Disasters disproportionately affect conflict-affected regions, where approximately two billion people reside, posing significant challenges for disaster risk reduction (DRR). This reality has increasingly spurred calls for violent conflict to be included in the global DRR agenda. However, consideration of peace has been lacking, despite that challenges for peace can distinctly impact capacities to set, pursue, and achieve DRR objectives. This study investigated how the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) engages with peace through a document analysis, revealing three key findings. First, the SFDRR does not mention “peace,” mirroring its lack of reference to conflict. Second, while peace-related terms appear throughout the SFDRR in themes related to partnership and all-of-society approaches, this engagement is superficial. Third, the SFDRR’s approach is fundamentally problematic for advancing peace due to its avoidance of the complex social and political dynamics inherent to disaster risk and its reduction. The SFDRR united United Nations Member States in its ambition to “leave no one behind,” but has taken approaches that smooth over diversity rather than strengthen pluralistic connections. A radical, integrated DRR-peacebuilding agenda must take conflict as the new starting point and carve new pathways toward peace including through disaster diplomacy and environmental peacebuilding. By embracing the ambiguity between war and peace and addressing the root causes of risk, societies can cultivate peaceful interactions and collectively advance safety. This study concludes with recommendations for a global DRR policy that not only implicitly relies on peace but actively contributes to peacebuilding in the world’s diverse and divided societies.

Humanitarian action and disaster risk reduction are essential in addressing global vulnerability to disasters and crises. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR), adopted in 2015, has garnered significant attention for its role in fostering disaster risk reduction. The role the SFDRR plays vis-à-vis humanitarian action represents a crucial space where policies, practices, and priorities (could) converge and diverge. Understanding the dynamics of this SFDRR-humanitarian action relationship is essential for advancing both disaster risk reduction and humanitarian goals. This article comprehensively examines this relationship since the adoption of the SFDRR. Employing a multimethod approach, including a systematic literature review, mapping exercise, and expert interviews, the study identified key themes and challenges in integrating the SFDRR within humanitarian action. Findings indicate that while SFDRR references are prevalent in post-disaster discussions, their full integration into humanitarian strategies remains nascent. Notably, advancements in anticipatory humanitarian action represent primary arenas for SFDRR integration within humanitarianism. The role of the International Disaster Response Law in bridging SFDRR and humanitarianism also emerged as an important finding. The study also underscored blurred distinctions between humanitarianism and disaster-related actions, highlighting the limited systemic integration of the SFDRR by traditional humanitarian actors. Moving forward, the study advocates for improved collaboration between humanitarian and disaster management sectors to strengthen disaster prevention, response, and mitigation. By examining the relationship between SFDRR objectives and modern humanitarian practices, this research aims to enhance disaster preparedness, response, and recovery strategies, alongside other crisis management approaches.

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) is at its 10th anniversary amidst a rapidly changing climate, which, together with social vulnerabilities, have led to significant impacts on human health and well-being. In the climate change and health field, the term “climate-related health risks” is often used while the term “health disaster” is less common. This article identifies opportunities and challenges that the SFDRR presents for the intersection between climate change and health. The SFDRR, through disaster risk reduction for climate change and health, complements international health- and climate change-related agendas. It expands the perspective of climate change and health beyond the classical health sphere by highlighting the importance of addressing the underlying drivers of disaster risk, most of them related to social vulnerabilities. Additionally, strong governance and leadership from the health sector might foster the integration of health-centered perspectives into climate change policies. However, the SFDRR faces challenges due to differential capacities among countries, which limit effective implementation. The role of politics, power, and diverse interests needs to be recognized in disaster-related decision-making processes, as well as the many barriers for global and systematic disaster-related data structures that limit a comprehensive understanding of disaster risk. The 10th anniversary of the SFDRR represents an opportunity to reflect on the many opportunities that it represents and on the challenges that need to be addressed. By looking for synergies among diverse agendas, initiatives, and collaborations, the SFDRR sheds some light on protecting people’s health and well-being.

This autoethnographic study presents a historical perspective on disaster risk reduction (DRR) at the local level, with the case study of the city of Tunja in Colombia. We analyze the impact that colonization, the independence period, and recent history have had on the creation and reduction of disaster risks in this city. We offer a holistic perspective that shows the interactions of the impact of inequality on Indigenous populations, lack of urban planning, deforestation and the planting of invasive plant species, among other factors, which in combination with natural hazards, such as heavy rainfall, increase disaster risks. We conclude that although the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 is a fundamental instrument to promote risk reduction, in the local context of Tunja, the framework as such is not seen as a guide or parameter. The Colombian Disaster Risk Management Law is the main guide to advance risk reduction. This study demonstrates how DRR is not an isolated process, but a process that encompasses the general well-being of the population. We demonstrate from our lived perspective how access to public education and school feeding, as well as other social protection measures, increase the resilience of the population, making them better able to cope with adversity due to different hazards. This local perspective, with a historical review of a small city in the middle of the Andes, demonstrates the importance of continuing to prioritize and invest in measures that contribute to the population’s well-being as a way to reduce disaster risks, including adapting to our changing climate.

This article aims to assess Algeria’s progress in implementing the seven global targets of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) between 2015 and 2022. To achieve this, both qualitative and quantitative data were collected to meet the study’s objectives. The primary goal is to report on Algeria’s alignment with the seven SFDRR targets, considering the four priority areas of the framework as they relate to these targets. The article also seeks to explore the governance of risk in Algeria in the context of the SFDRR’s implementation. Over the past decade, Algeria has experienced a range of disasters involving natural hazards, including floods, storms, droughts, extreme temperatures, wildfires, earthquakes, transport crashes, and outbreaks of diseases such as COVID-19. These disasters, along with other endogenous causes not addressed in this article, have significantly hindered the country’s progress toward key global objectives, including the SFDRR.

Over the past decade, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have made progress in implementing the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR). Still, significant challenges remain in assessing its impact. The region’s high levels of inequality and vulnerability to disasters continue to hinder the effectiveness of disaster risk reduction (DRR) efforts. This article emphasizes the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach in SFDRR implementation, particularly the role of regional intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and networks that promote collaboration among civil society, the private sector, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, youth, and marginalized groups. Despite government efforts to integrate SFDRR into national policies, gaps in stakeholder engagement, resource allocation, and governance limit DRR effectiveness. The article underscores the value of co-production for involving communities to contribute to designing DRR strategies that address their specific needs. Co-produced strategies can bridge the gap between high-level policies and practical solutions by leveraging local knowledge and fostering partnerships. The review of regional networks’ efforts highlights the central role of IGOs in coordinating DRR strategies. These networks help create innovative solutions that empower communities. The article advocates for thinking about the subsequent phases post-SFDRR, drawing on the lessons from the regional networks and calls for more strategic collaborations and experimentation as a model to promote effective governance of DRR by engaging multiple stakeholders to design and pilot locally-driven solutions that can accelerate the implementation of the priorities of the SFDRR to reduce disaster risks in LAC through collaborations that build capacity through action and ensure meaningful engagement.

Islands have come to be seen as a distinct object of disaster risk and climate change policy and research. This is reflected in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR), which specifies Small Island Developing States (SIDS) as in need of specialized policies, attention, and support. This article directs an island studies perspective toward the SFDRR, discussing obstacles to the framework’s implementation in island contexts. Focus is placed on two interrelated sets of issues: (1) problematic aspects of the concepts of “development” as it is applied to islands (particularly in the SIDS category); and (2) international cooperation, militarism, and geopolitics. The study found that although island societies can benefit from the attention brought to them by the SFDRR, the framework engages in rhetoric that may limit island possibilities and potentials while distracting from more fundamental changes that should be made by other state and non-state actors.

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) has been a guide for disaster risk governance globally. With the popularization of the vulnerability paradigm, gender has been established as one of the social determinants of disaster risk. However, it is often used interchangeably with “women” based on the binary categorization of gender identity that dominates, including in the Western world, reducing it to a demographic variable denied of any voice, context, or history. This article explores gender beyond the binary in the SFDRR, disaster risk reduction (DRR), and the broader risk governance mechanisms through examples of hijras from India and baklas from the Philippines. It delves into a discussion on the influence of dominant Western discourses in the creation of gender categories and their non-Western realities through a post-colonial lens. The article deals with questions on hybridity of identities, power, control, resistance, leverage, and the unique capacities of gender diverse groups at the time of disasters and beyond, while investigating the space of such groups within global frameworks like the SFDRR.

Bringing together global efforts to enhance the implementation of warnings in managing vulnerabilities, hazards, risks, and disasters is essential to saving lives and for long-term vulnerability reduction. Ten years into the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR), there has been a renewed focus on warnings following the 2022 announcement by the United Nations Secretary-General of the five-year goal of Early Warnings for All. Delivering on Target G of the SFDRR has subsequently generated significant outcomes, however substantial gaps remain with implementing effective early warning systems (EWS). This article charts the policy evolution of warnings within the UN context and outlines the progress and remaining gaps of EWS in the SFDRR to date. Three key gaps that hinder the effective delivery of SFDRR and beyond are identified: (1) the need for common understanding of warning processes and terminology, such as multi-hazard EWS, and further elucidation of indicators used to measure and chart progress; (2) the need to mobilize and strengthen existing EWS, many of which are not formally recognized yet do the work of warnings across actors and entities, especially in fragile or resource-poor contexts; and (3) the need to foster collaboration between the multitude of actors and approaches involved in all forms of warnings, including people-centered warnings to address diversity and inclusivity, and integrate top-down and bottom-up approaches across sectors. Significant barriers to working across the numerous silos (institutional, geographical, political, and scientific) must be overcome to generate effective people-centered multi-hazard EWS to support disaster risk reduction in the future. Recommendations on how to fill these gaps in future frameworks are provided, to support people-centered, integrated warnings for all.

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) aims to play a fundamental role in increasing global resilience. The focus of this research is to consider analysis of risks and recovery related to satellite disruption within the context of the SFDRR. Analysis of satellite disruption has often been more technical and less focused on supporting recovery. This research considers the framework’s relevance for preventing disruption to satellite systems and global recovery measures for related disasters that emerge due to dependence on satellites. First, the use of space terminology within the framework is considered. Next, principles within the SFDRR that are relevant to satellite system disruption are highlighted, and this is followed by presentation of key gaps relevant to this disruption, before potential improvements to expand the framework are proposed. This article outlines how concepts within the SFDRR could help to improve recovery from a disaster that occurs due to worst-case-scenario type satellite disruption. In this case, critical satellites are disrupted, preventing access to fundamental services such as navigation and timing. The aims of this research are to consider how the SFDRR can be expanded to consider disruption to critical satellite systems, by identifying aspects of the framework that are applicable to this type of disaster. Another outcome is to contribute to wider disaster recovery literature by encouraging consideration of disasters involving disruption to digital services.

The Mid-Term Review of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) recognizes the “interconnections and interdependencies” of disaster resilience. Conceptual and empirical research suggests that the field currently lacks innovative methodologies to enhance associated policy and practice that actively harnesses these relational dimensions. To help address these gaps, we apply Paul Ricœur’s concept of being in the world (“Oneself as Another”) to explore what a relationally-focused understanding might offer for the operationalization of the SFDRR’s 13 Guiding Principles. Our article outlines discursive, concrete, and practical benefits when relational approaches are fostered, including: (1) addressing shortcomings of structuralist, instrumentalist, and rationalist approaches; and (2) achieving more cohesive, ethical, and meaningful disaster resilience outcomes. Our analysis also reveals the particular risks of continuing to focus on the structural organizing of the constituent elements of the SFDRR’s disaster resilience policy and practice instead of attending to relational dimensions and processes. These risks include limiting ourselves to an instrumentally-driven, disconnected discourse and narrative of responses to disaster that favor the Self gaining resilience “through” Another. Thus, the alternative we illustrate, and advocate for, is a relational style of building resilience through prioritizing a robust sense of Oneself “with” Another. It is through this sense of “with” that can enable a shift from asymmetrical to symmetrical forms of policy and practice for future disaster resilience.