Towards policy-relevant science and scientifically informed policy: Political economy of the use of knowledge and research evidence in urban resilience interventions in the Philippines

The United Nations 2009 Global Report on Disaster Risk Reduction ranked the Philippines as the third most disaster-prone country in the world, and the country with the largest population exposed and displaced every year due to natural disasters. When natural disasters such as violent floods, typhoons or earthquakes occur, the damage has long lasting effects, not only on the economy but more importantly, on people’s lives and a community’s sense of security and normalcy. While natural disasters cannot be avoided, it is the duty of governments and civil society in general to develop initiatives that reduce the negative effects natural disasters have on people’s lives. In this study we look at urban resilience polices – the tools governments use to make decisions and implement disaster risk reduction, as well as initiatives aimed at reducing the negative effects of natural disasters. We define urban resilience as ‘the ability of an urban system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions.’ (UNISDR 2009). As noted by Ashley (2011) , ‘we know how good decision-making works. It should be factbased, deliberative and tested by real arguments. This means it needs people who have the knowledge to engage and the self-confidence to challenge assumptions.’ To paraphrase Ashley, we could say that ‘we know how good policy works. It should be fact-based, deliberative and tested by real arguments.’ This study examines whether the processes that govern policy and decision-making on resilience to natural disasters in urban areas of the Philippines are good, i.e. fact-based and deliberative, and tested by real arguments.