Journal Pre-proof

The role of local community leaders in flood disaster risk management strategy
making in Accra

Raphael Ane Atanga

PII: S2212-4209(19)30543-6
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101358
Reference: IJDRR 101358

To appear in: International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Received Date: 2 May 2019

Revised Date: 7 October 2019
Accepted Date: 8 October 2019

Please cite this article as: R.A. Atanga, The role of local community leaders in flood disaster risk
management strategy making in Accra, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (2019), doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101358.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition
of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of
record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published
in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that,
during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal
disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Title:

THE ROLE OF LOCAL COMMUNITY LEADERS IN FLOOD DISASTER

RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY MAKING IN ACCRA
ABSTRACT
Flood disaster risk is a major problem with upward trends and devastating impacts in cities
worldwide. Part of the problem is that local leaders of flood prone communities are not always
factored into flood risk management decision making. Consequently, this research argues that,
leaders of flood affected communities in Accra could play effective roles in flood risk
management strategies. Flood-prone communities bear direct impacts of floods and the
community leaders can influence flood risk management in their neighbourhoods. In Accra for
example, floods are managed by city authorities. However, it is unclear whether leaders of
flood-prone communities participate in decision making regarding flood disaster risk
management or how these leaders participate in the flood risk management decision making
processes if at all they participate in the process. This paper seeks to answer these research
questions: Do flood-prone community leaders in the city of Accra participate in flood risk
management strategy making? How are the local community leaders involved in the flood risk
management strategy making? This qualitative research relied on secondary and primary data
to address the research questions. The secondary data were obtained from documents analysis
on flood disaster risk management whilst the primary data were obtained through individual
face-to-face interviews and focus group discussion. The research findings revealed that flood-
prone community leaders participate only in the implementation stage of flood risk
management strategies. The paper concludes that an effective flood risk management strategy
making, and implementation require active participation and role play of flood-affected
community leaders.
Key words: Flood-prone communities; flood disaster risk management; strategy;
implementation
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Flood disasters are a recurrent problem with devastating impacts in cities worldwide, with a
potential to worsen in the future [1,2]. Unfortunately, the existing management strategies are
unable to deal with flood disaster risk due to the changing trends of climate and societal
developments [3]. The City of Accra in Ghana faces flood disasters annually with negative
impacts on socioeconomic and environmental security [4]. This trend suggests that the existing
flood risk management (FRM) strategies are ineffective and require more innovative approaches.
This study investigates the participation and role of local community leaders in FRM strategies of
the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA). The main aim is to understand the prospects and
challenges for innovation in communities’ participation in FRM strategy making in Accra.

Floods are associated with inundation of areas due to precipitation, upsurge of storms, melting
snow, rising underground water and overflow of water bodies that have socioeconomic and
environmental impacts. In developing countries, floods often result in loss of lives and property,
and damage to environment in flood-prone areas [2]. Some studies have confirmed incidence of
increase in trends of hazard, vulnerability and impacts of floods in cities of developing countries
[5–7]. The city of Accra in Ghana has experienced chronic annual flooding for decades, with
daring consequences on life, property and the environment [4,8,9]. Floods in Accra may have a
long history, but records show that their re-occurrence and impacts began to worsen since the
1990s [10]. Flood impacts in Accra has kept worsening with the 3rd June 2015 flood disaster
being the most recent event with a death toll of over 150 people, besides its huge economic loss
and environmental damage [11]. Thus, floods in Accra over the years have resulted in deaths and
displacement of people, disruption of businesses, environmental damage and outbreak of
diseases [9].

Despite the existence of FRM strategies in Accra, the reoccurrence of floods and their increasing
negative impacts suggest a degree of ineffectiveness in these strategies [12]. Apparently, existing
structural and non-structural FRM measures have not been effective in dealing with flood
disaster risk in Accra [4]. The city of Accra thus far has relied on structured and non-structured
FRM strategies. The structured FRM strategies adopted by the city authorities include the
establishment of drainages and channelisation approaches to floods control [8,13,14]. In
addition, there are land use planning plans that attempt at keeping development away from
flood risk zones [4]. On the other hand, the non-structural FRM strategies consist of policies and
organisational activities such as public sensitisation, capacity building, resources mobilisation and
the coordination of stakeholders in response to floods [15].

Although several studies have been conducted on floods in the city of Accra, none of them
specifically focused on the participation and the role of local community leaders in FRM strategy
making process. Some studies observed that urbanisation, poor land-use planning and policy
implementation, inadequate and poor maintenance of drains, encroachment on waterways and
inability to relocate developments in flood-prone areas are the main causes of floods in Accra
[4,8]. Specifically, Okyere, Yacouba, & Gilgenbach [10] examined the hydrological, economic and
political factors and their inter-linkages with urbanisation and the occurrences of floods in Accra
whilst Gyekye [13] on the other hand studied the role of climate and landscape changes on
urban flooding in Accra. Amoako & Frimpong Boamah [11] further focused on three-dimensional
causes of flooding in Accra, using urbanisation and slum development; perceived impacts of
climate change and variability and rainfall intensity, and poor management of surface water as
thematic areas. They proposed an integrated FRM approach as a measure to curb floods in
Accra. Apparently, these studies have not addressed the role of local community leaders in FRM
strategy making of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA). However, researches show that
trends in FRM and in environmental management strategies are changing globally from expert-
based decision making of top-down approach to include local community participation in flood
management decisions [15–17]. International risk management policies have also touted the
importance of local community participation in FRM strategies and governance [18–20].

This study contends that local leaders, including traditional chiefs and flood community
representatives could play a role in FRM strategy making for effective response to flood disaster
risk in Accra. Yet, in practice it is unclear if such local community leaders participate and play a
role in the decision-making process of FRM strategies in the AMA. Neither is it known how these
leaders get involved in FRM strategies, if they really do. This study answers the following
research questions: Do flood-prone community leaders in the city of Accra participate in flood
risk management strategy making? How are the local community leaders involved in the flood
risk management strategy making?

Flood disaster risk management and FRM are applied synonymously in this research. The study
uncovers the gaps and prospects for innovation in the participation and role of community
leaders in FRM strategy making in Accra. First, the participation of local community leaders in the
FRM strategy making is investigated to understand whether these leaders take part in this
process or not. Secondly, this research investigated how these leaders participate in the FRM
strategy making in order to understand and identify the existing prospects and gaps for
innovation. Besides this introduction, the next section examines the conceptual setting and the
perspectives on FRM strategies and the concept of community participation in FRM strategy
making and implementation. It is followed by the research methods; specifying the study site,
the data collection methods and analytical procedures. The discussion of results section follows
next to showcase the empirical findings and their practical relevance for FRM and the existing
literature. Finally, it focuses on the limitations, recommendations and conclusions of this study.

2. FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT AND STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

Research shows that cities in Africa face persistent flood disaster risk and impacts [2,5,6,9,21].
Flooding can be a result of pluvial floods from localised rainfall; fluvial flooding from overflow
of defined channels (rivers, channels, reservoirs); groundwater flooding through rising levels of
underground water, and storm surge flooding from sea level rise [6,22,23]. There are arguments
that growing level of urbanisation, unregulated development of slums, weak land-use planning
and policy implementation, and the culminating impacts of climate change are the causal factors
of flood disaster risk and impacts [8,12,24,25]. Undoubtedly, these factors together contribute to
flood hazard, vulnerability, and exposure leading to flood disaster risk.
Understanding the concepts of hazard, vulnerability, exposure and risk is relevant for
appreciating flood disaster risk management[26,27]. The UNISDR [28] describes a hazard as “a
dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or condition that may cause loss of life,
injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and
economic disruption, or environmental damage.” The negative consequences of floods on lives,
property, social functions and values, environment and economic productivity support this
conceptual perspective. Vulnerability to flood on the other hand is considered as a product of the
physical, institutional, social, economic, and environmental factors that influence the
susceptibility of communities to impacts of flood hazards [29]. The communities that are
susceptible to floods fall within flood vulnerability zones. Communities prone to flooding have
their residents, properties, activities and structures exposed to flood hazards with potential
adverse impacts [30]. Since flood-prone communities directly bear flood impacts, they need to
actively participate in the strategy making process to as true owners of the problem.

The International Business Continuity Management Standards of the International Standards of

Organisations [ISO] [31] interprets risk management in corporate contexts as “coordinated
activities to direct and control an organisation with regard to risk.” Managing floods includes
decision-making arrangements and processes towards the prevention and reduction of flood
risks. Decision making in environmental governance and risk management is a business of a risk
management committee, often consisting of multiple stakeholders. The management committee
takes decisions on FRM intervention options for reducing flood hazards, vulnerabilities,
exposure and impacts. This committee evaluates and takes the final decision on the FRM options
[26].

Schanze [[32], p. 7] defines FRM as a “holistic and continuous societal process of analysis,
evaluation and reduction of flood risk.” By this definition, FRM is an ongoing societal process
that considers possible factors of risk within the flood risk system. This involves individuals,
experts, opinion leaders, politicians and actors representing various sectors, institutions,
organisations and locations with varied interests, thereby making it a societal process. These
actors may have diverse interests and can influence FRM strategy making and implementation.
Basically, among others, the focus of FRM strategies is to reduce flood hazard, vulnerability,
exposure and impacts.

FRM strategies consider the level of risk that can be tolerated, and the risk reduction alternatives
to be prioritised over others. The protection of lives and assets from flood hazards can be a
priority. Prioritisation is however necessary due to limited response resources and conflicting
interests of stakeholders, and because not all risk can be eliminated. Whereas Hooijer et al. [[33],
p. 346] define strategy as “a consistent set of measures, aiming to influence developments in a
specific way”, FRM strategy can be seen as a statement that indicates the direction of using
structural and non-structural measures [34]. Reaction of stakeholders to the implementation of
FRM strategies may result in resistance, blocking and litigation while others may include support
and compliance [35]. In fact, studies indicate that stakeholders who have no chance to participate
in decision making of strategies tend to resist these strategies at the implementation stage [36].
This is particularly a compelling reason to make conscious efforts to incorporate stakeholders in
FRM strategy making process.
Experts and ordinary people´s knowledge about floods and their impacts is useful for successful
FRM strategy making and implementation. FRM is an opportunity to bring stakeholders from
different sectors together to contribute to the overall goal for flood risk reduction. However,
research shows that FRM decision making is sometimes considered as an expert activity, limited
to professionals without flood-prone community representation in the process, although it is the
local communities that bear the direct impacts of floods [17,35,37]. In the context of
environmental risk governance, FRM includes collaboration to coordinate stakeholders and their
resources beyond the scope of a single organisation [38]. Participation is particularly relevant
with the rise of integrated FRM, involving combination of structural and non-structural measures
and multilevel organisations, requiring more social input of the affected communities than before
[35]. Sikder, Asadzadeh, Kuusaana, Mallick & Koetter [39] revealed that there is a limited
participation of informal settlement communities in climate risk management for resilience in the
Khulna city, Bangladesh. Local community stakeholder participation in FRM runs parallel with
the increase in the campaign for good governance and sustainable development with arguments
advocating for increase in opportunity for individuals, groups, and organisations to participate in
decisions that will affect them and their interest [40]. Thaler & Levin-Keitel [15] acknowledged
the high level of responsibility in the roles and power of stakeholders in FRM in England and
conclude that the level of participation of stakeholder depends on their capacity.

The importance of stakeholder participation in climate risk governance with emphasis on FRM is
apparent in the literature. There are arguments supporting the view that the process of
stakeholder engagement facilitates social support for working together to find a solution to
societal problem [15]. In a broader disaster management context, evidence from Col [41]in a
comparative study between local community participation in the management of Hurricane
Katrina in the USA and Tangshan earthquake in 1976 in China, demonstrated how the public
participation in the process of risk management led to a more effective response in the case of
the Tangshan earthquake. Edelenbos et al. [35] asserted that participation in FRM can be self-
initiated by stakeholders or through government policy initiatives. Self-initiative applies when
local communities take initiatives to participate in FRM decisions, whereas the latter is when the
government makes the move to involve local communities in the process. This bottom-up
process can improve quality in decision-making and support for public policies [15].

Stakeholder participation is said to increase public trust, legitimacy and support for public
policies and administrators and potential to increase success in implementation of such policies
[16]. Despite the importance of stakeholder participation in FRM, scholars indicate that
differences in the interest of individual stakeholders, lack of resources, political will and
administrative inflexibility suffocates the opportunities for stakeholder participation[16].
Notwithstanding the varied arguments about stakeholder participation in environmental disaster
risk management decision making, studies and policy arguments support stakeholder
participation as it increases quality of decisions and policy implementation [16].

Reed [16] revealed that stakeholder participation has evolved overtime since the 1960s. The
author argues that in the 1960s participation was about raising awareness but later graduated
from incorporation of local perspectives in the 1970s to local knowledge recognition to the 1980s
through the participation as part of sustainable development agenda in the 1990s to the current
post-participation critiques [17]. Handmer & Dovers [42]broadly describe community as a group
of people of a locality with a common interest. Individuals and groups of a place may have
common interests but different levels of agreement. A community leader can represent the
community in decision making. Handmer & Dovers [42] further pointed out the importance of
public participation in disaster risk management to include facilitation of public debate and
problem framing, strategic policy choice and formulation, transparency and accountability,
policy enforcement and implementation, and operational emergency management.

The ladder of participation [43] has three major levels, with eight steps to explain community
participation in planning. The first level is non-participation in planning, which is manipulation
and therapy with an objective to educate and cure the affected communities. The second is
tokenism which includes informing, consultation and placation with the aim to give and receive
information from affected communities. People affected can be heard but may not have
representation and power to directly influence decision making. Placation allows the affected
communities to advise powerholders but have no position to decide with the powerholders. The
next level of participation is partnership in which the affected people can negotiate and engage in
trade-offs with power stakeholders. At the topmost rungs of the ladder is delegated power and
citizen control, where the affected people can obtain majority of decision-making positions, or
full control of managerial power. Although it is useful for analysis of community participation,
Arnstein’s ladder of participation is criticized as simple, which assumes participation as an end
to itself rather than a means to an end [44]. The ladder also fails to distinguish empirical scaling
from normative approval of participation and further excludes the contexts in which the
participation takes place [45]. Various arguments consider dimensions of participation including
the scope of participants, the mode of participants’ interaction in decision making and the degree
of authority of the participants.

3. THE STUDY SITE

Accra is the capital city of Ghana in West Africa and the metropolis of the AMA with eleven
sub-metropolitan assemblies. It is a coastal city characterised by urbanisation and development
of informal settlements [8]. The city experiences floods events annually. The hard-hit areas are
the slums and unplanned communities, especially the Old Fadama neighbourhoods. The
participation and role of local community leaders in FRM strategy making and implementation
of these neighbourhoods were emphasized. The community members are the victims and and at
the same time influence flood hazards, vulnerabilities, exposure, impacts and FRM strategies in
the neighbourhoods. The study area is limited to FRM strategy making and implementation in
the AMA and it involves representatives of the AMA disaster management committee as well as
leaders of the flood prone communities.

4. MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a qualitative research focused on the participation of local community leaders in FRM
strategy making in the city of Accra. The case study is limited to the AMA. The research used
data from primary and secondary sources. These data were extracted from the doctoral thesis of
the researcher. The research participants were heads of departments, organisations, local leaders
and traditional chiefs of flood communities and representatives of other major stakeholders in
FRM in the AMA. The research focused on the expertise of leaders and heads of institutions
because it is assumed that they are involved in leadership roles and serve as authority
representing the interest of their departments, organisations and communities. This assumption
speaks to an ideal situation, but the author is aware that there can be extremes contrary to this
ideal. Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were employed to identify the relevant
research participants. The snowball technique helped to find additional individuals to interview.
Flood event reports and policy documents of the National Disaster Management Organisation
(NADMO) provided useful sources of data for this study. Reports on flood disaster risk obtained
from NADMO at the AMA provided useful data for this study. Updates from reports on the
Ghana Progress Report on the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015 were useful for
the study. The Disaster Management Operational Procedures and Plans of Ghana, the Disaster
Management Plan for the AMA, and the NADMO Act 517 of 1996 provided relevant data for
this study.

The interview guide was tested with individuals from the National Disaster Management
Organisation and the Secretary to the AMA Disaster Management Committee. This approach
ensured that the language of the interview guide was practical and understandable to the research
participants. Pre-interview arrangements were made to confirm the appointments for the final
interviews. These arrangements also enabled the research participants to prepare in advance for
the interviews. These participants constitute stakeholders as they affect and are affected by FRM
strategy making and implementation of the study site [46].

For the primary data, workshops and individual face-to-face interviews were conducted with
heads of organisations involved in FRM strategy making and implementation in the AMA.
Representatives of the Ga traditional chiefs, the flood prone communities and the Slum Union of
Ghana also participated in the interviews. A total of thirty-one participants were interviewed and
each interview took between thirty minutes and one hour. This method enabled the researcher to
obtain detailed data from experts in FRM from the city of Accra. This selection strategy created
avenues to obtain perspectives from the formal and informal experts of the study site. In
addition, a semi-structured interview guide was used for the data collection in order to enhance
the quality of data collected. For instance, the interview guide covered themes about the state of
flood disaster risk, local community leaders and their participation in FRM strategy making
process. Again, the implementation of FRM strategies, the gaps left and the prospects for future
innovation were also covered by the interview guide. Open-ended interview questions were used
to obtain comprehensive data to answer the research questions and this allowed for probing
where necessary [47]. In addition, the interview guide was designed to capture the interests of
the research participants by unfolding the conversation from generic to more specific issues on
FRM strategy making and the participation of local community leadership.

The research employed content analysis to analyse the data gathered. This involved the
transcription of the interviews from audio to text, coding of the transcripts c and categorising of
codes into different themes all falling within the overall research objectives. This analytical
approach was deemed appropriate for qualitative research purposes [48]. Analysis of the data
began with a transcription of the interviews from audio to text, and coding of the transcripts.
Relevant portions of the transcripts were coded and selected for data analysis. Babbie [48]
explains that content analysis involves a process of coding data into standardised forms and
grouping them into categories and themes before interpretation in an iterative fashion. Relevant
quotations were selected and interpreted to address the research questions. For purposes of
anonymity of the research participants, pseudonyms were used in presentation of results. This
helped to conceal the names of the interviewees.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section, the findings of this study are presented and discussed in relation to the
participation of local community leaders in flood disaster risk management strategy making in
Accra. Specifically, this section examines the strategies for flood prevention and mitigation,
preparedness, emergency response to and recovery from flood disasters, and the flood prone
community leadership participation in these processes as well as in the AMA disaster
management committee. This section further addresses the prospects and challenges of the
participation process.

5.1 Flood prevention and mitigation strategies

Structural and non-structural FRM measures have been used by stakeholders in response to flood
risk and impacts [1,6,17]. FRM is to prevent flood disasters using structural and non-structural
measures. However, a complete prevention is not always feasible, and it is necessary to include
strategies to mitigate flood risk. The results of this research revealed the application of structural
and non-structural measures at the study site. The structural measures are mainly channelisation,
involving construction and maintenance drains to convey storm water in parts of Accra. Policy
documents indicate efforts of governments to construct and maintain drains along some of the
natural drainage basins in response to floods. The results of research demonstrate that the AMA
is drained by “eleven drainage basins namely, the Densu outfall, the Lafa, the Chemu West,
Odaw, Osu Klottey, Kpeshie, Songo, Mokwe, Sakumono, East Chemu and the Gao basin. All the
drains in the Odaw upstream areas such as Achimota, Taifa, Dome, Ashongman, Agbogba,
Haatso have not been developed but these areas have become densely populated communities and
experience annual floods” (SL11).

Nonetheless the findings show that some major drains particularly along the Odaw drain in the
heart Accra are often silted and choked with urban waste, forcing storm water to over flow even
with a normal rainfall. Consequently, leading to flooding in the city. It was also observed that
most of the drainage projects undertaken by the city authorities since the 1960s have focused
mainly on the major drains within the city. Examples are the The Korle Lagoon Ecological
Restoration Project (KLERP), which began the year 2000, and the Conti Project of the year
2012. These are the recent flood management projects in Accra which focused predominantly on
the major drains within the city. Both projects were basically an extension of the Odaw drain. It
is imperative to note that the city authorities have generally leaned towards the structural
measures in order to mitigate floods. Nonetheless, in as much as the structural measures are
useful, a problem emerges when all limited resources are invested in structured measures alone
to the neglect of non-structured measures. Besides, the non-structural measures help to maintain
the structural measures for effective performance.

For instance, land use planning policies are noted for keeping developments, properties and lives
safe from floods [35]. The strategy of keeping developments and properties away from
waterways was investigated and the results indicate that land use plans and policies exist for
some parts of Accra. However, this is poorly implemented and ineffective, especially in
informal communities as these regulations have often been flouted. The research participants
during the interviews noted that the land use regulations of Accra require that all developers
obtain building permits for development activities. It is noted that: “There is a land use plan in the
whole city of Accra and before a structure is put, a building permit must be given by AMA” (SL1). These
policies are to ensure that physical development does not obstruct the natural waterways.

The research findings further demonstrated that developments and properties encroached on
waterways in flood-prone areas. This evidence cuts across the interviews and a classic
representation is the following statement: “the main causes of floods here is the choked drains.
The drainage systems are poor, and we can also talk of encroachment on waterways. Squatters
start springing up on water ways and people who build here claim they have permit from the city
authorities” (SL10). The land-use regulations prohibit developments less than 15 meters away
from drainage basins, but instances prove that developers in flood-prone areas have failed to
comply with this regulation. In fact, encroachment on waterways is a problem interrupting the
free flow of water to primary, secondary and tertiary drains. Likewise, rapid urbanisation further
reduces surface water percolation and increases surface water runoff. The land surface is sealed
with pavements without efficient underground drains to provide avenue for storm water, leading
to floods. Other studies on floods in the cities of developing nations revealed similar findings
[4,6,39].

5.2 Preparedness, emergency response and recovery strategies

Preparedness focuses on initiatives to create awareness and engagement with public on risk
management, and efforts to minimise damage and mitigate flood disaster risk. It can ensure that
citizens can safely respond to the flood disaster risk and impacts. There is institutional and policy
action preparedness in response to floods [3]. The results of this study showed that Ghana’s
NADMO is the established institution to coordinate and mobilise resources for the management
of disaster risk, including FRM. NADMO organises flood awareness activities to prepare the
public for flood events. There is further evidence that besides collaboration with international
organisations for emergency management training workshops, NADMO prioritises attention on
dealing with floods hazards, vulnerability and impacts of Accra. This prepares staff to identify
flood risk and vulnerability in the affected communities. The research findings suggest that
preparedness for flood events involves the local community disaster volunteer groups (DVGs).
Individuals of the DVGs are residents of the local communities with knowledge about the
hotspots of flood hazards and vulnerabilities to assist the NADMO officials in the risk reduction
efforts. The results demonstrate that flood-prone communities have been subjected to relocation
and eviction as part of the FRM strategies. For example, a programme for relocation of Old
Fadama community to Adjen Kotoku, a suburb of Accra, was implemented, but the community
refused to relocate, citing lack of market and far away from Accra central business area as core
reasons. Relocation does not involve the application of force; it is a negotiation process with the
affected communities. There is evidence that several eviction attempts have been tried since
2003 and became intense in 2009. The strategies were resisted with support from humanitarian
and human rights activist groups that use legal strategies to stall the process. Literature on FRM
in developing world cities showed the use of relocation and eviction of informal communities
from flood prone areas as very common [1,6,39]. However, evidence shows that flood affected
communities resisted relocation and eviction programmes but insisted on being part of the
strategy making [36].

The research findings further indicated that preparedness for floods also takes the form of public
education and announcement strategies through media outlets such as radio, television, print and
electronic media as well as local community engagements. Before the rainy season begins,
officials of NADMO engage with the local communities to give safety measures in the event of
floods. Emphasis is put on keeping valuables in safer places in their apartments and how to react
when caught up in floods. A strategy of flood mapping is employed to prepare for evacuation
and response during flood events. In addition, Relief items are mobilized and stored in
warehouses for use during flood events.

The FRM concept of the study site follows an integrated disaster risk management approach.
Apparently, the international disaster risk management policies and practices support this
approach to disaster risk management [1]. Disaster risk management in Ghana is decentralised
from national, through regional to district levels [49], as practiced in other countries [50]. The
AMA is the district authority with responsibility to formulate and implement disaster
management policies through its disaster management committee. The organisational structure
for disaster management in the AMA is indicated in Figure 1. The committee has an overarching
role with the district NADMO coordinator as intermediary between the staff of NADMO and the
disaster volunteer groups (DVGs) of the district. The model of disaster management covers all
zones and communities in the district.

The Accra Metropolitan District Disaster Management Committee was set up by NADMO in
accordance with the Act 517 (1996) of the Parliament of Ghana. This committee consists of
representatives from the departments of various sectors in disaster risk management. The HFA
2005-2015 and the Sendai Framework for DRR recommend decentralisation and community
participation in disaster risk management for resilience. In line with this. The research
participants also explained that, the immediate impact of flood disasters is on the local
communities. The participants, therefore, argued that the leaders of these communities can serve
as experts in the decision-making process and subsequent implementation of FRM strategies.
Besides, studies support the participation of flood affected communities in FRM strategy making
and implementation for effective DRR[16,50,51]. However, in practice the role of the
community leader in city of Accra’s disaster risk management is not clearly captured by the
authorities and policy makers. In fact, this can be seen from the chart not only is the role of the
community leader not clearly stated but they have not even been captured in the chart. Part of the
reason for this being that, the city authorities of Accra seem not to adopt a bottom-up approach to
disaster management in practice, where local chiefs and flood prone communities can be part of
the FRM strategy making process. For instance, these leaders have no membership in the AMA
disaster management committee. Scholars suggest that for flood risk management strategy to
fully incorporate communities and their leaders into disaster risk management strategies there is
need to be a bottom-up approach to the strategy making process [16,35,39].
Although, the 1996 Act 517 emphasizes a bottom-up approach this is not so in practice.
Therefore,
The top-down and bottom-up linkages can ensure a good flow of disaster risk management
information among the organisations at various levels.

Figure 1: Organisational chart of disaster risk management in AMA

Source: Adapted National Disaster Management Plan (NADMO 2010: 26).

The AMA has 11 sub-metros with NADMO offices that coordinate the Disaster Volunteer
Groups (DVGs) at various local communities in each sub-metro. Figure 1 clearly shows that the
management of disasters does fully integrate the traditional and local community leadership into
the decision-making process. The DVGs are community volunteers and do not take part in
decision making. In line with this, Douglas [6] observed that there exist institutional
arrangements in policy, funding organisations and individuals in response to floods in most
African cities.

5.3 Flood prone community leadership representation in the AMA disaster management
committee
Section 15 of the NADMO Act 517 of 1996 established the Metropolitan Disaster Management
Committee (MDMC) with the Metropolitan Chief Executive as Chairman; members of
Parliament of constituencies within the area; the Metropolitan Director of Health Services; the
Metropolitan Information Officer; a representative of the Garrison Commander of the Armed
Forces; the Metropolitan Police Commander; the Metropolitan Fire Officer; the Assembly
member(s) from the affected electoral area(s); the Metropolitan Coordinator of NADMO as
Secretary of the committee and co-opted members. Furthermore, the section 16 of NADMO Act
517 stipulates the role and responsibilities of the Metropolitan Disaster Management Committee.
It is supposed to prepare plans for AMA to prevent and mitigate disasters in its area of authority;
maintain close liaison with the regional committee in drawing up its plans and perform in the
Metropolis such functions as the national coordinator of NADMO may direct. Interestingly, no
section of the Act specifies the role for local community leaders in disaster risk management
strategy making. The local community leaders such as local chiefs, flood-prone community
representatives and Ghana Real Estate Developer Association (GREDA) whose activities
directly influence flood risk have no representation in the AMA Disaster Management
Committee. The findings suggest that a simple consultation of the flood prone communities by
the city authorities to give and receive information just before implementation of FRM strategies
excludes the communities from the onset of the strategy making process.
Studies and international policies on environmental risk governance accentuate the importance
of community involvement in strategy making for effective environmental risk management
including FRM [3,16,35]. This research addressed the research question on how the local
community leaders get involved in the FRM strategy making. The interview data confirmed that
local chiefs, and flood prone community leaders are consulted and informed before disaster
management plans are implemented although they are not included in the decision-making
phase. This is not unique as studies elsewhere support those findings. For instance, consultation
and informing characteristics of the community leadership involvement fits into Arnstein’s
ladder of participation where participation is limited to tokenism. Raungratanaamporn et al.
[44] highlight similar trends of public participation in disaster risk management in Thailand.

The research participants were probed to verify if the flood-prone community leaders have
knowledge about the Disaster Management Committee that makes strategic plans for disaster
risk management, including FRM in the AMA. For instance, Old Fadama is the biggest slum
community in Accra with flood problems. The Old Fadama Development Association was
formed to bring the community members together for local development and interest. The
office of the National Slum Union of Ghana is in this community with its resident as president
and spokesperson. The Old Fadama community leadership and the local chiefs have no clear
representation and role in the Metropolitan Disaster Management Committee decision making.

The representative of the Old Fadama Community and the Slum Union of Ghana insisted that:
“I am not aware of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly Disaster Management Committee and I
have not been involved in meetings of this committee. We will always kick against decisions to
evict us until the authorities involve us in the planning process” (SL6, 2014).

Similarly, the representative of the Ga Tradition Council of Chiefs explained that:

Local chiefs are not involved in stakeholder meetings during the decision-making phase for flood
disaster risk reduction. When floods occur, chiefs do mobilize their people to help rehabilitate
the communities, but the decision-making phase is still left for the city planners as the chiefs are
left out. When policy gets to its implementation that the AMA authorities come down to the
chiefs to ask for their support (SL25, 2014).

Although there is lack of involvement of the local communities through leadership representation
in the disaster risk management committee at the AMA, it was clear throughout the interviews
that local chiefs and flood-prone community leaders are consulted in implementation of any
flood risk management plans. Communities are involved in preparedness for flood disasters
through durbars, community education, public announcements and the print and electronic media
of communication.

The research findings suggest that implementation of some FRM programmes have failed due
to poor involvement of local communities in the planning process. The failed eviction and
relocation programme for the Old Fadama community since 2003 to Adjen Kotoku in Accra was
cited as classical example. This was confirmed in the interviews as the following quotation
illustrates:
Adjen Kotoku is simply a market area for the yam sellers and because the yam sellers were not
involved in the planning process they have refuse to move to the place. What they have there
are garages with big gates which they call warehouses and they are not properly ventilated. The
yams would get spoilt if they store them in those places. There is no proper planning and
communication with the people (SL14, 2013).

The reasons for not involving the leadership of local communities and chiefs in the decision
making were mentioned as unclear legal provision, conflicts among chiefs, difficulty in local
community entry process, and illegal state of slums. The research participants also explained
that, the city authorities and policy makers do not consider local community leaders because they
think such issues are technical and need expert skills which the local leaders and chiefs do not
have. In practice, however, the research participants contented that, local leaders and chiefs can
contribute to FRM strategy making as local experts and traditional leaders. The argument is that,
the Ga Chiefs have the local knowledge and influence in their community members and land use
to contribute to FRM strategy making and implementation. It was evident that, the local leaders
have traditional land guards called the Osafo Group, and this has been in the traditional land use
and management system for a long time and serves as a land policing force for the traditional
areas. The Osafo Group can play effective role in land-use and enforcement of FRM strategies.
The research participants further asserted that in a typical community in Accra, community
members have respect for their chiefs. Especially, when the people see their chiefs and
community leaders taking up leadership roles, it can help in implementing FRM strategies.
Nonetheless it must be acknowledged that Accra is generally becoming a cosmopolitan city and
these traditional values may be rapidly fading away. However, this point of view suggests that
the traditional community leaders can make an impact in the disaster management committee in
making strategic decisions for flood risk management.
5.4 Prospects and challenges of local community participation
The importance of local community participation in the management of disaster risk is
emphasized in policy and scientific works [1,3,17,52]. This study revealed that leaders of
communities prone to flood risk in Accra have no official representation in the Accra
Metropolitan Disaster Management Committee which takes strategic decisions on FRM in the
city. There was clear evidence in the results that the AMA authorities only consulted the local
chiefs and community leaders for support at the implementation stage of the FRM strategies.
When disaster strikes, the communities, individuals and groups voluntarily participate in the
emergency flood disaster responses. In mainstream flood management strategy making,
participation is limited to disaster management experts of the AMA. Participation at this stage is
based on protocol and all interested individuals cannot be involved directly. It is leaders of
groups and communities that can carry messages of the groups and communities to the
management committees if the protocol allows this form of participation. Nonetheless, the
research uncovered that the committee consults the local community leaders to inform them
about the implementation of FRM plans which they were not involved in designing. Flood
disasters affect the general public of prone-communities and it is useful to include the local
communities in the FRM strategy making as well as in implementation. The research revealed
that the public takes part in FRM strategy at the implementation stage through information and
consultation from the authorities. Local community involvement in implementation of FRM
strategies as noted earlier occurs through durbars, churches, public announcement, electronic and
print media, brochures, radio, television and staff visits flood disaster scenes.

Other studies revealed similar finding in the management of disasters in the country. Oteng-
Ababio [49] studied the preparedness of NADMO in managing disasters in Ghana and concluded
that the organisation applies a top-down management approach and it is handicapped in its
ability to develop capacity for implementation of disaster risk management strategies. Local
community leaders do not participate in decision making for FRM. However, the city authorities
consult them for information. Similarly, Poku-Boansi & Cobbinah [12] found that although the
planning concepts require communities to be involved in the urban planning process, it is poorly
done in practice in the cities of Accra and Kumasi.
Some studies show that local communities take initiatives in flood risk management [15,16].
This research findings indicate some initiatives of the local communities of the AMA in FRM in
preparedness, mitigation and emergency response to flood disaster risk. The findings indicate
that a task force within the communities enforces community initiatives for flood management
in the communities. In the Old Fadama neihbourhoods for example, this task force engages in
preparedness against flood events. This was supported by the research participants who noted
that: The Old Fadama Development Association has a taskforce in place, and we come together
to discuss how we can do away with these illegal structures found on water ways. Such
structures also have been identified and would be pulled down” (SL15). The results further show
that the local chiefs (the Ga Traditional Authorities) as custodians of people in the traditional
areas have a primary responsibility to provide shelter for flood affected community in times of
emergency. These local communities provide land for safe-havens in emergency response to
flood impacts. Again, the community leaders offer emergency relief and recovery support to
flood victims. Furthermore, the results show that the Osafo Group, local community land
guards, play a major role in land use and management for the traditional authorities. It was
clear from the results that the surveillance competence of the Asafo Group can be tapped and
employed to monitor developments of flood risk in the local communities.
NADMO empowers DVGs through training programmes to respond to flood disaster risk.
Community voluntary participation is common in disaster risk management [53]. The DVGs are
in the communities to identify and respond to flood hazards and vulnerabilities. They are the first
point of contact during a flood event. NADMO has staff in the sub-metros of Accra to educate
the public on disaster risk reduction. The results show that there is public information and
consultation about FRM to flood prone communities from the city authorities of the AMA.
Individuals, non-governmental organisations, religious groups and private sector organisations
voluntarily provide support in response to flood disasters. Handmer & Dovers [42] similarly
provided examples of community groups which contributed to firefighting in Australia.
Voluntary participation in emergency flood disaster response is common as it is a matter of
urgency and need.

6. LIMITATIONS
The practical policy implications of this research may be limited to FRM strategy making of the
study site. The research findings focused on the views of the local community leaders and the
AMA disaster management committee members and did not include the views of the individual
residents of the study site. Thus, the focus is to understand from the perspectives of the
decision makers and local community leaders the participation and role in the FRM strategy
making. Again, the findings are relevant to literature on FRM in communities with similar
conditions as Accra. In addition, the results from this research suggest that traditional chiefs
and local flood prone community leaders should be active participants, both in decision-making
and the implementation of FRM strategies.

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This research focused on the participation of local community leaders in FRM strategy making
in Accra, Ghana. The findings support the need for active participation of local leaders of flood
affected communities in FRM strategy making and implementation. In addition, the results
confirmed that flood prone community leaders do not participate in FRM strategy making level,
but they are involved at in the implementation of these strategies. Furthermore, the research
observed that the participation of flood prone communities in FRM strategy making is limited
to public information and consultation. The community leaders are only consulted during the
implementation of FRM strategies but are not involved in the decisions and FRM strategy
making stages. Hence, the lack of participation in the strategy making level was explained as a
problem, making the Old Fadama communities to resist the eviction and relocation attempts by
the city authorities. In a similar study Farouk & Owusu [36] observed that resistance to eviction
notices from AMA authorities emerged due to the fact that local communities and their leaders
were not involve in the decision making processes. . Apparently, the resistance to relocation
and eviction by the AMA is due to the none-involvement of the communities from the strategy
making process. Thus, an active participation of the flood prone-community leaders in the FRM
strategy making and implementation can bring a consensus to reduce local resistance to
relocation and eviction programmes. Besides, FRM is a continuous process and needs the
participation of the local community leadership in the Accra Metropolitan Disaster
Management Committee to make collective decisions for flood risk reductions. Public
involvement at the FRM implementation stage through public awareness creation, information,
consultation and education is considerably high. It can therefore be recommended that a
successful FRM strategy making and implementation needs to bring together the local leaders
of the Ga Traditional areas and leaders of flood prone communities in the process. The results
suggested that the President of the Ga Traditional Council of Chiefs, representatives of
organisations and flood prone communities can be given a role through the co-opted
membership option of the Disaster Management Committee to be fully integrated into FRM
strategy making of the study site. Future research needs to explore public participation into
detail, using quantitative and qualitative methods with large sample size involving households
of the flood prone communities.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I acknowledge that this paper made use of data from my doctoral dissertation and every support
from individuals and organisations is appreciated.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT
The researcher had no conflict of interest in conducting this study.
REFERENCES
[1] A.K. Jha, R. Bloch, J. Lamond, Cities and Flooding: A Guide to Integrated Urban Flood
Risk Management for the 21st Century, (2012) 638. doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-8866-2.
[2] IPCC, Climate Change, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, 2014. doi:http://ipcc-
wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/IPCC_WG2AR5_SPM_Approved.pdf.
[3] Unisdr, Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: Building the resilience of nations and
communities to disasters, World Conf. Disaster Reduction, January. (2005) 1–25.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Hyogo+Framework+for
+Action+2005-2015+:+*#1.
[4] N.K. Karley, FLOODING AND PHYSICAL PLANNING IN URBAN AREAS IN WEST
AFRICA : SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF ACCRA , GHANA Theoretical and
Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Theor. Empir. Reasearches Urban Manag. 4
(2009) 25–41.
[5] I. Douglas, K. Alam, M. Maghenda, Y. McDonnell, L. McLean, J. Campbell, Unjust
waters: climate change, flooding and the urban poor in Africa, Environ. Urban. 20 (2008)
187–205.
[6] I. Douglas, Flooding in African cities, scales of causes, teleconnections, risks,
vulnerability and impacts, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 26 (2017) 34–42.
doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.024.
[7] L.M. Lam, R. Kuipers, Resilience and disaster governance: Some insights from the 2015
Nepal earthquake, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 33 (2019) 321–331.
doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.10.017.
[8] D. Rain, R. Engstrom, C. Ludlow, S. Antos, Accra Ghana: A city vulnerable to flooding
and drought-induced migration, Glob. Rep. Hum. Settlements 2011. (2011) 21.
[9] J. Songsore, The Complex Interplay between Everyday Risks and Disaster Risks: The
Case of the 2014 Cholera Pandemic and 2015 Flood Disaster in Accra, Ghana, Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduct. 26 (2017) 43–50. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.043.
[10] C.Y. Okyere, Y. Yacouba, D. Gilgenbach, The problem of annual occurrences of floods in
Accra: An integration of hydrological, economic and political perspectives, Theor. Empir.
 Res. Urban Manag. 8 (2013) 45–79.
[11] C. Amoako, E. Frimpong Boamah, The three-dimensional causes of flooding in Accra,
Ghana, Int. J. Urban Sustain. Dev. 7 (2014) 109–129.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19463138.2014.984720.
[12] P.B. Cobbinah, M. Poku-Boansi, Towards resilient cities in Ghana: Insights and strategies,
Futures. 101 (2018) 55–66. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.06.005.
[13] a. K. Gyekye, Environmental change and flooding in Accra, Ghana, Sacha J. Environ.
Stud. 3 (2013) 65–80.
[14] A. Gyekye, Geomorphic Assessment of Floods within the Urban Environment of Gbawe-
Mallam, Accra, Ghana J. Geogr. 3 (2011) 199–229.
[15] T. Thaler, M. Levin-Keitel, Multi-level stakeholder engagement in flood risk
management-A question of roles and power: Lessons from England, Environ. Sci. Policy.
55 (2016) 292–301. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.04.007.
[16] M.S. Reed, Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review,
Biol. Conserv. 141 (2008) 2417–2431. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.
[17] U. Wehn, M. Rusca, J. Evers, V. Lanfranchi, Participation in flood risk management and
the potential of citizen observatories: A governance analysis, Environ. Sci. Policy. 48
(2015) 225–236. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2014.12.017.
[18] R. Heffron, P. Haynes, Challenges to the Aarhus convention: Public participation in the
energy planning process in the United Kingdom, J. Contemp. Eur. Res. 10 (2014) 236–
247.
[19] European Commission, Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council on the assessment and management of flood risks. Technical Report, Off. J. Eur.
Union. (2007) 8. doi:English.
[20] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 - 2030, United Nations Off. Disaster Risk Reduct. (2015)
32. doi:A/CONF.224/CRP.1.
[21] P. Tschakert, R. Sagoe, G. Ofori-Darko, S.N. Codjoe, Floods in the Sahel: An analysis of
anomalies, memory, and anticipatory learning, Clim. Change. 103 (2010) 471–502.
doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9776-y.
[22] Z.W. Kundzewicz, Flood risk and vulnerability in the changing climate, 31 (2008) 21–31.
[23] Z.W. Kundzewicz, K. Takeuchi, Flood protection and management: quo vadimus?,
Hydrol. Sci. J. 44 (1999) 417–432. doi:10.1080/02626669909492237.
[24] I.O. Adelekan, Vulnerability of poor urban coastal communities to flooding in Lagos,
Nigeria, Environ. Urban. 22 (2010) 433–450.
[25] Y. Jabareen, Planning the resilient city: Concepts and strategies for coping with climate
change and environmental risk, Cities. 31 (2013) 220–229.
doi:10.1016/j.cities.2012.05.004.
[26] O. Renn, P. Graham, Risk governance: Towards an integrative approach, White Pap.
No.1. (2005) 1–157. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01467.x.
[27] G. Hutter, J. Schanze, Learning how to deal with uncertainty of flood risk in long‐term
planning, Int. J. River Basin Manag. 6 (2010) 175–184.
doi:10.1080/15715124.2008.9635346.
[28] UNISDR, 2009 UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, Int. Strat. Disaster
Reduct. (2009) 1–30. doi:978-600-6937-11-3.
[29] A. Blanco-Vogt, J. Schanze, Conceptual and methodological frameworks for large scale
and high resolution analysis of the physical flood susceptibility of buildings, Nat. Hazards
Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. 1 (2013) 5695–5728. doi:10.5194/nhessd-1-5695-2013.
[30] S. Rufat, E. Tate, C.G. Burton, A.S. Maroof, Social vulnerability to floods: Review of
case studies and implications for measurement, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 14 (2015)
470–486. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.09.013.
[31] ISO 22301, ISO22301 Societal security — Business continuity management systems -
Requirements, International Organization for Standardization, 2012.
[32] J. Schanze, Flood risk management - basic understanding and integrated methodologies.,
2009th ed., FLOODsite Report; T21-09-08, 2009.
[33] A.G. Hooijer, A., Klijn, F., Pedroli, B. & Van Os, Towards sustainable FRM in the Rhine
and Meuse River Basins: Synopsis of the findings of IRMASPONGE., River Res. Appl.
20 (2004) 343–357.
[34] G. Hutter, J. Schanze, Learning how to deal with uncertainty of flood risk in long‐term
planning, Int. J. River Basin Manag. 6 (2008) 175–184.
doi:10.1080/15715124.2008.9635346.
[35] J. Edelenbos, A. Van Buuren, D. Roth, M. Winnubst, Stakeholder initiatives in flood risk
management: exploring the role and impact of bottom-up initiatives in three ‘Room for the
River’ projects in the Netherlands, J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 60 (2017) 47–66.
doi:10.1080/09640568.2016.1140025.
[36] B.R. Farouk, M. Owusu, “If in doubt, count”: The role of community-driven enumerations
in blocking eviction in Old Fadama, Accra, Environ. Urban. 24 (2012) 47–57.
doi:10.1177/0956247811434478.
[37] K. Cutter, S. L.; Gall, M.; Nguyen, Governance in Disaster Risk Management, Integr. Res.
Disaster Risk. (2014). doi:10.13140/2.1.2130.2568.
[38] K.J. Tierney, Disaster Governance: Social, Political, and Economic Dimensions, Ssrn.
(2012). doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-020911-095618.
[39] S.K. Sikder, A. Asadzadeh, E.D. Kuusaana, B. Mallick, T. Koetter, Stakeholders
participation for urban climate resilience: A case of informal settlements regularization in
Khulna city, Bangladesh, J. Urban Reg. Anal. 7 (2015) 5–20.
[40] E. Richard, L.F. David, The future of citizen engagement in cities—The council of citizen
 engagement in sustainable urban strategies (ConCensus), Futures. 101 (2018) 80–91.
doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.06.012.
[41] J.-M. Col, Managing disasters: The role of local government. Public, Adm. Rev.
December 2 (2007) 114–124.
[42] S. Handmer, J. and Dovers, The handbook of disaster and emergency policies and
instutitions., Earthscan, London, 2007.
[43] S.R. Arnstein, A Ladder Of Citizen Participation, J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 35 (1969) 216–224.
doi:10.1080/01944366908977225.
[44] I. Raungratanaamporn, P. Pakdeeburee, A. Kamiko, C. Denpaiboon, Government-
communities Collaboration in Disaster Management Activity: Investigation in the Current
Flood Disaster Management Policy in Thailand, Procedia Environ. Sci. 20 (2014) 658–
667. doi:10.1016/j.proenv.2014.03.079.
[45] A. Fung, Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance, Public Adm. Rev. 66 (2006)
66–75,. doi:10.1111/j.1540-%0A6210.2006.00667.x,.
[46] J.D. Bonnafous-Boucher, M., and Rendtorff, Stakeholder theory: A model for strategic
management. Springer Briefs in Ethics., Springer International Publishing AG, Geneva,
Switzerland, 2016.
[47] M. Cook, C. & Crang, Doing ethnographies, Sage Publications Ltd., 2007.
[48] E. Babbie, The Practice of Social Research., 13th Editi, Wadsworth Cengage Learning.,
2012.
[49] M. Oteng-Ababio, ‘Prevention is better than cure’: Assessing Ghana’s preparedness
(capacity) for disaster management, Jàmbá J. Disaster Risk Stud. 5 (2013) 1–11.
doi:10.4102/jamba.v5i2.75.
[50] S.A. Mashi, O.D. Oghenejabor, A.I. Inkani, Disaster risks and management policies and
practices in Nigeria: A critical appraisal of the National Emergency Management Agency
Act, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 33 (2019) 253–265. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.10.011.
[51] M. Wiering, M. Kaufmann, H. Mees, T. Schellenberger, W. Ganzevoort, D.L.T. Hegger,
C. Larrue, P. Matczak, Varieties of flood risk governance in Europe: How do countries
respond to driving forces and what explains institutional change?, Glob. Environ. Chang.
44 (2017) 15–26. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.02.006.
[52] S. Handmer, J. and Dovers, The handbook of disaster and emergency policies and
instutitions, Earthscan, London, 2007.
[53] J.-M. Col, Managing disasters: The role of local government, Public Adm. Rev. 2007
(2007) 114–124.
Conflict of interest

There was no conflict of interest in conducting this research.