The importance of training disaster practitioners on how to deal with poor vs wealthier neighbourhoods

A small number of practitioners differentiated between poorer and wealthier neighbourhoods, and their responsiveness to communication strategies in risk and disaster situations. They felt that ‘nicer’ neighbourhoods were easier to work with in disaster situations or simulations: “In 24 apartments only one person was still inside, the others were very cooperative. This was a nice neighbourhood; if you bring the same situation to the suburbs, people usually do not move and you cannot convince anyone” (G1; R5), “In other areas, you find people who can easily leave their homes and this is easier for us. The problem with the suburbs is that after the event you need to spend energies to relocate people, the wealthier areas need attention in other terms: insurance, safeguard of the cultural heritage” (G3; R6).

Note: See source document for full reference.

Cultural Factors: Socio-economic status

Hazards: Natural hazards, Man-made non-intentional hazards or emergency situations, Man-made intentional hazards

Disaster Phases: Response, Recovery

Types of Actors Concerned: National civil protection body, Local authorities, Healthcare and emergency services, Law enforcement agencies, Military, NGOs, Red Cross

Recommendations:

• Develop culturally aware disaster preparedness and response training
• Training programmes for citizens of all ages should be developed. These are necessary to increase citizens’ knowledge of and preparedness in case of disasters. The training activities should be organized on the basis of a training strategy and should take various forms, ranging from emergency drill to workshops