Community-Based Disaster Risk Management and Inclusion
This domain tests whether you can support communities to assess and manage risk themselves, with inclusion built into process and outcomes. Expect questions on participatory assessment, community action plans, local knowledge and the difference between consultation and genuine participation.
Core rules and concepts
- CBDRM places communities at the centre of hazard, vulnerability and capacity assessment and action planning. It combines local knowledge with technical data and links community plans to local government planning and resources.
- A community action plan identifies priorities, responsibilities, timelines and resources. It should be owned by the community and supported, not replaced, by external agencies.
- Inclusion means women, men, girls, boys, older people, persons with disabilities, indigenous groups and other marginalised groups shape decisions and benefit from actions. A twin-track approach combines mainstream inclusion with targeted measures.
- Accessible early warning, evacuation and shelter are inclusion tests, not afterthoughts.
Worked example
A village conducts a vulnerability and capacity assessment. Women report that the evacuation route crosses a river and that the shelter lacks accessible toilets. Older residents rely on radio, while younger people use mobile phones. The community action plan assigns evacuation route repairs to the local council, tests SMS alerts with volunteers, and designs shelter upgrades with disability representatives. The reasoning shows that the community is not a single interest group and that inclusion changes the plan’s content, not just who attends the meeting.
Traps that cost marks
- Treating “the community” as homogeneous.
- Counting attendance as participation.
- Defining disability only in medical terms.
- Excluding women from decisions about shelter and livelihoods.
- Producing an external plan that the community does not own.