Territorial Resilience in Disasters and Accidents

In this second article, I approach the perspective of resilience based on the observation of some of the main known accidents and disasters. The idea here is to provide the reader with a vision of the whole, of the 13 articles, whose cases will later be further analyzed.

Every accident or disaster must be considered a source of learning.

In the aeronautical sector, each accident is meticulously analyzed by specialized investigative bodies, such as the Center for Investigation and Prevention of Aeronautical Accidents (CENIPA) in Brazil, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in the United States, the Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung (BFU) in Germany, the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la Sécurité de l'Aviation Civile (BEA) in France and the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) in the United Kingdom. CENIPA, linked to the Brazilian Air Force, acts independently and systematically to investigate aeronautical accidents, identifying their causes and proposing safety recommendations.

It is important to highlight that CENIPA does not look for culprits, but rather understands the factors that contributed to the accident, with the aim of preventing future occurrences. The CENIPA process involves the collection and analysis of accident data, interviews with witnesses and studies of human and operational factors. 

These investigations result in detailed reports with specific recommendations to prevent future tragedies. This continuous process of review and improvement has contributed significantly to making aviation one of the safest modes of transport.

Inspired by the rigor and systematic methodology of the aviation industry, we should adopt a similar approach to other types of major accidents and disasters. 

However, it is important to highlight that in the context of this article, when making this parallel, our focus is not on discussing measures to avoid accidents. While preventing accidents and guarding against disasters is essential, our approach here is different. We recognize that, even with all care, accidents will still happen. And, when they occur, it will be essential to implement comprehensive reparation actions.

Therefore, it is crucial that, after facing the challenges of comprehensive post-disaster repairs and overcoming the difficulties arising from what was not foreseen, we carry out an in-depth retrospective exercise. 

Supposing we could go back in time to before an accident, without changing the event itself, but modifying all the practices and procedures that could make repairs faster and fairer, what would we do? This reflection exercise is fundamental for continuous learning and for improving strategies and good practices. Territorial resilience emerges as a crucial concept to ensure that communities affected by disasters can recover and adapt in an effective and sustainable way. 

This article explores how resilience can be built and maintained, using examples from recent disasters to illustrate lessons learned and best practices developed. 

ACCIDENTS AND DISASTERS

In recent years, several major accidents and disasters have occurred around the world, causing significant impacts in both human, material and environmental terms. Let's see:

Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico, United States (2010): The Deepwater Horizon disaster, which occurred on April 20, 2010, resulted in the explosion of a platform operated by BP, causing the deaths of 11 workers and the spill of 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico over the course of 87 years. days. The event impacted 11,000 km² of ocean area and more than 510 km of coastline, resulting in the deaths of 6,800 animals. Economically, the loss to tourism between May and July 2010 was estimated at US$900 million. BP established the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) with a fund of US$20 billion, processing more than 1 million claims and paying US$6.5 billion to more than 220,000 claimants. Investments of US$14 billion were made in repair projects. 

Fukushima Nuclear Accident, Japan (2011): The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, which occurred on March 11, 2011, was caused by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and a subsequent tsunami, resulting in the meltdown of the cores of reactors 1, 2 and 3, and hydrogen explosions. Approximately 150,000 people were evacuated, and radiation levels released included 1.3 x 10^17 Bq of iodine-131 and 6.1 x 10^15 Bq of cesium-137, comparable to 10-20% from the Chernobyl disaster. Compensation and recovery costs were estimated at US$63.75 billion, with monthly payments of US$750 per person evacuated and an additional US$6,750 for those who returned. In total, 160,000 people were compensated, totaling US$6.375 billion in compensation. The response involved more than 50,000 workers, highlighting the need for robust governance and effective control mechanisms to mitigate socioeconomic and environmental impacts, while full recovery of the affected area remains a long-term challenge.

Failure of the Fundão Dam in Mariana, Brazil (2015): On November 5, 2015, the Fundão dam in Mariana, Minas Gerais, failed, releasing 34 million cubic meters of mining waste and contaminating 680 kilometers of water bodies. Operated by Samarco Mineração SA (Vale SA and BHP Billiton Brasil Ltda.), the disaster caused 19 deaths and displaced more than 500 people, destroying the communities of Bento Rodrigues, Paracatu de Baixo and Gesteira. The Renova Foundation, responsible for recovery, runs 42 reparation programs, with total costs of R$ 36.56 billion until June 2024, including R$ 16.57 billion in compensation to 439,500 people

Dam failure in Brumadinho, Brazil (2019): On January 25, 2019, the B1 dam at the Córrego do Feijão Mine, operated by Vale SA, failed, releasing 12 million cubic meters of mining waste. The disaster resulted in 272 deaths and one person still missing, impacting around 100,000 people and affecting an area of 249,500 square meters. Vale paid R$ 3.4 billion in compensation and signed a Comprehensive Reparation Agreement of R$ 37.7 billion for environmental recovery and compensation actions. So far, R$ 23.6 billion has been disbursed. Safety measures included the elimination of 12 of 30 upstream dams and the restoration of roads and local health systems.

Braskem cases in Maceió, Brazil (2018): In March 2018, an earthquake in Maceió, Alagoas, caused by the extraction of rock salt by Braskem, resulted in cracks in buildings and streets, affecting approximately 17,000 residents and vacating around 4,500 properties. Braskem implemented an extensive Financial Compensation and Relocation Support Program, disbursing R$ 409 million in temporary aid and presenting 3,555 compensation proposals, of which 3,052 were accepted. The national production of Chlorine Soda was impacted by 33%, affecting 530 direct jobs and 2,000 indirect jobs. Geological stabilization measures were adopted, including the closure of 35 salt wells, with 4 plugged and 9 closed through continuous monitoring. Urban mobility and social compensation projects, worth R$ 1.66 billion, were developed for the region's recovery, setting a significant precedent in industrial disaster management.

Australian Bushfires (2019-2020): The bushfires in Australia between 2019 and 2020, known as “Black Summer”, resulted in unprecedented devastation. Approximately 18 million hectares were burned, affecting 3 billion animals and destroying more than 3,500 homes. Human losses were significant, with 33 lives lost and a direct economic impact of USD 70 billion. For recovery, the government allocated USD 1.4 billion and the Australian Red Cross raised approximately USD 140 million. More than 10,000 firefighters, with support from 12 countries, fought the fires. Approximately 38,000 compensation claims were registered, totaling payments of approximately USD 1.61 billion. These fires have highlighted the urgent need for climate action and improvements in forest management.

Floods in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (2024): The floods of May 2024 in Rio Grande do Sul, caused by persistent and intense rain, resulted in devastating floods that affected 456 municipalities and more than 206 thousand properties. Extensive damage occurred to infrastructure, disrupting essential services and causing major economic losses, especially in agriculture and local commerce. Approximately 80,573 people were displaced, requiring emergency assistance. Emergency responses mobilized thousands of personnel and significant resources for rescue and assistance. Compensation and financial support programs, such as Reconstruction Aid, were implemented, although fraud was suspected in some applications. Governance of the remediation process involved a state committee and a dedicated agency, focusing on transparency and future resilience. The event highlighted the importance of preparedness and community resilience to face climate disasters.

These examples illustrate the complexity and scale of the challenges faced in disaster repair. Each event provides valuable lessons to improve territorial resilience processes, highlighting the need for integrated and sustainable approaches to the recovery and adaptation of affected communities. In some of these cases, the cause was linked to natural events and, in others, man-made. 

Territorial Resilience

Territorial resilience is a fundamental concept to ensure that communities potentially affected by disasters can recover and adapt effectively and sustainably, should they occur. To fully understand this concept, it is essential to explore its different dimensions and theoretical approaches.

Definition and Theories

Territorial resilience can be defined as the ability of a territory to resist, absorb, adapt and recover from adverse events, minimizing damage and ensuring the continuity of essential functions. According to Davoudi et al. (2013), this concept is multidimensional, covering social, economic and environmental aspects. Territorial resilience theories highlight the importance of complex adaptive systems, in which the interaction between different components of the territory (infrastructure, population, economy, ecosystems) is crucial for overall resilience.

Absorption and Adaptation Capacity

Territorial resilience involves the ability of a region to absorb the impact of natural or human-induced disasters, minimizing damage and allowing effective adaptation to new post-event conditions. This ability to absorb and adapt is essential for the recovery and continuity of territorial functions, as discussed by Folke et al. (2016).

Dimensions of Territorial Resilience:

• Social: The social dimension of territorial resilience involves the ability of communities to organize themselves, support each other and adapt to the impacts of disasters. This includes mobilizing social support networks, strengthening social capital and promoting community cohesion. According to DeVerteuil and Golubchikov (2016), active community participation in planning and recovery processes is fundamental to increasing social resilience.
• Economic: Economic resilience refers to a territory's ability to maintain and restore its economic activities after a disaster. This involves diversifying economic bases, supporting small and medium-sized companies and creating rapid response financial mechanisms. Financial sustainability is crucial to guarantee the continuity of economic functions and the well-being of affected populations, as highlighted by Kim and Lim (2016).
• Environmental: The environmental dimension of territorial resilience focuses on the ability of ecosystems to recover and adapt to the impacts of disasters. This includes the protection and restoration of natural habitats, the implementation of green infrastructure and the promotion of sustainable use practices for natural resources. Folke (2016) highlights that environmental resilience is vital to maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services that sustain human life.

Fast and Efficient Recovery 

This dimension encompasses the territory's ability to quickly restore critical functions and essential infrastructure, ensuring the continuity of social and economic activities and the well-being of the affected population. According to Elmqvist (2014), fast and efficient recovery is essential to reduce disruption time and minimize the negative impacts of disasters.

Proactive Strengthening 

It goes beyond the immediate response, involving anticipatory and pre-accident or pre-disaster strategies, taken in the long term and which strengthen the social, economic and environmental structure of the region to resist and adapt to future adversities. According to Kates and Clark (1996), integrating resilience into territorial development policies is fundamental to building a safer and more sustainable future.

Integration of Resilience Measures 

To build and maintain territorial resilience, it is essential to integrate resilience measures into urban and rural planning policies and practices. This includes developing resilient infrastructure, implementing early warning systems, promoting community education and awareness, and strengthening institutional capacities for disaster response and recovery.

Building Resilience: A Complex and Gradual Process

Building territorial resilience does not occur quickly or simply. It is a complex process that demands engagement from various actors, including governments, the private sector, civil society organizations and the affected community itself. This engagement is necessary to identify and analyze weaknesses and opportunities, create a robust social fabric, and develop a multidimensional development strategy.

Detailed studies on vulnerabilities and risks are essential to understand the most critical areas that need strengthening. Furthermore, it is essential to promote social cohesion and inclusion, ensuring that all voices are heard and that the solutions developed meet the needs of all segments of the population.

The implementation of a multidimensional development strategy involves actions on several fronts, such as the creation of public policies that encourage sustainable practices, investments in resilient infrastructure, and the promotion of education and training of communities. Only with an integrated and collaborative approach is it possible to build truly resilient territories, capable of facing and overcoming adversities in an effective and sustainable way.

The Role of the UN in Territorial Resilience

The UN, through the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), plays a fundamental role in promoting territorial resilience globally. UNDRR promotes the implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, which sets targets and indicators to monitor progress in disaster risk reduction at national and local levels. UNDRR also supports cities and communities through the Making Cities Resilient 2030 (MCR2030) campaign, which offers a three-step “resilience roadmap”, helping cities improve their resilience over time with access to a range of tools and guidance techniques provided by different partners.

Additionally, the United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat) works to strengthen urban and territorial resilience, promoting sustainable urban planning and disaster risk reduction. UN-Habitat, through its Global Urban Resilience Program, empowers cities and communities to deal with the impacts of disasters and build lasting resilience.

Comprehensive Repair

Comprehensive reparation is a complex and multidimensional process that aims to restore the lives of affected families, compensate for the damage suffered, ensure the resumption of economic and social activities, promote environmental recovery and restore the affected economic value chains. 

Definition of Comprehensive Repair

Comprehensive reparation refers to a set of actions aimed at restoring, to the greatest extent possible, pre-disaster living conditions for affected people and communities. This includes financial compensation, reconstruction of infrastructure, reestablishment of essential services, psychological and social support, environmental recovery and restoration of economic value chains. According to the UN, full reparation must consider all damages suffered, including material losses, moral damages and impacts on the victims' physical and mental health.

Repair Strategies:

• Financial Compensation: Compensation is an essential part of comprehensive reparation, providing victims with financial resources to compensate for material losses and allow them to rebuild their lives. These compensations generally cover moral damages, material damages, loss of profits and offer some financial assistance until full reparation is completed. To calculate these compensations, it is crucial to construct a damage matrix that values ​​all categories to be monetized. These damage matrices must be constructed in a participatory manner and approved by the actors of the justice system so that they have the force of legal definitiveness in the process. Compensation policies must also be created, clarifying the eligibility criteria given that the incidence of fraud in the process is common.
• Infrastructure Reconstruction: Reconstruction of damaged infrastructure is critical to restoring normality in affected areas. This includes rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, roads and other public services. These efforts are crucial to ensuring the continuity of economic and social activities in the affected areas.
• Environmental Recovery: Environmental restoration is a vital component of comprehensive remediation. This includes cleaning and decontaminating affected areas, restoring ecosystems, and implementing sustainable practices to prevent future disasters. Environmental restoration not only helps restore ecological balance, but also ensures the long-term health and well-being of local communities​
• Psychosocial Support: Psychological and social support is crucial to helping victims deal with the trauma and losses they have suffered. Psychosocial support programs should be implemented to provide emotional assistance, counseling and community support. Studies indicate that the mental health of victims is often overlooked, but is vital to long-term recovery​ 
• Economic Repair: Economic reparation is essential to reestablish the value chains and economic activities impacted by the disaster. When a value chain or economic activity is affected, the impact is multifactorial and on a wide scale, affecting several actors and sectors. Economic recovery must include measures to support local businesses, create jobs, encourage entrepreneurship and invest in productive infrastructure. Restoring value chains helps ensure the long-term economic sustainability and well-being of affected communities

Challenges in Implementing Comprehensive Reparation:

• Complexity of Originating Conditions: One of the critical points of the comprehensive repair process involves determining the “original conditions”, that is, the situation prior to the accident or disaster. The lack of updated information on previous conditions, the multiple correlation of causes and effects, and the difficulty of establishing an exact ground zero make this aspect very difficult. According to studies, the available data is often not sufficient to simulate the real impacts after the event, making it difficult to provide adequate resources for full repairs. 
• Cessation of Damages: Damage is considered “ceased” when proof with technical, legal and – the most difficult – social force is presented. For example, the cessation of an economic damage resulting from loss of income is only considered legally complete if evidence is presented that the affected person has resumed their activity, either in the one originally impacted or in a new activity. This evidentiary process normally involves studies by experts, so that they are impartial and accurate. But once cessation is proven and temporary aid is interrupted, social resistance is very strong. 
• Coordination between Stakeholders: Comprehensive reparation requires effective coordination between different actors, including governments, companies, NGOs, the justice system, representatives of those affected and local communities. A lack of communication and collaboration can result in fragmented and ineffective efforts and, sometimes, conflicting interests tend to make the process slower than necessary.​
• Financial Sustainability: Another significant challenge is ensuring that financial resources are sufficient to cover all repair costs. In many cases, the companies responsible for the disasters do not have enough assets to pay all the compensation, and the amounts provisioned in balance sheets and insurance are insufficient. This means that the final cost often falls on society and the state, creating an additional financial burden for taxpayers and governments.

Importance of Comprehensive Repair

Comprehensive reparations are critical to ensuring that communities affected by disasters can fully recover and rebuild their lives. It is not just about restoring material conditions, but also about promoting social justice, human dignity and economic sustainability. Experience shows that a holistic and well-coordinated approach can make a significant difference in the recovery of affected communities.

Next Articles

This article is the second in a series exploring territorial resilience in disasters. In upcoming articles, we will continue to deepen our understanding of how communities can prepare for, respond to, and recover from adverse events. Each article will address a specific aspect of territorial resilience, providing a comprehensive and practical overview of the best strategies and approaches.

Article 3: Real Cases We will analyze relevant cases (cited in this article) to analyze the morphology of each case. At the end, we will discuss Brazil's peculiarities and how they influence, or should influence, risk management for both the state and the private sector.

Article 4: Lessons We Learned or Should Have Learned From the most recent experience, and perhaps one of the most successful in terms of time and scope of repair, we will discuss what we learned from the repair process. And more, how the justice system innovated in concepts linked to indirect damages, rough-justice, intelligence processes to deal with fraud, sociocultural cartographies for informal public recognition processes, among others. We will also talk about the governance models that were adopted, and what lessons we learned for future cases that, despite not wanting them to occur, will occur.

Article 5: A New Legal Basis We will evaluate the National Policy on the Rights of Populations Affected by Dams (PNAB) (PL 2,788/2019). How it happened, what real changes bring and how this should impact, from now on, the assessment of risks and responsibilities of businesses exposed to possible crisis situations, accidents or disasters.

Article 6: The Mining Sector The mining sector is, without a doubt, one of those with the greatest lessons to learn from what has happened. Either because the legal basis and jurisprudence of recent cases apply to this sector in particular, or because there is a significant amount of liabilities at risk whose territories must be assessed in light of their vulnerabilities and, in particular, their resilience . Acting in advance can be, more than a necessity, an opportunity.

Article 7: The Wind and Photovoltaic Energy Production Sector Although it is not possible to imagine that a sector as recent as this one is linked to problems similar to broken dams in terms of impacts, the reports reaching the Brazilian Ministry of Mines and Energy are worrying. Large populations reporting recurring impacts and, in a sense, a new concept of “dam failure” occurring. Let's analyze these cases and better understand what recent learnings bring us to alert.

Article 8: Monoculture Sectors Would monoculture and its potential impacts on biodiversity or water bodies be a new form of impact on scale?

Article 9: What is your Dam? In this article, we will explore the metaphor of “every business has a dam to call its own”. In it, we will explore how recent accidents and disasters in Brazil created a jurisprudence, a legal body and a social body that learned to demand and receive compensation for damages. And as this new “social, legal and economic culture”, it should guide risk analyzes and business modeling in light of impact risks.

Article 10: Recommendations for Companies We will consolidate practical guidelines so that companies can improve their risk management and resilience-building practices in territories potentially vulnerable to their operations. We will discuss the importance of corporate responsibility, disaster preparedness, and recovery strategies.

Article 11: Recommendations to Territories Suggestions for communities and territories to increase their resilience to disasters will be addressed. We will emphasize the importance of participatory planning, community education and resilient infrastructure.

Article 12: Recommendations for Social Movements We will analyze the crucial role of social movements in promoting post-disaster resilience and justice. We will discuss strategies to strengthen advocacy, mobilization and support for affected communities.

Article 13: Recommendations to Public Authorities Finally, we will discuss policies and practices that governments can adopt to strengthen territorial resilience. We will emphasize the need for integrated public policies, interinstitutional cooperation and investment in resilient infrastructure.

Bibliographic references

1. Davoudi, S., Brooks, E., & Mehmood, A. (2013). Evolutionary resilience and strategies for climate adaptation. Planning Practice & Research, 28(3), 307-322. doi:10.1080/02697459.2013.787695
2. Folke, C. (2016). Resilience. In Oxford research encyclopedia of environmental science. OxfordUniversity Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.8
3. DeVerteuil, G., & Golubchikov, O. (2016). Can resilience be redeemed? City, 20(1), 143-151. doi:10.1080/13604813.2015.1125714
4. Kim, D., & Lim, U. (2016). Urban resilience in climate change adaptation: a conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8(4), 405. doi:10.3390/su8040405
5. Elmqvist, T. (2014). Urban resilience thinking. Solutions, 5(5), 26-30.
6. Kates, R. W., & Clark, W. C. (1996). Environmental surprise: expecting the unexpected? Environment, 38(2), 6-34. doi:10.1080/00139157.1996.9933458
7. UNDRR. (2024). Words into Action guidelines: Implementation guide for local disaster risk reduction and resilience strategies. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Retrieved from undrr.org
8. UN-Habitat. (2021). Program Support – Urban Resilience, I (Temporary Job Opening). United Nations Human Settlements Program. Retrieved from unhabitat.org
9. Ferreira, A.J.D., Bento-Gonçalves, A., & Vieira, A. (2020). Integration of resilience thinking in environmental impact assessment: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Environmental Management, 264, 110415. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110415
10. United Nations. (2011). Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework. United Nations. Retrieved from un.org