https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2024.

p0750

Note:

Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence

Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development
Ritsuko Yamazaki-Honda∗,∗∗,†
∗
Land Institute of Japan
1-16-17 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0001, Japan
†
Corresponding author, E-mail: [email protected]
∗∗
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience (NIED), Tsukuba, Japan
[Received April 18, 2024; accepted August 30, 2024]

In 2023, which marked the midpoint of the post-2015 1 . Introduction

global agendas, the findings of midterm review process
of the Sendai Framework (MTR SF) were presented. The year 2023 marked the midpoint of the post-2015
Various data demonstrate that hydro-meteorological global agendas, including the Sendai Framework for Dis-
disasters, presumably exacerbated by climate change, aster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, the 2030 Agenda for
are increasing in frequency and intensity and caus- Sustainable Development, and the Paris Agreement when
ing widespread adverse impacts and associated losses, the findings of the midterm review process of the Sendai
which calls for coherence among disaster risk reduction Framework (MTR SF) were presented [1–5]. Emerging
(DRR), climate change adaptation, and sustainable de- and systemic risks,1 such as the COVID-19 pandemic and
velopment. This article provides findings and recom- recent wars, have posed unprecedented challenges to peo-
mendations through an analysis of publicly available ple and society, accelerating the need for coherence among
data and reports, including monitoring for the Sendai these three agendas [6, 8]. Systemic risks are embed-
Framework and Sustainable Development Goals as well ded in the complex networks of an increasingly intercon-
as the MTR SF. The main findings in the MTR SF nected world which will shape the dynamic interactions
are that countries focus primarily on short- to mid- among the post-2015 global agendas [7]. Since the on-
term adjustments rather than on long-term structural set of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been exacer-
transformation and that policies and measures to re- bated by the impacts of climate change, there has been
duce exposure are less well described. Recommenda- an urgent need to understand the systemic nature of risk
tions include (i) the development of a national disas- and the increased importance of transdisciplinary, intersec-
ter loss database to collect data on both large- and toral, and multiscale coordination [4]. The new risk land-
small-scale and slow-onset disasters; (ii) the implemen- scape requires achieving common goals, namely, disaster
tation of “custom indicators” to supplement the Sendai resilience, overarching disaster risk reduction (DRR), cli-
Framework Monitoring (SFM) by utilizing available mate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable develop-
loss data collection and exceptional governance mea- ment, in a coherent approach to implement risk-informed
sures in the case of high-impact disasters; (iii) the em- policymaking with pre-disaster (ex-ante) measures to real-
ployment of common metrics with the SFM at the na- ize a resilient and sustainable society. However, progress
tional level for climate change statistics and indicators in this area has been limited, with continued emphasis on
to promote integrated data collection and coherence; reactive measures rather than proactive approaches [5].
(iv) the introduction of new indicators to measure and The term “coherence” was not clearly defined in the
verify implementation; and (v) formulation and elab- main United Nations (UN) documents such as the United
oration of a long-term comprehensive national strat- Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
egy that goes beyond national DRR strategies to inte- (UNISDR) disaster terminology [9, 10] and was not con-
grate DRR-related sectoral policies in support of rel- sidered a disaster risk science vocabulary [11]. Alexander,
evant stakeholders, underpinned by secured resources known as one of the world authorities on disaster science,
and adaptive governance with monitoring and evalua- described “integrity (coherence)” when examining the de-
tion to enable a transformation toward more resilient velopment of the term “resilience” [12]. Nevertheless, this
and sustainable future. term has often been referred to as the linkage and integra-
tion of DRR-related areas as used in the Sendai Frame-

Keywords: Sendai Framework, SDGs, climate change 1. The term “systemic risk” is defined as risk endogenous to, or embed-
ded in, a system with a latent or cumulative risk potential to negatively
adaptation, disaster-related statistics, national DRR strat- impact overall system performance and is used in diverse ways across
egy different disciplines; for instance, the global financial crisis in 2008 and
the COVID-19 pandemic [6, 7].

750 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024

© Fuji Technology Press Ltd. Creative Commons CC BY-ND: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/)
 Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence
Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development

work, reports, and papers [1, 13–16]. In this article, the more sustainable and resilient society. The methodology
term coherence is defined as policy coordination, partic- is mainly a literature review and qualitative analysis of UN
ularly DRR with CCA and sustainable development, un- documents; voluntary national reports (VNRs), (particu-
der the Sendai Framework Guiding Principle on disaster larly those submitted by countries with significant losses
governance to mainstream and integrate DRR within and from disasters); and information from websites, coupled
across sectors in their policies, plans, programs, and pro- with quantitative analysis of data from the UN and govern-
cesses as well as indicators and measurement systems for ment websites, including monitoring for the Sendai Frame-
implementation.2 work and SDGs [27–29].
When the concept of sustainable development was first First, this article analyzes recent disaster impacts at-
introduced in 1987 [17], countermeasures against disas- tributed to natural hazards using various data sources (i.e.,
ters were rarely addressed; rather, disasters were presented international databases and Japanese data). The proposed
in the given circumstances. Later, Agenda 21, adopted indicators can complement the Sendai Framework Moni-
in 1992, presented integration of environment and devel- toring (SFM) as “custom indicators” for Target C of the
opment at the policy, planning and management levels, Sendai Framework. Second, it highlights advances in cli-
along with several DRR measures in several chapters, in- mate change statistics and disaster-related statistics (DRS)
cluding human settlement development, water resources as catalysts for achieving common goals through improved
management, and climate change risks [18]. On DRR M&E mechanisms. Third, it analyzes key findings from
side, however, the 1994 Yokohama Strategy referred only the MTR SF and identifies gaps. After reviewing SFM
to Agenda 21 without addressing climate change and its data and VNRs from the perspective of coherence, it pro-
associated adverse impacts [19]. Kelman compared the poses measures toward coherence (i.e., spatial planning)
Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai Framework from Japanese practices. Finally, based on the identified
in reviewing climate change [20]. The progress is that the challenges, this study outlines recommendations for pol-
Sendai Framework contains “clear recognition of mecha- icy instruments that could be implemented in any country
nisms for coherence across agendas, monitoring, and peri- to promote coherence, surpassing national DRR strategies.
odic reviews in support of UN Governance bodies,” with
explicit reference to the then ongoing intergovernmental
negotiations for the upcoming global agendas. 2 . Alternative Data from the Sendai
Although the need for a systematic linkage between Framework Monitor to Show the
DRR and CCA to advance sustainable development was Characteristics of Recent Disasters and
discussed prior to 2015, integration/coherence has been
largely limited or hindered in practice due to the different Impacts
spatial and temporal scales, knowledge bases, and norma-
Hydro-meteorological disasters, which are presumably
tive systems that characterize DRR and CCA [21, 22].
exacerbated by climate change, are increasing in fre-
Against this background, few publications are avail-
quency and intensity, causing widespread adverse impacts,
able on coherence in policy planning, implementation,
associated losses, and damage to humans and ecosys-
and progress reports of the post-2015 agendas. Most of
tems. Overall adverse economic impacts attributable to
these analyzed measures were implemented in specific ar-
climate change, including slow-onset and extreme weather
eas in a practical manner rather than from a global perspec-
events, have been increasingly identified [30]. At the mid-
tive [14, 23, 24] while others focused on governance and
point of the global agendas, there was a progressive de-
institutional arrangements in a theoretical manner [11,25].
cline in disaster-related mortality (excluding COVID-19
Kelman analyzed the challenges of coherence from various
deaths) [31].
aspects and underscored the importance of monitoring and
A total of 38 indicators, the so-called “global indica-
evaluation (M&E); however, he neither reviewed the ongo-
tors,” were internationally agreed upon and adopted to
ing monitoring processes embedded in the post-2015 agen-
monitor the implementation progress of the Sendai Frame-
das nor indicated specific options; therefore, their practi-
work in 2017 [32]. These are a minimum set and by
cality and feasibility in governments remain unclear [11].
themselves cannot explain progress and contribute well to
Etinay et al. analyzed a part of the global indicators and
M&Es. Although countries are recommended to add their
recommended more data on disaster loss and risk drivers as
own “custom indicators,” very few have done so. Many
well as risk-sensitive spatial planning; however, they only
countries have identified the lack of quality, interoperabil-
presented conceptual alternatives [25].
ity, and accessible data on disaster risk as major barriers to
Building on our previous article, the present study aims
effective DRR [5].
to review the progress and challenges in achieving coher-
There are limited options of global open databases col-
ence among DRR, CCA, and sustainable development [26]
lecting multi-disaster losses and damages with different
and recommended suitable policy measures. Specifically,
thresholds and standards [33, 34]. Although countries
it focuses on M&E and a planning system as practical mea-
have agreed to report direct economic losses according to
sures with actual operative examples to promote coher-
the “global indicator” of Target C, the number of coun-
ence and encourage risk-informed development toward a
tries reporting data for Target C, either through SFM or
DesInventar, is lower than that for the other targets [28].
2. Paragraph 11, 19(h), 27(a), 28(b), 31(a), and 48(c).

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024 751

Yamazaki-Honda, R.

Ϭ͘ϱϬϬ
meteorological disasters, above all typhoons and torren-
Ϭ͘ϰϱϬ
tial rains, have consistently accounted for a significant
Ϭ͘ϰϬϬ
amount, whereas major earthquakes caused the most dam-
Ϭ͘ϯϱϬ
age (Fig. 2). Such loss data for specific infrastructures and
Ϭ͘ϯϬϬ facilities should be available for any country. Since the
Ϭ͘ϮϱϬ classification should differ from the global indicators of
Ϭ͘ϮϬϬ Target C, the data should be reported as “custom indica-
Ϭ͘ϭϱϬ tors” to supplement the SFM.
Ϭ͘ϭϬϬ
From another perspective, a disaster impact on a nation
Ϭ͘ϬϱϬ
is not always determined by economic losses, but an ex-
ceptional governance measure, such as the declaration of
Ϭ͘ϬϬϬ
ϮϬϬϰ ϮϬϬϱ ϮϬϬϲ ϮϬϬϳ ϮϬϬϴ ϮϬϬϵ ϮϬϭϬ ϮϬϭϭ ϮϬϭϮ ϮϬϭϯ ϮϬϭϰ ϮϬϭϱ ϮϬϭϲ ϮϬϭϳ ϮϬϭϴ ϮϬϭϵ ϮϬϮϬ ϮϬϮϭ ϮϬϮϮ ϮϬϮϯ a state of emergency, would indicate a disaster causing an
dŽƚĂů ,LJĚƌŽͲDĞƚΘůŝŵĂƚ 'ĞŽƉŚLJƐŝĐĂů
extraordinary impact and thus should be introduced as a
Source: EM-DAT [36] and World Bank [37].
“custom indicator.” Relevant policies and data should be
Fig. 1. Economic loss from natural hazards in relation to made available to disaster-prone countries. Japan has a
GDP (unit: %, world). Disaster Relief Law that applies to municipalities and pre-
fectures, which are supported by the national governments
in the case of disasters where a large number of house-
Table 1. Number of events listed by country in income holds are lost/affected or at risk. A review of the applied
group, by economic loss in real term (2004–2023). disasters from 1995 to 2023 reveals that both the number
(0'$7 ZLWK(FRQRPLF/RVV ZLWK7RS ZLWK7RS of hydro-meteorological disasters and the number of ap-
Number of events Number of events Economic Loss Economic Loss
,QFRPHJURXS
+LJKLQFRPH 

 

  
plied local governments have increased. This means that
Upper middle income       severe hydro-meteorological disasters have become more
Lower middle income
/RZLQFRPH












frequent and widespread in recent years and that all levels
WRWDO   of government urgently need to get prepared for unprece-
Note: The income group applied is the latest version (2025 FY) despite dented catastrophic disasters [40] (Table 3 and Fig. 3).
the time of the events.
Source: EM-DAT [36] and World Bank [38].
3 . Review of the Coherent Approach in the
Recognizing the threshold causing under-reporting, under- Global Statistical Framework to Support
estimation, and reporting biases, particularly in the pre- Monitoring and Evaluation
2000 data, EM-DAT data on economic losses from natural
hazards3 have been collected over the last two decades [5, In contrast to the extreme events described in the previ-
35, 36]. ous section, slow-onset events also cause economic losses,
Although they are affected by large-scale disasters, food insecurity, displacement, and disruption of services;
global economic losses tend to increase over time in nom- however, assessing the impact is challenging due to unclear
inal terms. According to the global indicator C1, which periods, particularly in cases with extreme events resulting
examines the values of relative losses to world gross do- in direct and indirect or cascading impacts [41].
mestic product (GDP) [37], those of geophysical disasters The implementation of M&Es for adaptation is currently
tend to decrease slightly in both nominal and real terms, limited but has recently increased at the local and na-
whereas those of hydro-meteorological and climatological tional levels [30]. EM-DAT only collects data on relatively
disasters do not show an increasing trend (Fig. 1). large-scale disasters (as evidenced by the criteria5 ), result-
Comparing the events listed in EM-DAT between 2004 ing in underreported and underestimated losses [7, 35].
and 2023, global economic loss is mainly accounted for Against this backdrop, a global DRS framework is un-
by higher-income countries [36, 38], which dominated the der development by the United Nations Office for Disas-
list of events with higher economic losses in real terms ter Risk Reduction (UNDRR), the United Nations Statis-
(Tables 1 and 2). tics Division (UNSD), and the statistical divisions of all
Regarding national disaster loss accounting, in Japan, five UN regional commissions, which established the Inter-
each government agency collects disaster loss data accord- Agency and Expert Group on Disaster-Related Statistics in
ing to its responsibility, some of which is then compiled 2021 [42]. In response to the increased urgent need, the es-
and published by the Cabinet Office [39]. The number tablishment of global measurements for DRS is expected
of deaths due to hydro-meteorological disasters4 has in- to support the international community’s efforts to avert,
creased over the years [39]. In terms of the amount of dis- minimize, and address losses and damages, such as the loss
aster damage to major infrastructure and facilities, hydro- and damage fund from COP27, Early Warnings for All ini-
tiatives for risk analysis and policymaking, assessing, and
3. The analyzed data set includes the figures from EM-DAT Disaster sub-
groups: geophysical, meteorological, hydrological, and climatological. 5. EM-DAT globally records at the country level human and economic
4. Hydro-meteorological disasters include typhoons, torrential rains, and losses for disasters with at least one of the following criteria: (i) 10 fa-
heavy snow. talities, (ii) 100 affected people, (iii) a declaration of state of emergency,
and (iv) a call for international assistance [36].

752 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024

 Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence
Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development

Table 2. List of events listed in EM-DAT (largest 20 events, in order of the amount of economic loss in real terms; 2004–2023).
7RWDO'DPDJH * reference
5DQN 'LVDVWHU7\SH (YHQWRU&DXVH1DPH <HDU &RXQWU\ ,QFRPHJURXS
 $GMXVWHG 0LO86 Total Deaths
 (DUWKTXDNH Great East Japan Earthquake  -DSDQ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH.DWULQD  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 (DUWKTXDNH 6LFKXDQ(DUWKTXDNH  &KLQD Upper middle income  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH+DUYH\  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH,DQ  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH0DULD  Puerto Rico +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH,GD  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH,UPD  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH6DQG\  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 )ORRG 7KDLODQGIORRG  7KDLODQG Upper middle income  
 (DUWKTXDNH .XPDPRWR(DUWKTXDNH  -DSDQ +LJKLQFRPH  
 (DUWKTXDNH &KXHWVX(DUWKTXDNH  -DSDQ +LJKLQFRPH  
 )ORRG Low pressure system “Bernd”  *HUPDQ\ +LJKLQFRPH  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH,NH  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 (DUWKTXDNH &KLOH(DUWKTXDNH  &KLOH +LJKLQFRPH  
 (DUWKTXDNH 2023 Turkey-Syria Earthquake  7UNL\H Upper middle income  
 6WRUP :LQWHU6WRUP  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 Extreme temperature2008 Chinese Winter Storm  &KLQD Upper middle income  
 6WRUP +XUULFDQH,YDQ  86$ +LJKLQFRPH  
 )ORRG &KLQD)ORRGV  &KLQD Upper middle income  
Note: The losses listed here are accumulated by country; some disaster origins caused cross-border losses.
Source: EM-DAT [36] and World Bank [38].

ϭ͕ϮϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ
informed sustainable development and actions against cli-
ϭ͕ϬϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ
mate change [26, 45, 46].
A global set of Climate Change Statistics and Indicators
ϴϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ was adopted by the UN Statistical Commission in 2022.
A comprehensive statistical framework with statistics, in-
ϲϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ dicators, and metadata was designed to support countries
in preparing their own sets of climate change statistics and
ϰϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ
indicators according to their individual concerns, priori-
ties, and resources [47, 48]. UNSD led the development of
ϮϬϬ͕ϬϬϬ
the global set under the UN Department for Economic and
Ϭ
Social Affairs in collaboration with the secretariat of the
ϮϬϭϮ ϮϬϭϯ ϮϬϭϰ ϮϬϭϱ ϮϬϭϲ ϮϬϭϳ ϮϬϭϴ ϮϬϭϵ ϮϬϮϬ ϮϬϮϭ ϮϬϮϮ United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
ĂƌƚŚƋƵĂŬĞĚŝƐĂƐƚĞƌƐ ,LJĚƌŽͲDĞƚĞƌŽůŽŐŝĐĂůĚŝƐĂƐƚĞƌƐΎ ŽƚŚĞƌƐ through extensive global consultation with specialized in-
Source: Cabinet Office Japan, compiling data from government ministries ternational agencies, including UNDRR. The main sta-
and agencies [39].
tistical references include internationally accepted frame-
Fig. 2. Damage to major infrastructure from disasters, works, standards, and guidelines such as SDGs and the
Japan (unit: mil JPY). Sendai Framework. The metadata sheets in the background
document contain reference sections of SDG and SFM that
correspond to the respective indicators in the section and
guide the original source in the metadata [47]. Accord-
tracking the impacts of slow-onset events [43]. A new dis- ingly, 43 indicators and eight statistics in the global set
aster loss and damage tracking system developed by the match SDG indicators either verbatim or in “similar to”
UNDRR in partnership with the United Nations Develop- or “related to” form. Among the 158 indicators, nine in-
ment Program and World Meteorological Organization to dicators and three statistics follow the guidance of SFM,
better align weather and climate observations is expected which could benefit from SFM data and Targets A–E and G
to facilitate M&E at the national, regional, and global lev- (Table 4).
els [5,44]. For integral and cross-sectoral M&E, a new sys- As the SDG monitoring involves national statistical of-
tem must enable interoperability and accessibility for var- fices taking the lead in data collection and promoting a
ious stakeholders across sectors and strengthen a national national data platform supported by various stakeholders,
data platform, which will promote policy coherence at the climate change monitoring should also establish a collab-
global and national levels. orative monitoring and reporting system with SDGs and
Countries are encouraged to report on their annual the Sendai Framework. Additionally, it should adopt com-
progress against the Sendai Framework global targets us- mon metrics for climate change statistics and DRS to pro-
ing 38 internationally agreed global indicators. Above mote integrated data collection, monitoring, and reporting,
all, indicators for Targets A–E of the Sendai Frame- which will contribute to coherence and achieve the com-
work were adopted in the SDG review process. Eleven mon goals of the three global agendas.
common indicators (five indicators, excluding dupli-
cates) under Goals 1, 11, and 13 measure disaster-risk-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024 753

Yamazaki-Honda, R.

Table 3. List of disasters applied to the Disaster Relief Law of Japan (in order of the number of applied prefectures; 1995–2023).
Number of Number of
5DQN 'LVDVWHUJURXS 'LVDVWHUW\SH 'LVDVWHUQDPH <HDU
prefectures municipalities*
 Hydro-Meteorological typhoon Typhoon No.19, R1   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, July H30   
 Geophysical earthquake Great East Japan Earthquake   
 Hydro-Meteorological typhoon Typhoon No.14, R4   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, from 3 July R2   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, from 7 July R5   
 Hydro-Meteorological typhoon Typhoon No.23, H16   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, from 11 August R3   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, from 3 August R4   
 Hydro-Meteorological typhoon Typhoon No.12, H23   
 Hydro-Meteorological typhoon Typhoon No.14, H17   
 Hydro-Meteorological torrential rain Torrential Rain, end August H10   

Note: The number of municipalities is as of the time the law was applied.
Source: Cabinet Office Japan [40], compiled by H. Hayashi and the author.

ϭϮ
quadrennial comprehensive policy review of SDGs at the
ϭϬ High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development
in July 2023 and COP28 in December 2023, which were
ϴ
“part of the integrated and coordinated follow-up processes
to United Nations conferences” [5, 51–53].
ϲ
MTR SF invited “states to assess progress, gaps, and
ϰ
challenges in the implementation of the Sendai Frame-
work at the local, national, regional, and global levels and
Ϯ to share findings, good practices, and recommendations
with UNDRR” [51]. A total of 72 member states sub-
Ϭ
mitted their respective VNRs of the MTR SF, including
'ĞŽƉŚLJƐŝĐĂů ,LJĚƌŽͲDĞƚĞŽƌŽůŽŐŝĐĂů KƚŚĞƌƐ LA (,LJĚƌŽͲDĞƚĞŽƌŽůŽŐŝĐĂůͿ
a retrospective review with progress in the four priorities
Source: Cabinet Office Japan [40], compiled by H. Hayashi and the au- and seven targets of the Sendai Framework, a prospective
thor. review, and recommendations according to the template
Fig. 3. Number of disasters applied to the Disaster Relief provided by UNDRR [5, 27, 54]. At the national level,
Law of Japan. the MTR SF process (a compilation of VNRs) was led by
the central government agency in charge of DRR coordi-
nation, in most cases through deliberation and consulta-
tion with an inter-ministerial and multi-stakeholder DRR
4 . Implications and Recommendations for committee. Some countries, including the Philippines and
Policy Coherence from the Midterm Thailand, have held workshops to collect cross-sectoral
Review of the Implementation of the views and input from diverse stakeholders [54–56]. Con-
Sendai Framework sequently, VNRs are reliable sources of rich information
and knowledge on policy measures, challenges, directions,
4.1. Midterm Review Process and Findings and references, which enable qualitative comparative anal-
yses among countries. UNDRR prepared the MTR SF Re-
The year 2023 was marked as the midpoint of the post- port, which involved quantitative and qualitative analyses
2015 global agendas. The Sendai Framework has intro- of VNRs and data submitted to the SFM, followed by anal-
duced a holistic notion of risk and resilience, incorporating yses of surveys, interviews, and other sources [5, 28].
DRR measures throughout the four priorities from under- Some gaps and weaknesses are observed in the MTR
standing risk to Building Back Better [49]. The MTR SF SF Report, which only briefly presents good cases of DRR
was launched to assess the progress of integrating DRR measures extracted from each country’s VNR and catego-
into policies, programs, and investments at all levels, iden- rizes them under a specific priority of the Sendai Frame-
tify good practices, gaps, and challenges, and accelerate work even if the measure falls under several priorities. As
the path to achieving the goal of the Sendai Framework and a result, the DRR measures presented in the report are
its seven global targets by 2030 [50]. The MTR SF process somewhat fragmented and do not provide a complete pic-
included the adoption of the Political Declaration at the ture. For example, reducing exposure has been addressed
High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly in May 2023 in the Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai Frame-
to renew commitments with policy adjustments and new work; however, policies and measures to reduce exposure
modalities, accelerate implementation, and inform mile- are not well described in the report [5, 57]. Although the
stones of the post-2015 agenda. Examples include the

754 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024

 Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence
Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development

Table 4. Common indicators in Climate Change Statistics with SFM and SDG monitoring.
*OREDOVHWRIFOLPDWHFKDQJHLQGLFDWRUV 6HQGDL)UDPHZRUN,QGLFDWRUV 6'*,QGLFDWRUV
Impacts 27. Direct agricultural loss attributed to disasters C-2 1.5.2, 11.5.2 [part of]
40. Direct economic loss to all other damaged or destroyed
Impacts C-3 1.5.2, 11.5.2 [part of]
productive assets attributed to disasters
Impacts 41. Direct economic loss in the housing sector attributed to disasters C-4 1.5.2, 11.5.2 [part of]
42. Number of deaths, missing persons and directly affected persons A-1 (Compound: A-2, A-3);
Impacts 1.5.1, 11.5.1, and 13.1.1
attributed to disasters per 100,000 population B-1 (Compound: B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5)
*Number of people whose destroyed dwellings
43. Number of climate refugees, climate migrants and persons
Impacts were attributed to hydro-meteorological disasters -
displaced by climate change
** part of B-4
Impacts 75. Damage to critical infrastructure attributed to disasters D-1 (Compound: D-2, D-3, D-4) 11.5.3 [part of]
76. Direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed critical
Impacts C-5 1.5.2, 11.5.2 [part of]
infrastructure attributed to disasters
80. Direct economic loss to cultural heritage damaged or destroyed
Impacts C-6 1.5.2, 11.5.2 [part of]
attributed to disasters
133. Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local
Adaptation disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk E-2 1.5.4, 11.b.2, 13.1.3
reduction strategies
Adaptation 134. Coverage of disaster shelters per capita G-6 [related to] -
Adaptation 136. Coverage of early warning systems G-1 (compound) [related to] -

Source: UNSD [46, 47] and UNISDR [37], edited by the author.

report addresses the importance of risk assessment and sources at both the national and subnational levels; how-
risk-informed investment, it does not provide an exam- ever, implementation is left to each country [5]. The SFM
ple or clear guidance on how to interlink and implement data of the indicators E1 and E19a show increases in the
them. Moreover, the presented challenges focus primar- scores over the years in many countries, suggesting that
ily on short-to mid-term adjustments rather than on long- there has been some progress, including enhanced policy
term structural transformations. Furthermore, the analysis coherence, such as the formulation and amendment of na-
of the SFM was not fully presented. In addition to insuf- tional DRR strategies toward alignment with the Sendai
ficient data reporting, the scores of qualitative indicators Framework [28, 29]. Most importantly, countries with
(i.e., Targets E and G) cannot be averaged globally or re- progress in the score of indicator E1a9 are considered to
gionally because the reporting countries varied from year have introduced coherent elements into their strategies.
to year. The following sections supplement this analysis The VNRs of these countries demonstrate that DRR and
and propose a policy instrument for Target E: disaster gov- CCA principles are embedded in legislation, planning, and
ernance. governance schemes. In the Pacific, several countries have
developed joint national action plans (JNAPs) that incor-
porate both DRM and CCA [58, 59].
4.2. Observed Coherence in DRR Strategies Taking another example of disaster-prone countries,
As of March 2023, the number of countries with national Nepal ensures policy coherence with global agendas, and
DRR strategies had increased to 125, whereas the number the Disaster Risk Reduction National Strategic Plan of Ac-
of countries with strategies promoting policy coherence tion (DRRNSPA 2018–2030) integrates climate change
had reached 118 [4,5,58]. In contrast to Targets A–D, Tar- considerations into national development priorities [60].
get E focuses on the policy input of national and local DRR In contrast, the Climate Change Policy (2019) has a DRR
strategies. Instead of counting the number of countries focus, while the National Adaptation Plan prioritizes DRR
with national DRR strategies, the indicator E1 “Number and builds climate resilience through risk-sensitive land
of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk use planning (RSLUP) [61]. RSLUP is a guiding docu-
reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework” is ment for local governments to develop risk-sensitive mu-
calculated using ten sub-indicators. The score of the indi- nicipal development plans [60, 62]. The Nepal Climate
cator E1 is calculated as the sum of the incremental scores Change Financing Framework integrates climate finance
(0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1) of the ten sub-indicators self-assessed into national planning and budgeting and streamlines long-
by the country against the pre-defined ten key elements of term CCA and DRR investments through the national sys-
the Sendai Framework [32]. Such sub-indicators are rather tem [58].
subjective, but progress can be measured from a country’s The Philippines developed the National Disaster Risk
scores over the years. The sub-indicator E1a9 measures Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP 2020–2030)
the progress of “policy coherence relevant to DRR such as using the Sendai Framework global targets and priori-
sustainable development, poverty eradication, and climate ties [55]. The NDRRMP is in line with other national
change, notably with the SDGs the Paris Agreement.” strategies and enables national agencies and local govern-
The MTR SF Report highlights that the development ments to incorporate disaster risks into their respective de-
and implementation of multisectoral, multiscale DRR velopment and sectoral policies, plans, and budgets. Ac-
strategies still require further concerted efforts, includ- cording to the Department of Human Settlements and Ur-
ing coherent institutional architectures, clear legislative ban Development, as of September 2022, 40% of local gov-
mandates, strong partnerships, and sufficient financial re-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024 755

Yamazaki-Honda, R.

ernments had updated Comprehensive Land Use Plans in- 5 . Next Steps from the Midpoint of the
corporating DRR and CCA [55]. The Philippines is in Common Goal: Proposals for Addressing
the process of integrating the Climate Change Commis- Challenges in DRR Strategies
sion and the Office of Civil Defense, which is currently
in charge of DRR, into an overarching agency to establish Present monitoring frameworks and mid-term review
the Department of Disaster Resilience (DDR) for a more processes have promoted integration and collaboration be-
disaster-resilient nation. DDR is expected to provide lead- tween different stakeholders and sectors at the national and
ership and coordination in all DRR phases [55, 58, 63]. global levels. However, as mentioned above, indicator E1
Japan, reporting the full score, has introduced a new is not always reported considering all DRR-related strate-
flood management policy, “River Basin Disaster Re- gies and policies and does not reflect the actual situation. In
silience and Sustainability by All,” which is under Pri- addition, although indicator E1 involves the implementa-
ority 3 in its VNR but actually covers all Priorities [64]. tion aspect rather than existence, none of the sub-indicators
The policy was based on risk assessment from climate pro- of E1 are dedicated to implementation. In fact, only one
jections to first obtain rainfall change rates for extreme sub-indicator of a follow-up mechanism (E1a10) could
rainfall, and then modify river management plans to im- lead to implementation. UNDRR reported that there is no
prove flood prevention, exposure reduction, and disaster clear evidence to support whether these strategies can be
resilience through integrated structural and non-structural implemented, that is, backed by resources, budgeting, and
measures in cooperation with all stakeholders in river financing to ensure implementation, except for some coun-
basins [65]. Concerted efforts are secured by legisla- tries with a financial plan for implementing their national
tion and budgets at both the national and subnational lev- DRR strategies, and that the overall issue of DRR financ-
els. In addition, Japan has developed a series of compre- ing and budgets has been identified across all regions [58].
hensive national strategies (i.e., the 1st–5th Comprehen- Since progress in incorporating DRR into legal mandates /
sive National Development Plans and the 1st–3rd National frameworks at all levels of government is primarily con-
Land Strategies) to overcome socioeconomic challenges fined to high-income countries, the Political Declaration
and promote development with scope to achieve its goals for MTR SF calls on countries to ensure that disaster risk
within approximately 10–20 years [66–70]. These plans governance is supported by legal and regulatory frame-
were formulated to meet the needs of the time through works, policies, and plans at all levels [5, 53]. However,
intra-governmental negotiations. Although concepts and since plans and strategies are not effective by themselves,
projects are supposed to be respected and realized in sec- they need to be accompanied by a project scheme and a
toral policies, they have not always been backed by suffi- procedural and regulatory framework to implement them,
cient resources and have therefore been regarded as con- preferably backed by financial schemes such as grants and
cept notes. tax incentives. In this regard, we recommend introducing
While the increasing scores of the indicator E1 show implementation aspects in the SFM; in particular, a leg-
progress, some countries downgraded their scores at some islative framework and financial and human resources for
point due to the termination of their strategies. For exam- implementation. Improving data quality and accessibility
ple, the Marshal Islands gave a full score of 1 for indica- through recent efforts, such as DRS, climate change statis-
tor E1 from 2014 to 2018, but gave zero in 2019 and 2020, tics, and new tools, would contribute to risk-informed pol-
with a note stating that “the previous JNAP expired in icymaking.
2018, but the replacement has not yet been finalized” [28]. The new risk landscape underscores the need for a co-
Given such a case, the following analysis used the maxi- herent and integrated approach to DRR across traditional
mum scores from 2015, with the assumption that a coun- sectoral boundaries. Coherence should be pursued beyond
try that has implemented a strategy once will maintain or the present coherent approaches via cross-references (joint
upgrade the level of alignment. Under the assumption planning) of other sectors and a unified conference body to
that disaster-prone countries have more full-fledged na- bring together various stakeholders. DRR strategies (often
tional DRR strategies with higher scores of alignment with formulated as sectoral plans) alone are insufficient to sub-
the Sendai Framework, particularly against recent hydro- stantially reduce risk; both vulnerability and exposure. The
meteorological disasters, EM-DAT data and the maximum recommendation advocates the integration of DRR with
scores of SFM reporting countries were analyzed. The re- other sectoral plans into an overarching policy instrument
sult is a lack of correlation between the scores and any in support of relevant stakeholders that surpasses sectoral
type of disaster loss for any disaster group and loss level, national DRR strategies, such as a comprehensive national
suggesting several policies, besides DRR strategies, have strategy. Such a long-term strategy should prioritize risk-
contributed to DRR. For example, the US reports 0 for in- informed proactive measures underpinned by secured re-
dicator E1a9 throughout the years, stating “scores reflect sources and adaptive governance with M&E to enable a
alignment of the 2018–2022 FEMA Strategic Plan with the transformation toward a more resilient and sustainable fu-
Sendai Framework” [28]. ture.
Lastly, this study is based on an analysis of UN and
government reports, supplemented by information avail-
able on the website, which is limited, particularly for non-

756 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024

 Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence
Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development

English-speaking countries. Future research would bene- [18] United Nations, “Agenda 21,” United Nations Conf. on Envi-
fit from primary sources and interviews with policymakers ronment & Development, 1992. https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf [Accessed August 18,
and other stakeholders in the target country to understand 2024]
the policy fully and consider its applications elsewhere. [19] International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)
of United Nations, “Yokohama Strategy and plan of action for a
safer world: Guidelines for natural disaster prevention, prepared-
ness and mitigation.” 1994. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/
References: 8241_doc6841contenido1.pdf [Accessed August 18, 2024]
[1] United Nations, “Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction [20] I. Kelman, “Climate change and the Sendai Framework for Disas-
2015–2030,” 2015. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/43291_ ter Risk Reduction,” Int J. of Disaster Risk Science, Vol.6, No.2,
sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf [Accessed April 5, 2024] pp. 117-127, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0046-5
[2] General Assembly of United Nations, “Resolution adopted by [21] J. Birkmann et al., “Addressing the challenge: Recommenda-
the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 – Transforming tions and quality criteria for linking disaster risk reduction and
our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” adaptation to climate change,” DKKV Publication Series 38.
No.A/RES/70/1. 2015. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/70/1 [Ac- 2009. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/10193_DKKVreport.
cessed April 5, 2024] pdf [Accessed August 18, 2024]
[3] United Nations, “Paris Agreement,” 2015. http://unfccc.int/files/ [22] J. Birkmann and K. von Teichman, “Integrating disaster risk re-
essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_ duction and climate change adaptation: Key challenges—scales,
agreement.pdf [Accessed April 5, 2024] knowledge, and norms,” Sustainability Science, Vol.5, No.2,
pp. 171-184, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-010-0108-y
[4] General Assembly of United Nations, “Main findings and rec-
ommendations of the midterm review of the implementation of [23] W. S. A. Saunders, S. Kelly, S. Paisley, and L. B. Clarke,
the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030,” “Progress toward implementing the Sendai Framework, the Paris
No.A/77/640, 2023. https://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get? Agreement, and the Sustainable Development Goals: Policy from
OpenAgent&DS=A/77/640&Lang=E [Accessed April 8, 2024] Aotearoa New Zealand.” Int J. of Disaster Risk Science, Vol.11,
No.2, pp. 190-205, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-020-
[5] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), 00269-8
“The report of the midterm review of the implementa-
tion of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduc- [24] I. S. Fitrinitia, M. Matsuyuki, F. Nakamura, S. Tanaka, and R.
tion 2015–2030,” 2023. https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/ Ariyoshi, “An integration of social protection, disaster risk reduc-
media/86858/download [Accessed April 5, 2024] tion, and climate change adaptation in disaster policy, plan and
program: A review on global discourse and case study of Indone-
[6] J. Sillmann et al., “ISC-UNDRR-RISK KAN Briefing note on sys- sia,” J. of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Ser. D3 (Infrastruc-
temic risk,” 2022. https://doi.org/10.24948/2022.01 ture Planning and Management), Vol.78, No.6, pp. II_302-II_314,
[7] UNDRR, “Global assessment report on disaster risk re- 2022. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscejipm.78.6_II_302
duction 2019,” 2019. https://www.undrr.org/publication/global- [25] N. Etinay, C. Egbu, and V. Murray, “Building urban resilience
assessment-report-disaster-risk-reduction-2019 [Accessed April for disaster risk management and disaster risk reduction,” Proce-
8, 2024] dia Engineering, Vol.212, pp. 575-582, 2018. https://doi.org/10.
[8] International Science Council (ISC), UNDRR, and Integrated 1016/j.proeng.2018.01.074
Research on Disaster Risk (IRDR), “A framework for global [26] R. Yamazaki-Honda, “Promoting coherence among disaster risk
science in support of risk informed sustainable development reduction, climate change adaptation, and sustainable develop-
and planetary health,” 2021. https://www.irdrinternational.org/ ment for disaster resilience,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.17, No.6,
knowledge_pool/publications/91 [Accessed September 17, 2024] pp. 1015-1021, 2022. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2022.p1015
[9] United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction [27] UNDRR, “MTR SF submissions and inputs – Voluntary na-
(UNISDR), “2009 UNISDR terminology on disaster risk re- tional reports.” https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/2023/mtr-
duction,” 2009. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/7817_ sf-submissions-and-reports [Accessed April 5, 2024]
UNISDRTerminologyEnglish.pdf [Accessed August 20, 2024]
[28] UNDRR, “Sendai Framework Monitor.” https://sendaimonitor.
[10] UNDRR, “Disaster risk reduction terminology.” https://www. undrr.org/ [Accessed April 8, 2024]
undrr.org/drr-glossary/terminology [Accessed August 20, 2024]
[29] Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
[11] I. Kelman, “Lost for words amongst disaster risk science vocabu- United Nations, “SDG Global Database.” https://unstats.un.org/
lary?,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Science, Vol.9, No.3, pp. 281-291, sdgs/dataportal [Accessed April 13, 2024]
2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-018-0188-3
[30] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “Cli-
[12] D. E. Alexander, “Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An mate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerabil-
etymological journey,” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sci- ity,” Cambridge University Press, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1017/
ences, Vol.13, No.11, pp. 2707-2716, 2013. https://doi.org/10. 9781009325844
5194/nhess-13-2707-2013
[31] United Nations, “The sustainable development goals report
[13] K. Peters, L. Langston, T. Tanner, and A. Bahadur, “‘Re- 2023: Special edition,” 2023. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/
silience’ across the post-2015 frameworks: Towards coher- 2023/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2023.pdf
ence?,” Overseas Development Institute, 2016. https://odi.org/ [Accessed April 8, 2024]
documents/5362/11085.pdf [Accessed August 14, 2024]
[32] UNISDR, “Technical guidance for monitoring and reporting on
[14] S. Sandholz, M. Wannewitz, M. Moure, and M. Garschagen, progress in achieving the global targets of the Sendai Framework
“Costs and benefits of (in)coherence: Disaster Risk Reduc- for Disaster Risk Reduction.” 2017. https://www.unisdr.org/files/
tion in the Post-2015-Agendas. Synthesis report,” United 54970_techguidancefdigitalhr.pdf [Accessed April 8, 2024]
Nations University – Institute for Environment and Hu- [33] K. Moriyama, D. Sasaki, and Y. Ono, “Comparison of global
man Security, 2020. https://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU: databases for disaster loss and damage data,” J. Disaster Res.,
7638/COHERE_PDF_META_2020.pdf [Accessed August 18, Vol.13, No.6, pp. 1007-1014, 2018. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.
2024] 2018.p1007
[15] I. Kelman, J. C. Gaillard, and J. Mercer, “Climate change’s role [34] L. A. Bakkensen, X. Shi, and B. D. Zurita, “The impact of disaster
in disaster risk reduction’s future: Beyond vulnerability and re- data on estimating damage determinants and climate costs,” Eco-
silience,” Int. J. of Disaster Risk Science, Vol.6, No.1, pp. 21-27, nomics of Disasters and Climate Change, Vol.2, No.1, pp. 49-71,
2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0038-5 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-017-0018-x
[16] S. Flood, Y. J. Columbié, M. Le Tissier, and B. O’Dwyer, “In- [35] UNISDR, “Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction
troduction: Can the Sendai Framework, the Paris Agreement, 2015,” 2015. https://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/
and Agenda 2030 provide a path towards societal resilience?,” 2015/en/gar-pdf/GAR2015_EN.pdf [Accessed April 8, 2024]
S. Flood, Y. J. Columbié, M. Le Tissier, and B. O’Dwyer (Eds.),
“Creating Resilient Futures: Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction, [36] Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED)
Sustainable Development Goals and Climate Change Adaptation and University of Louvain, “EM-DAT: The international disaster
Agendas,” pp. 1-19, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022. https://doi.org/ database.” https://public.emdat.be/ [Accessed April 7, 2024]
10.1007/978-3-030-80791-7_1 [37] The World Bank, “Indicators.” https://data.worldbank.org/
[17] United Nations Secretary-General and World Commission on En- indicator [Accessed April 7, 2024]
vironment and Development, “Report of the World Commis- [38] The World Bank, “World Bank Country and Lending Groups.”
sion on Environment and Development: Our Common Future,” https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/
1987. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/ 906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups [Accessed
5987our-common-future.pdf [Accessed August 18, 2024] August 20, 2024]

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024 757

Yamazaki-Honda, R.

[39] Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, “White Papers on Disaster [56] Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, Min-
Management,” (in Japanese). https://www.bousai.go.jp/kaigirep/ istry of Interior, Thailand, “Midterm review of the im-
hakusho/index.html [Accessed September 17, 2024] plementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
[40] Cabinet Office Japan, Government of Japan, “Application of the Reduction 2015–2030: National voluntary report of Thai-
Disaster Relief Law,” (in Japanese). https://www.bousai.go.jp/ land,” 2022. https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/publication/
taisaku/kyuujo/kyuujo_tekiyou.html [Accessed April 13, 2024] thailand-voluntary-national-report-mtr-sf [Accessed April 13,
[41] IPCC, “AR6 synthesis report: Climate change 2023,” 2023. https: 2024]
//www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ [Accessed April 13, 2024] [57] UNISDR, “Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building
[42] United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the resilience of nations and communities to disasters,” 2015.
the Pacific (UNESCAP), “Disaster-related statistics framework.” https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/hyogo-framework-
https://stat-confluence.escap.un.org/display/TWG/DRSF%3A+ action-2005-2015-building-resilience-nations-and-communities-
Disaster-related+Statistics+Framework [Accessed April 13, disasters [Accessed April 13, 2024]
2024] [58] UNDRR, “Status report on Target E 2023,” 2023.
[43] United Nations Economic and Social Council, “Core group https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/status-report-
of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Disaster-Related target-e-2023 [Accessed April 13, 2024]
Statistics: Note by the Secretary-General,” No.E/CN.3/2023/28, [59] S. C. Woodruff and P. Regan, “Quality of national adaptation
2023. https://unstats.un.org/UNSDWebsite/statcom/session_54/ plans and opportunities for improvement,” Mitigation and Adap-
documents/2023-28-DisasterRelatedStats-E.pdf [Accessed April tation Strategies for Global Change, Vol.24, No.1, pp. 53-71,
8, 2024] 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9794-z
[44] UNDRR, “Disaster losses and damages tracking system.” https: [60] Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of Nepal, “Mid-term re-
//www.undrr.org/disaster-losses-and-damages-tracking-system view of the implementation of Sendai Framework for Disaster
[Accessed August 14, 2024] Risk Reduction (2015–2030), Nepal National Voluntary Report,”
[45] Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2022. https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/publication/nepal-
United Nations, “Global indicator framework for the Sustain- voluntary-national-report-mtr-sf [Accessed April 13, 2024]
able Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for [61] Government of Nepal, “National Adaptation Plan 2021–2050,”
Sustainable Development,” Nos.A/RES/71/313, E/CN.3/2024/4, 2021. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/NAP_Nepal_
2024. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/ [Ac- 2021.pdf [Accessed September 17, 2024]
cessed April 8, 2024]
[62] C. L. Hada, R. Shaw, and A. Pokhrel, “Preparation and adop-
[46] Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, tion of risk sensitive land use plans in the new federal context
United Nations, “Metadata for SDG indicator.” https://unstats.un. of Nepal,” R. Djalante, M. B. F. Bisri, and R. Shaw (Eds.), “Inte-
org/sdgs/metadata/ [Accessed April 8, 2024] grated Research on Disaster Risks: Contributions from the IRDR
[47] United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), “Background Young Scientists Programme,” pp. 175-191, Springer Nature,
document to the report of the Secretary-General on cli- 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55563-4_10
mate change statistics (E/CN.3/2022/17): Global set and [63] B. E. Tamayo, “Go pushes Department of Disaster
metadata,” 2022. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/53rd- Resilience bill,” The Manila Times, April 8, 2024.
session/documents/BG-3m-Globalsetandmetadata-E.pdf [Ac- https://www.manilatimes.net/2024/04/08/news/national/go-
cessed April 8, 2024] pushes-department-of-disaster-resilience-bill/1940363 [Ac-
[48] United Nations Economic and Social Council, “Climate change cessed April 13, 2024]
statistics: Report of the Secretary-General,” No.E/CN.3/2022/17,
2021. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/53rd-session/ [64] “The midterm review of the implementation of the Sendai Frame-
documents/2022-17-ClimateChangeStats-E.pdf [Accessed work for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030: Voluntary national
April 8, 2024] report, submission by Japan,” 2022. https://sendaiframework-
mtr.undrr.org/publication/japan-voluntary-national-report-mtr-sf
[49] UNDRR, “Good practices in disaster risk reduction: [Accessed April 13, 2024]
Midterm review of the implementation of the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030,” 2023. [65] Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, “River
https://www.undrr.org/publication/good-practices-disaster-risk- basin disaster resilience and sustainability by all: Japan’s new pol-
reduction-midterm-review-implementation-sendai-framework icy on water-related disaster risk reduction,” 2020. https://www.
[Accessed April 13, 2024] mlit.go.jp/river/kokusai/pdf/pdf21.pdf [Accessed April 13, 2024]
[50] United Nations General Assembly, “Resolution adopted by the [66] A. Shimokobe, “Testimony to Postwar National Land Planning,”
General Assemble on 21 December 2020 – Disaster risk re- Nikon Keizai Hyoronsha Ltd., 1994 (in Japanese).
duction,” No.A/RES/75/216, 2020. https://digitallibrary.un.org/ [67] Y. Kawakami, “A study on the history of the comprehen-
record/3896586/files/A_RES_75_216-EN.pdf [Accessed April sive national development plans from a viewpoint of the so-
5, 2024] cial backgrounds,” Historical Studies in Civil Engineering,
[51] United Nations, “Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on Vol.13, pp. 121-128, 1993 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.2208/
17 December 2021 – Disaster risk reduction,” No.A/RES/76/204, journalhs1990.13.121
2021. https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/sites/default/files/ [68] T. Hashimoto, “A comparison of the characteristics of the Na-
inline-files/N2140643.pdf [Accessed April 5, 2024] tional Land Sustainability Plan with the basic plans —From the
[52] UNDRR, “The midterm review of the implementation of the viewpoint of planning techniques, basic characteristics, and polit-
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030: Con- ical interests—,” Planning and Public Management, Vo.32, No.1,
cept Note,” 2021. http://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/media/ pp. 83-91, 2009 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.14985/jappm.32.
77425/download [Accessed April 5, 2024] 1_83
[53] United Nations General Assembly, “Resolution adopted [69] H. Sano and A. Soshiroda, “The discourses analysis about na-
by the General Assembly on 18 May 2023 – Po- tional planning for the past 20 years – Case study on the proceed-
litical declaration of the high-level meeting on the ings of the Diet and the magazines –,” Proc. of the 38th Annual
midterm review of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Conf. of the City Planning Institute of Japan, Article No.32, 2003
Risk Reduction 2015–2030,” No.A/RES/77/289, 2023. (in Japanese). https://doi.org/10.11361/cpij1.38.0.32.0
https://www.undrr.org/publication/political-declaration-high- [70] T. Kurita and M. Muraki, “The concept of new public in the na-
level-meeting-midterm-review-sendai-framework-disaster-risk tional land strategy,” J. of the City Planning Institute of Japan,
[Accessed April 5, 2024] Vol.54, No.3, pp. 1372-1378, 2019 (in Japanese). https://doi.org/
[54] UNDRR, “The midterm review of the implementation of the 10.11361/journalcpij.54.1372
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030:
National consultations, review and reporting, guidance for
UN members states – Annex I, Voluntary national report –
Template.” https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/sites/default/
files/2022-01/MTR-SF-Voluntary-National-Report_Member-
States_TEMPLATE_December%202021.pdf [Accessed April
13, 2024]
[55] Office of Civil Defense, National Disaster Risk Reduc-
tion and Management Council, Philippines, “The Philip-
pines’ midterm review of the implementation of the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030
with a short-term review of the National Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Plan (2020–2030),” 2022.
https://sendaiframework-mtr.undrr.org/publication/philippines-
voluntary-national-report-mtr-sf [Accessed April 13, 2024]

758 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024

 Progress and Challenges Toward Coherence
Among Disaster Risk Reduction, Climate Change Adaptation,
and Sustainable Development

Name:
Ritsuko Yamazaki-Honda

ORCID:
0009-0005-3056-5920

Affiliation:
Executive Research Director, Land Institute of
Japan
Visiting Researcher, National Research Insti-
tute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience
(NIED)
Address:
1-16-17 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0001, Japan
3-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0006, Japan
Brief Career:
2003-2007 Administrator, Directorate for Public Governance and
Territorial Development, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD)
2009-2015 Several Deputy Director positions for regional development,
spatial planning and transport, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
2016-2019 Programme Management Officer, United Nations Office for
Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR/UNDRR)
2019-2020 Director, Policy Planning Office, MLIT
2020-2023 Deputy Director-General, NIED
Selected Publications:
• “Promoting coherence among disaster risk reduction, climate change
adaptation, and sustainable development for disaster resilience,” J.
Disaster Res., Vol.17, No.6, pp. 1015-1021, 2022.
• “Sustainable development and disaster risk reduction – Coherence
between the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction –,” Statistics, Vol.2019, No.10,
pp. 22-27, 2019 (in Japanese).
Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:
• Working Group on IRDR Activities Promotion, Subcommittee on
IRDR, Committee on Civil Engineering and Architecture, Science
Council of Japan
• The City Planning Institute of Japan (CPIJ)
• Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE)

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.19 No.5, 2024 759