have mainly focused on the significance of addressing landslide risk from the appropriate institutional and spatial scales.
Holcombe and Anderson recommend that initiatives for risk reduction be developed at the community level. Further, they say that the initiatives should by champions adopted, funded and embraced by the agencies, donors and governments. This is because the hierarchical authority ensures liberty and specifies the consequences. Besides, the authors also talk about the aptness of the extent to which the risk is spatially addressed. Evidently, top-down risk reduction programs have been initiated. This has not only been at the local scale but also at the scale determined by aggregate types of data for instance hill-slope angles and soil type. In their justification of the same, the authors suggest that it is important to evaluate the communities critically for the models, and instabilities that cause the landslides so as to come up with the mitigation measures.
The authors support their main points by arguing that the measures for risk reduction necessitate a scientific foundation in a manner that those for the mitigative measures can justify their solutions. In conclusion, they point out that understanding the mechanisms that cause the landslides, as well as their operational range is of paramount. This is because a comprehensive understanding of the same provides an appropriate basis for reducing the landslide risk. Hazards resulting from landslide hazard originate from a combination of various preparatory issues, which relates to soil as well as geology, slope geometry, vegetation, and groundwater regimes, triggering mechanisms like seismic and rainfall events.
It is clear that Holcombe and Anderson`s main audience is the community, government and other donor institutions, as well as the funding agencies. They argue that through the institutional chain of command that runs from the community social intervention fund, as well as community involvement then to the recognition of the government and ending at the approval at the regional organization level and international agencies then effective mitigative measures can be attained. From this it is evident that the authors were seeking the audience of the community, government and funding agencies.
From a personal perspective, the title of this article- Implementation of Community-Based Landslide Hazard Mitigation Measures: the Role of Stakeholder Engagement in `Sustainable` Project Scale-Up- is appropriately placed. It is evident that the topic links with the ideas and purpose of the authors. The topic is also very significant to the understanding of the root cause of landslide hazard and the best way possible to mitigate the same. Additionally, the as the topic suggests, the authors have shown how the community, government and fund agencies should be involved in the mitigation process. Apparently, landslide risk is caused by a number of preparatory factors which include vegetation, slope geometry groundwater regimes, soil and geology and surface water, as well as triggering mechanisms such as seismic events and rainfall also result to landslide risk. As such some measures need to be put in place to mitigate the same. Successful results cannot be attained by a single group as the hazard affects people, the economy and property. The effects are felt mainly by the vulnerable groups – those whose houses are constructed at the landslide prone areas. Therefore, it is necessary to involve the stakeholders involved. Besides, the article has an abstract. In it, the authors have considered explaining the main points in the body. According to studies, articles should have detailed abstracts to introduce the work. This is so as to give the reader an insight of what is to be discussed (Paula, 2010). In this article, the abstract is well presented and it provides the reader with a clear picture of the cause of landslide hazard.
Finally, the article has an organized and well presented body. The authors have discussed his main points. Holcombe and Anderson have begun by introducing their work. It is necessitated that all works should have a comprehensive introduction (Paula, 2010). The paper has also discussed the program intended to be used in a comprehensive manner. In addition, the authors have shown how well all the stakeholders can be engaged to mitigate the landslide hazard.
Holcombe, E.A. & Anderson, M.G. (2009). Implementation of Community-Based Landslide Hazard Mitigation Measures: the Role of Stakeholder Engagement in `Sustainable` Project Scale-Up.
Paula, D. (2010). Literature Reviews Made Easy: A Quick Guide to Success. London: IAP.
Implementation of Community Student`s Name