Purpose - Capacity assessment is increasingly identified as a vital tool for effective capacity development for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. However, most internationally supported capacity assessments focus mainly on one administrative level in their attempts to understand the current capacities and capacity needs of the system under study. This article aims to investigate the potential for discrepancies between what stakeholders on different administrative levels in Fiji express when explaining how their system for managing risk and disaster situations functions. Design/methodology/approach - The study includes semi-structured interviews with involved stakeholders from all administrative levels in Fiji, who are asked to describe what information and assistance is given or requested between administrative levels, in everyday circumstances and in disaster situations. The data were then analysed to identify similarities and differences in descriptions. Findings - The study illustrates that there may be substantial discrepancies between accounts on different administrative levels concerning key functions of their system. Research limitations/implications - The study is not claiming that this always is the case, only that there may be a possibility for it. Potentially undermining the effectiveness of ensuing capacity development activities. Practical implications - Given that capacity assessment is to create a coherent foundation for capacity development, the study indicates that it would beneficial to include a wider range of administrative levels in attempting to construct one comprehensive view of the current capacities and future capacity needs. Originality/value - The research topic is novel and valuable for stakeholders in the international community active in capacity development.
Becker, P
The importance of integrating multiple administrative levels in capacity assessment for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation
Disaster Prevention And Management