Purpose: This paper introduces the state of informal settlements in Latin America and the Caribbean, and it explores potential relationships between informal settlements and national policies on urban development and disaster risk reduction, especially on how risk governance and disaster resilience are conceived and practiced by governments.Design/methodology/approach: 17 Habitat III National Reports issued during the preparatory process toward the New Urban Agenda in 2016 are analyzed using statistics and qualitative methods. Some quantitative variables, such as access to drinking water and sewerage in the region, are combined with qualitative data from references to the Sendai Framework and national urban policies in the mentioned reports. Countries in the study include Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay.Findings: Results show that the situation of informal settlements in the region is complex and presents two different realities that coexist: one group of countries in which provision of basic urban services poses great challenges for a significant proportion of the urban population, while the other group in which urban informality and precariousness persists despite better statistics. Risk governance and disaster resilience principles are scarcely articulated in existing urban development discourses in the region.Originality/value: The preparatory process toward the New Urban Agenda allowed to conduct an original updated cross-country analysis and to identify cross-cutting issues on informality, risk reduction, and urban development in the region.

This study analyzed the international key literature on integrated disaster risk management (IDRM), considering it a dynamic sociocultural process subjected to the historical process of social formation, offering a closer look at the concept while exploring conceptual elements and ideas to advance IDRM in both national and international contexts. Methodologically, the study adopted a literature review strategy, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, combined with qualitative content analysis. This article examines the history of IDRM, discusses current challenges for implementation, looks at some experiences, and proposes avenues for further research. Some findings point out the lack of an overarching IDRM approach, which is characterized by a rather disperse set of ideas and experiences concerning what IDRM is and how it should be operationalized, thereby revealing the need for a more comprehensive theory and methodologies to further advance it. Other findings highlight that IDRM encompasses different kinds and levels of “integrations” that go from internal (that is, disaster risk reduction and management domains) to external (that is, all societal processes such as sustainable development), including temporal and spatial integrations. Hence, we are talking about a multidimensional integration of disaster risk management. In this regard, the article proposes four dimensions for integration: sectoral, spatial/hierarchical, temporal, and externally with other cross-cutting societal challenges, especially climate change and sustainable development. These dimensions cover 29 ideas for indicators or “proto-indicators” to guide the discussion, exploration, and analysis of IDRM in specific contexts.

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015−2030’s (SFDRR) framing moved away from disaster risk as a natural phenomenon to the examination of the inequality and injustice at the root of human vulnerability to hazards and disasters. Yet, its achievements have not seriously challenged the long-established capitalist systems of oppression that hinder the development leading to disaster risk creation. This article is an exploratory mapping exercise of and a collective reflection on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and SFDRR indicators—and their use in measuring progress towards disaster risk reduction (DRR). We highlight that despite the rhetoric of vulnerability, the measurement of progress towards DRR remains event/hazard-centric. We argue that the measurement of disaster risk could be greatly enhanced by the integration of development data in future iterations of global DRR frameworks for action.

This exploratory work seeks to shed light on disaster governance by looking into potential linkages between the production of vulnerability and disaster governance in Chile. Our point of investigation is the case of post-disaster Chaitén and the Chilean model of Disaster Risk Management. The work begins by situating disaster governance and the production of vulnerability in a broader context of existing governance system that includes a multiplicity of actors and socio-economic, socio-ecological, and political processes. Coming from a multi-scalar perspective, we use the disaster Pressure and Release (PAR) model to enable a differentiated analysis of the multiplicity of actors, rules, and processes related to DRM that participate in the production of disaster vulnerability in the current Chaitén. With this we address the questions as to ‘why’ the Chilean model of DRM is prominently centralised and ‘what’ are the effects on the production of disaster vulnerability for the case of post-disaster Chaitén.

El trabajo busca ofrecer una vista general, actualizada, pero también crítica de los asentamientos informales en América Latina y el Caribe, e identificar y explorar posibles tendencias entre los diferentes países con respecto a la gobernanza y resiliencia urbana para la reducción del riesgo de desastre en estos asentamientos. Se analizaron datos entregados por 17 países en sus reportes nacionales elaborados durante el proceso preparatorio hacia Habitat III: Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, República Dominicana, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, México, Paraguay, Perú y Uruguay. Se estimaron variables cuantitativas como el acceso al agua potable y alcantarillado junto al análisis cualitativo de contenido tales como referencias al Marco de Sendai y políticas públicas para los asentamientos. Los resultados muestran importantes contrastes en la región, variando significativamente el porcentaje de la población urbana viviendo en condiciones de inseguridad. En términos de gobernanza, prevalece la tendencia de los países a reconocer la importancia de un entorno propicio para el desarrollo urbano a través de estructuras territoriales y sectoriales que articulen vertical y horizontalmente a los diferentes actores. Pese a estas declaraciones, la evidencia entregada al respecto se limita a la articulación vertical de los actores públicos.