MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181582991 · doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102459

Managing city-scale slow-onset disasters: Learning from Cape Town's 2015–2018 drought disaster planning

2021· article· en· W3181582991 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment for International DevelopmentAXA Research FundSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsEnvironmental planningEmergency managementResilience (materials science)Government (linguistics)Scale (ratio)Disaster risk reductionPsychological resilienceBusinessRisk managementEnvironmental resource managementUrban planningPlan (archaeology)GeographyEngineeringPolitical scienceCivil engineeringCartographyEnvironmental sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disaster planning for slow-onset city-wide shocks will be become increasingly necessary, particularly as cities face increasingly severe climate hazards. This paper provides unique insight into the disaster planning and management that was undertaken by the City of Cape Town government in response to its most severe hydrological drought on record. It describes how risk was understood and why decisions were made on key elements of the plan, including trigger points, risk prioritisation and mitigation, and the location and design of points of distribution of water rations for the public. Reflecting upon the authors’ experience and interviews with senior City officials who worked on the drought disaster planning and response, the paper extracts five key lessons learnt that have since been applied during the COVID-19 pandemic: (i) the need for cross-functional planning and response skills, (ii) the need for integrated, up-to-date and scale-appropriate data; (iii) the importance of scenario-based simulations, communication and rapid costing to enable the rapid scaling-up of a response; (iv) the value of being able to use outsourced expert capacity effectively; and (v) the application of previously used disaster management and planning experience to build resilience in cities. These lessons, captured in a visual framework, help reflect on capabilities required for responding to future city-scale disasters. The paper provides an informative case study for other cities and risk managers, and will be particularly useful for global South contexts that face drought and other slow-onset disasters, most recently illustrated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it