Search

This paper reflects on what materialised during recovery operations following the earthquake in L'Aquila, Italy, on 6 April 2009. Previous critiques have focused on the actions of the Government of Italy and the Department of Civil Protection (Protezione Civile), with little attention paid to the role of local authorities. This analysis sheds light on how the latter used emergency powers, the command-and-control approach, and top-down planning to manage the disaster context, especially in terms of removal of rubble, implementing safety measures, and allocating temporary accommodation. It discusses how these arrangements constituted the mechanism via which ‘disaster capitalism’ took hold at the local and national level, and how it violated human rights, produced environmental and social impacts, hindered local communities from learning, transforming, and building resilience, and facilitated disaster capitalism and corruption. To make the disaster risk reduction and resilience paradigm more effective, a shift from centralised civil protection to decentralised, inclusive community empowerment systems is needed.

Drills are an important element of disaster management, helping to increase preparedness and reduce the risk of real-time failure. Yet, they are not applied systematically to slow-onset disasters such as a drought, which causes damage that is not instantly apparent and thus does not solicit immediate action. This case study evaluates how drills inform institutional responses to slow-onset disasters. It spotlights Guatemala, a country where drought has severe impacts on livelihoods and the food security of small farmers. By implementing part of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food's institutional response plan for drought, it explores how drills can help to detect issues in emergency response and to foster an institutional focus on improvements in preparedness. The results reveal that drills alone do not trigger institutional improvements if unsupported by a wider strategy that seeks to enhance capacities and protocols. These findings are valuable, however, in making problems transparent and in creating the space for discussion.