Introduction

The climate crisis is continuously impacting many countries with more devastating consequences in Africa which has low organisational resilience to tackle the ramifications of climate change (CC) (UN, 2020). This was emphasised in Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt) during the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNCCC; COP 27). Informed by contemporary CC research which indicates increasing intensity/frequency and duration of climate risks over the next decades (IPCC, 2020), governments were criticized for limited action on disaster/climate risk reduction actions and urged to be more proactive in reducing disaster/climate risks (UNCCC, 2022). Given the potential ramifications of climate change, the need for urgent climate action has never been so pressing! Before the Sharm el-Sheikh conference, very little progress had been made to reduce CC effects although during COP 21 in France a few years earlier, more ambitious actions at reducing the effects of CC were agreed including through disaster/CC education.

As emphasised by priority three of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) (2005–2015), countries should embed innovative measures for safety and resilience at all levels (local, regional/state, national), including the use of knowledge/education (UNISDR, 2005). DRR education provides knowledge and a better understanding of the causes of disasters and measures to reduce/mitigate disaster risks (Adiyoso and Kanegae, 2010). Hence, the reason education is perceived as a central apparatus for enhancing CC/DRR resilience (UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012). Since the disaster risk reduction (DRR) concept encapsulates efforts at minimising disaster/climate risks, DRR education also aims to educate about CC-induced risk reduction. Hence CC education is discussed in this chapter under the auspices of DRR education.

As a discipline, DRR education is new (UNESCO, 2011) and perceived as cost-effective with enhanced operational and functional attributes for effective DRM (Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, 2008). As a novel area, there is great potential for DRR pedagogy beyond formal school/curriculum teaching (UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012; Patel, 2008). A study that was carried out by the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre (2008) found that communities that have been educated on disaster preparation are more proactive in responding to disasters/crises than those that have not received any tuition/learning. Similarly, low-risk awareness, consciousness and/or knowledge of climate/disaster hazards and vulnerabilities can adversely affect DRR preparation and recovery (UNESCO, 2011). With Africa having a relatively low resilience to climate/disaster risks (UN, 2020), enhancing risk reduction through education is, therefore, vital.

Africa is susceptible to CC due to many factors including a projected increase in population growth. Coastal towns/cities with very high population densities are relatively more vulnerable to climate risks such as storms, rise in sea level, floods, hurricanes etc. (Bang & Burton, 2021). Arguably, the future of Africans is jeopardized if urgent action is not taken to mitigate the effects of CC on the continent (UN, 2020, 2022). Consequently, there is an urgent requirement for enhanced climate action (UNCCC, 2022) in Africa including mainstreaming DRR/CC education in DRR strategies from the community to national levels.

The motivation of this research is twofold: First, to assess the depth to which the African Regional Platforms (ARP) and High-Level Ministerial Meetings for DRR (hereinafter referred to as Platforms) have inculcated education as a vital instrument for mitigating disaster/climate risks. Second, this research seeks to use the determinants of DRR education to gauge the degree of embeddedness of DRR/CC education into the various Platforms. This study is innovative and arguably, pioneers research analysing the depth with which CC/DRR education has been immersed into the Platforms.

This chapter fosters understanding and knowledge of the importance of integrating CC/DRR education in the Platforms to facilitate the governance of disaster/climate risks and enriches the discourse on CC/DRR education at the regional Africa level. Literature on the subject will be enhanced, including accelerating climate action as emphasised in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13. By informing regional and national policies, including knowledge on CC/DRR education, this chapter argues that CC/DRR education is an invaluable risk aversion tool and should be inculcated into the African educational pedagogic system at all levels from primary school to University.

Succinct Appraisal of Underlying Concepts

Climate Change (CC)

The concept of CC discussed in this chapter is about the impact of climate risks (severe storms, hurricanes/cyclones, floods, etc.), with one of the worst being recurrent flash flooding (Bang and Burton, 2021). Of the various conceptualisations of CC, perhaps that of the United Nations is more succinct and considers CC as any change of climate observed over a comparable extended period which could be linked to natural climate variability (directly or indirectly) or resulting from anthropogenic activities (UNFCCC, 2011). Humanity is wary of CC because of the effects of climate risks that could have devastating consequences on various infrastructures, including ecosystems and public services (ibid). Its potential impact on human lives, livelihoods, well-being, health, socioeconomic, and cultural assets (IPCC, 2020) has intensified discussions on risk reduction strategies together with education on CC/DRR, which is the motivation of this chapter. In light of evidence indicating a rise in the severity, frequency and effects of climate risks (IPCC, 2020; Wing et al., 2018), debates on the most potent measures to mitigate the consequences are now a topical issue. As will be analysed later in the chapter, High-Level DRR discourses in Africa have addressed these concerns albeit with limitations.

Disaster Risks and DRR

The United Nations conceptualises disaster risk as “the potential loss of life, injury, or destroyed or damaged assets which could occur to a system, society or a community in a specific period of time, determined probabilistically as a function of hazard, exposure, vulnerability, and capacity” (UNISDR, 2017, p. 14). This definition aligns with the view of disaster risk in this chapter with CC perceived as a critical disaster risk posing a grave threat to humanity and economic growth worldwide (IPCC, 2020). Since climate risks constitute a core disaster risk, they can be managed through DRR, hence the discourse in this chapter also encapsulates climate risk mitigation.

DRR is usually perceived as a concept and practice of systematic risk reduction (including climate risks) and is aimed at reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing resilience to contemporary risk, averting emerging and/or new threats/risks, and ensuring residual risks are appropriately controlled (UNISDR, 2017). As underscored by UNESCO (2011), DRR/CC education is the best tool for mitigating these vulnerabilities/hazards and preventing them from becoming disasters. This is aptly discussed in the next section.

DRR/CC Education

The popular analogy “What people know is more important than what they have” denotes the relevance of education in enhancing resilience to CC/DRR. The conceptualisations of DRR education relevant to this chapter embrace that of UNESCO (2011) which perceives DRR education as fostering disaster management learning/teaching to alleviate lives/livelihoods and increase the resilience of communities/populations to disaster risks. In like manner, Nakano and Yamori (2021) consider disaster education as a knowledge acquisition activity involving teachers/instructors and students or learners where information, skills and expertise in preparing for, responding to, or proactively mitigating disaster/climate risks are shared. DRR education does not only involve formal teaching, the concept also encapsulates DRR/CC communication and/or information dissemination and raising awareness that encourages pre-emptive measures to increase resilience to disaster/climate risks (Delicado et al., 2017; Shaw & Krishnamurthy, 2010). Likewise, DRR education has been associated with disaster management planning (macro, meso, and micro levels), that involves assessment, protection, and response (Petal, 2008). As highlighted before, DRR/CC education is the central theme of discussion in this chapter, to assess its relevance in DRR discourses and practices at the highest regional level in Africa.

Contemporary Actions and Practices for DRR/CC Education: Succinct Perusal

Embedding DRR Education into Disaster Management Platforms/Meetings

International disaster management frameworks such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) (2015–2050) and the HFA (2005–2015) endorsed education in disaster risk consciousness and risk reduction at all levels (national, regional/provincial/state and local/community) as well as strengthening the culture of resilience/safety (UNISDR, 2005, 2015). In alignment with international frameworks, the African and Asian regional frameworks for DRR have urged their member countries to collect and dispense DRR/CC knowledge to foster risk reduction (Bang, 2023; Torani et al., 2019). In compliance, some governments have been designing novel DRR educational approaches to train the public, especially communities that are more prone to disaster/climate risks (Bosschaart et al., 2016; Kagawa and Selby, 2012). Nevertheless, as analysed later in the chapter, the degree of assimilation of DRR/CC education within the Platforms leaves much to be desired.

Benefits of CC/DRR Education

The literature mentions several advantages of CC/DRR education (traditional/formal): enhances measures for CC adaption; informs on awareness, knowledge and the appropriate skills for climate and disaster risks; offers insights on how the populace can reduce the effects (economic, cultural, social, impact) of climate/disasters risks; raises awareness on the appropriate actions, attitudes and/or behaviours required to confront, withstand, prepare for or bounce back after disasters/crises, as well as the desired risk reduction actions for lessening vulnerabilities/hazards plaguing individuals/communities (Patel, 2008; Rohrmann, 2008; UNESCO, 2011; UNISDR, 2015). O’Brien et al. (2006) and Cherniack (2008) opine that for effective DRR, it is essential to adopt a bespoke approach that targets individuals/groups with unique roles in DRR education and/or “at risk” communities. Examples include policymakers, educators (academics, teachers, professors), administrators (governors, directors, ministers etc.) service providers (emergency responders/rescuers, firefighters, volunteers, and relief/rescue teams etc.) and communities prone to/vulnerable to disaster risks (Dolatabadi et al., 2016; Torani et al., 2019). Torani et al. (2019) and Muttarak and Lutz (2014) analysed the effectiveness of DRR education and recommended that to maximise impact, the educational approach utilised (method of teaching and training) for the target communities or specific groups should be informed by their knowledge/experience, authority or leadership level, and level of educational attainment or qualification. The most vulnerable communities should be the first target for reasons discussed in the next section.

Prioritising the Most Vulnerable People

Vulnerability is conceptualised as situations caused by physical, socio-economic, and environmental elements or activities that make societies, countries, people, communities, or their various resources susceptible to hazard impacts. Vulnerable people/communities face unique challenges and therefore, need specialist help which could be in the form of education, training and/or sensitisation on risk management measures, which should be offered by disaster management professionals, specialists or educators (Muttarak & Pothisiri, 2013). The most vulnerable people such as the elderly, children and women, (Dolatabadi et al., 2016; Torani et al., 2019; UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012), require tailored disaster education, as discussed in the following paragraphs.

Specific gender issues have been associated with women who face distinct challenges during disasters (Eisenman et al., 2007; Wisner, 2006). Research has shown that after receiving basic training in disaster education, women became very active in the community to address risk issues. (Muzenda-Mudavanhu et al., 2016). Furthermore, it has been argued that when women are educated in DRR, the entire family will have a greater awareness of the issues since women are more proactive in disaster education at home (Muttarak and Pothisir, 2013; O’Brien et al., 2006).

Research-informed suggestions oblige disaster education for elderly and disabled people to focus mainly on their physical health and cognitive/mental ability in coping with, preparing for and responding to disaster risks (Thomas et al., 2015). For instance, there is evidence that training or informing/educating people with disabilities can help them survive disasters since the ability to save themselves with minimal assistance would have been enhanced (Morrow, 1999; Torani et al., 2019). This is similar for children.

Children are considered vulnerable to disasters, partly because they are emotionally and physically dependent on their parents/adults for protection against natural hazard-induced disasters, crises, and emergencies (UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012; Bosschaart et al., 2016; Tuladhar et al., 2015). The advantages of teaching children about disasters at an early age have been considered an innovative approach to DRR since children will grow with the knowledge in them and studies have shown that children hardly forget what they learned while they were younger (Bray, 2000). Disaster education in children will inform their knowledge of preventive and preparedness measures with an increased tendency to act for their safety during disasters (Bosschaart et al., 2016). Furthermore, there is a greater potential to educate children in their homes, which easily enhances their disaster risk perception (Sawada, 2007; Torani et al., 2019; Faber et al., 2014).

Despite the benefits and good practices for DRR education, it has been acknowledged that although DRR has the potential to foster knowledge on risk aversion awareness/consciousness, the overarching motivation for anticipatory risk reduction actions is scarcely achieved. Contrarily, Wisner (2006) reiterated that limited knowledge and low awareness/understanding of disaster risks unfavourably affect community resilience and preparation for any forthcoming disaster risks. That is why education on disaster/climate risks is the focus of this chapter with the discourse and application in Africa.

Assessing CC/DRR Education Discourse Within the Various ARPs

During the ARPs, national and international DRR stakeholders—regional stakeholders (economic communities/entities, directors/ministers from governments) and international development organisations converge to discuss/share experiences, lessons learned, skills and insights on any advancement in DRR efforts in Africa. Delivering Member States’ pledges to the African Union’s (AU) Programme of Action (PoA) of implementing the guidelines of the SFDRR/HFA and adopting the outcomes of the Platform is the key motivation for these High-Level meetings (UNDRR, 2021). Eight regional Platforms have occurred in Africa between 2005 and 2021. The next section elaborates on DRR education during the meetings including the AU’s PoA for implementing the SFDRR.

The 1st ARP for DRR was formed in Nairobi Kenya between the 26th and 27th of April 2007. Organised as a consultative meeting, the motive of this maiden gathering of High-Level officials was to assess improvements made in the application of DRR measures promised during the 2005–2015 HFA and the Africa PoA for DRR. This first meeting underscored the need to combat CC through the strengthening of institutional mechanisms to create what the organizers called “Ministers for Climate Change”. Discussions on education as a DRR tool were sparse albeit education together with knowledge, and innovation featured as a prominent theme (ARC, 2009).

The 2nd Ministerial Conference on DRR which took place from the 14th to 16th of April 2010 in Kenya’s capital (Nairobi) briefly discussed DRR/CC education. The African Development Bank and the AU urged African governments to mainstream knowledge and education on risk reduction in developing a resilient and safety culture. African countries were requested to boost formal and informal education systems for DRR, integrate DRR into educational institutions at the various educational levels (tertiary, elementary/primary and secondary/colleges) and assess the education sectors’ resilience and capacities (AU, 2010).

From the 9th to the 13th of May 2011, Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) hosted the 3rd ARP for DRR. The Platform recommended that DRR and CC adaptation should be a national education priority and be merged into the educational systems of countries. Emphasis was placed on utilising education and acquired knowledge in building a culture of resilience and safety in the multiple sectors/levels in countries. Worthy of note, was an emphasis on developing the disaster resilience of vulnerability education through public awareness and information dissemination campaigns, including the need to inculcate disaster management training in the tertiary education sector including in postgraduate degree programmes (AU & UNISDR, 2011).

Arusha, in Tanzania, hosted the 4th ARP in 2013, between the 13th and 15th of February. This meeting elaborated more on DRR education with more in-depth discussions on the relevance of incentivising the education sector to incorporate DRR into the curriculum/programme of educational institutions through more technical and financial support; strengthening collaboration/cooperation with tertiary educational institutions of different countries, including in urban risk management skills, and taking risk reduction decisions; allowing women and children to easily access DRR education; amalgamate community reduction on DRR with awareness/sensitisation and foster its coordination across the public and private sectors; and expedite agreement made during the second Ministerial Conference on DRR to create a network of education institutions at the sub-regional/regional levels (UNISDR, 2013).

The 5th ARP for DRR was combined with the third Ministerial Meeting for DRR and held in May 2014 from the 12th to the 16th in Abuja (Nigeria). This High-Level gathering also stressed the assimilation of DRR education within the curriculum of schools/universities and that education should be used as an instrument to enhance safety and resilience. The delegates also discussed how DRR/CC education can be used in the private sector for training/skills development. In recognition of the limited exposure of DRR in Africa, the Platform mandated African countries to rapidly develop human capital in risk reduction through more engagement with schools, universities and other institutions delivering DRR education. Given the ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo at the time, the meeting discussed the potential of disaster education in mitigating complex emergencies and conflicts through education programs on law and order, peace and nonviolence (AFRP Bulletin, 2014).

Between the 22nd and 25th of November 2016, Mauritius hosted the 5th High-Level Meeting on DRR together with the 6th ARP for DRR. Education was highlighted as critical in reducing vulnerabilities to disasters and in overcoming challenges in risk reduction. The host nation reported a forceful DRR and sensitisation/awareness-raising approach in its schools and communities. There was an indication that other African countries were gradually embracing DRR education when Zimbabwe delegates mentioned that plans were underway to develop novel policies on CC and embed DRR into the curriculum and education programs in Zimbabwe. The meeting reiterated the desire for higher education institutions in Africa to deliver training and qualifications in disaster management education and the delegates were urged to take action on this issue in their respective countries (AFRP Bulletin, 2016).

The triple 4th Arab Conference on DRR, the 6th High-Level Meeting on DRR and the 7th Session of the ARP for DRR were held in the capital of Tunisia (Tunis) from the 9th to 13th October 2018. The main DRR-related education issues discussed were the relevance of member states to institute DRR education programs; for countries to apply SDG 4 on having quality CC/DRR education; develop risk management courses/programs in Universities across Africa; use of DRR education in building the skills/capacity of youths; develop education programs that provide insights on multiple hazards; foster gender inclusion through educational programs on risk; and to further build in-country abilities for DRR professional practice (UNISDR Bulletin, 2018).

From the 16th to the 19th of November of 2021, the 8th Platform was hosted in Kenya. A session focused on local and indigenous knowledge systems and practices/activities associated with DRR. How indigenous knowledge systems enhance community participation in policy decisions was underlined. Indigenous women’s knowledge of CC and weather forecasting was highlighted. While assessing the inclusion of disability in DRR across Africa, a delegate mentioned education as a means used to promote disability inclusiveness in Zimbabwe. The meeting developed a PoA matrix for the period 2021–2025 to implement the SFDRR in which the incorporation of climate risk in educational systems across the continent was considered as one of the strategic areas. Mauritius, a country that is prone to CC specifically indicated its intention to assimilate and forster risk management education in its primary/elementary school programs (DRR Bulletin, 2021).

The AU’s PoA for the implementation of the SFDRR highlighted education as one of the local-level structures to be used by local government and sub-national agencies via participatory approaches through the mobilisation, sensitisation and empowering of people at the community level (AU, 2017). The PoA encouraged higher education institutions to engage in increasing the capacity of vulnerable communities in building collaborative DRR and management teaching and research. In addition, DRM stakeholders were requested to work with the public sector (government officials/institutions) to develop and support a culture of DRR education and awareness. The role of the media was recognised as fundamental to fostering DRR education during disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery including via accurate, fair, widespread, timely, and comprehensive reporting of disaster risk information. The PoA recommended that academic institutions should inform DRR education at the scientific, and technical higher-level education institutions. Cooperation and partnership with stakeholders in both the private sector and public agencies via educational training were also mandated. Furthermore, education was discussed in connection to enlightening risks, and the integration of DRR with adequate resourcing, advocacy, awareness raising, and mobilization for DRR. The PoA also recognised the relevance of education in strengthening its activities—and requested the UN Africa Office for Disaster Reduction to use education and training to strengthen the monitoring and implementation of activities related to the SFDRR.

Discussion: Critical Analysis of the Determinants of DRR/CC Education in the Platforms

The extent to which key CC/DRR education determinants are recognised as DRM instruments during the Platforms is discussed in this section. Key DRR/CC education determinants identified in the literature have been used to assess the depth of the education discourse during the Platforms. The eight most effective determinants of DRR/CC education identified and used in the analysis are an assessment of educational needs, approaches to education, educational planning, educational tools, knowledge-raising strategies, the content of educational delivery, educational challenges, and education organizations. This assessment informs the uptake of DRR/CC education in Africa since it arguably depends on how the Platforms are explicit in selling the concept to African countries.

Educational Needs Assessment

An evaluation of community educational needs is vital in fostering adequate programs on DRR/CC education. Aghaei et al. (2018) discuss the need for critical scrutiny of the expertise, skills, capabilities, knowledge and interests of people and their communities to assess their educational requirements. Other researchers have acknowledged many other attributes such as checking the strengths, weaknesses, ages and the most convenient educational tools for people/communities requiring DRR education (Meesters et al., 2009; Perry and Lindell, 2003; Prashar et al., 2013); an assessment of community resilience and the inherent risks-hazards, vulnerability, exposure (Apronti et al., 2015; Siripong, 2010) and how they can be mapped (Apronti et al., 2015; Perry and Lindell, 2003); and operational research and DRR plans/programs (Aghaei et al., 2018; UNISDR, 2005). At least two of these attributes are mentioned in all the Platforms (see Table 7.1). The most articulated education needs are DRR target groups and the need to integrate DRR education into schools. Both are also mentioned in five of the nine Platforms assessed followed by themes related to the requirement for building a resilience and safety culture including CC as a priority for DRR—both articulated in five of all the frameworks. While the former is mentioned thrice, the latter is mentioned twice. Bang (2023) analysed the most prominent disaster educational needs assessment as shown in Fig. 7.1.

Table 7.1 Summary of how the various platforms have articulated the CC/DRR determinants
Full size table
Fig. 7.1
A bar chart illustrating the key educational needs assessment. The tallest bar, with a value of 6, represents “Vulnerable/target groups for DRR Education (children, women, youths, persons with disabilities).” The second bar, with a value of 4, is “Use DRR knowledge & education to build a safety/resilience culture.” Three bars, each with a value of 3, represent “Make DRR a national Priority,” “Knowledge/Capacity development in educational Sector,” and “Mainstream DRR into the educational sector.” The chart emphasizes the importance of targeting vulnerable groups and integrating DRR into education.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational needs assessment.

Full size image

Strategies for Raising Knowledge

DRR scholarship and knowledge/capacity building are invaluable in ensuring effective policy, operational practice, decision making and collaboration in disaster management activities (Weichselgartner & Pigeon, 2015). Such knowledge, as emphasised by the SFDRR (UNISDR, 2015), can be shaped by people/community perceptions, culture and experiences. Viable knowledge-raising and transfer measures include information dissemination through various means (Lee et al., 2007) and joined community or team action in resolving disaster issues (Efthymis, 2014). Indeed, educational methods for DRR─inquiry/problem-based, require participation, collaboration and sharing of opinions, experiences and ideas amongst DRR stakeholders. Nanaka and Takeuchi (1995) endorse this method of intangible knowledge acquisition and emphasise that people’s emotions, values, judgements, beliefs and perceptions are valuable considerations for DRR to be effective.

From the analysis, it can be deduced that community involvement and public awareness in DRR/CC educational issues are sparsely discussed during the ARP. Considering Weichselgartner and Pigeon (2015) assertion of limited assimilation of knowledge systems in Africa, the relevance of more engagement on DRR/CC knowledge development during the Platforms cannot be overemphasised. Notwithstanding, it should be noted that if DRR/CC knowledge is improperly implemented, it will not lead to risk aversion/mitigation (Weichselgartner and Obersteiner, 2002), irrespective of the scale and scope of dissemination. On a similar note, Briceno (2015) affirmed an uneven DRR knowledge development with implications for practical and effective risk reduction. Furthermore, Gall et al. (2015) noticed implementation challenges in DRR professional practice and research. Further investigations have revealed that DRR/CC research and knowledge development has a shallow evidence-based application, DRR/CC education has limited cross-discipline application and the co-production of DRR/CC research and knowledge dissemination is led by Western scholars, compared to their peers in developing countries (ibid). Bang (2023) analysed the most prominent strategies for raising knowledge as shown in Fig. 7.2.

Fig. 7.2
A horizontal bar chart shows priorities in educational planning. The bars represent different strategies: “Create partnerships/collaborate with DRR institutions” and “Integrate DRR into school curriculum or education programmes” both score 2. “Access traditional/local knowledge to enhance DRR,” “Knowledge sharing & transfer within/between countries,” and “Community involvement in DRR education” each score 3. The x-axis ranges from 0 to 3.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent strategies for raising knowledge.

Full size image

Educational Approaches

A core approach to fostering DRR education is inculcating it within the programs of schools, universities and/or educational establishments (Apronti et al., 2015; Efthymis, 2014). The literature has a variety of educational methods/approaches employed in DRR. A joint study by UNESCO and UNICEF on educational approaches in the field of DRR in 30 countries revealed a broad range of DRR approaches. The main ones are methods that focus on environmental education and sustainable development viewed as a symbiosis approach; one that requires expertise and proficiency in developing educational programs (centralised competency-based approach); an inquiry, interactive, action-learning, and experiential approach (albeit limited) and the more traditional textbook-driven method (UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012). Patel (2008) notes that having critical analytic and problem-solving skills is essential to DRR education. Of the different approaches, the most common is knowledge transmission from teachers to learners or students, perceived as the traditional teaching style (Arvai, 2014). A common critique of the traditional teaching approach is that it creates knowledge disparity/gap between students and other learners and their teachers/tutors (Nakano & Yamori, 2021). Contrarily, there is abundant research evidence demonstrating that more effective DRR educational programs are driven by community engagements, programs and activities in risk awareness and mitigation strategies (Aghaei et al., 2018; Chen & Lee, 2012; Perry & Lindell, 2003). In this era of digital communication, community education can be facilitated through different outlets including the media (TV, radio etc.) and many other online Platforms (Aghaei et al., 2018) such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. Nevertheless, social media can be used for deception, telling lies, misinformation, and promoting fraudulent activities, hence, the need for caution (Patel, 2008). A recent study (Bang, 2023) revealed the most common educational approaches as shown in Fig. 7.3. The analysis of the approaches in the various Platforms reveals community engagement and media use are the most popular educational approaches discussed, albeit mentioned just a few times.

Fig. 7.3
A bar chart with four bars representing priorities in educational approaches. The tallest bar, with a value of 7, emphasizes mainstreaming DRR education into schools, tertiary education, and postgraduate courses. Three shorter bars, each with a value of 3, focus on encouraging DRR in formal and informal education & the role of the private sector in facilitating knowledge transfer, strengthening networks for knowledge transfer, and training teachers for DRR plan implementation and professional development.

Source Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational approaches.

Full size image

Educational Planning

Authors (Chen & Lee, 2012) have noted that education stakeholders such as the appropriate government officials; DRR professionals, scholars and experts (people with specialist knowledge on various aspects of DRR/CC); community leaders, and the populace are instrumental in designing/developing and administering DRR educational programs at the local, regional and national levels. Differentiating the community groups/people requiring DRR/CC education while also noting their educational needs is essential (Martin et al., 1984; Lopez et al., 2016). The literature has also identified other essential peculiarities required for planning such as experiences, skills, age, gender, political, religious and socio-economic factors (Apronti et al., 2015; Perry and Lindell, 2003; Aghaei et al., 2018). Patel (2008) underscored the role of synergies between indigenous/local, and scientific/technical knowledge in informing the planning process. An analysis of the Platforms shows that educational planning manifests most and the most prominent educational determinants are integrating DRR education into the school curriculum; the private, informal, and formal sectors; and establishing a resilience/safety culture. Discussion on assimilating DRR education at all levels and sectors of society features in almost all the Platforms, including the recent meeting where Mauritius stipulated the country’s intention to inculcate DRR education into the educational system at the primary level. Reiterating this point in successive Platforms could imply its application remains minimal in most countries. An analysis of the most prominent educational planning ideas is presented in Fig. 7.4.

Fig. 7.4
A bar chart with three vertical bars representing different strategies for enhancing educational planning. The first bar, labeled “Build institutional capacity for DE education, integrate education into the school curriculum & increase the number of institutions delivering DRR education” has a value of 5. The second bar, “Create incentives for DE knowledge, research & capacity development,” shows a value of 4. The third bar, “Generate funds, investments & resources for educational planning,” also has a value of 4.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational planning.

Full size image

Educational Tools

Various DRR educational tools are suitable for different groups and sectors of society. Effective training for students utilises multimedia tools such as graphics, video, audio, and animations; and other learning materials such as textbooks, and manuals including multimedia and online Platforms. These tools have also been found to be appropriate for educating children, including posters, painting, 3D simulations, animations, and exhibitions (Apronti et al., 2015; Grunwald and Corsbie-Massayand, 2006; Efthymis, 2014). Educative DRR/CC interactive learning programs designed for children with different age groups (Aghaei et al., 2018) and educative DRR media adverts/programs run over the radio and TV increase DRR awareness and knowledge (Fisch, 2000). Statistics from Fletcher’s (1990) investigation revealed using different education tools in children facilitates learning—children retain 20% of what they learn through hearing, and 40% of what they learn visually and studies that combinations of interactive, auditory and visual activities constitute 75% of what stays in their memory. Hence, the recommendation for bespoke educational tools for children is aligned with their age, skills or any special requirements (Aghaei et al., 2018). Research evidence suggests viable educational tools for women should consider participatory approaches including regular community campaigns/meetings including through the use of online social media tools and Platforms (Apronti et al., 2015; Redmond and Radjak, 2014; Meesters et al., 2009). UNESCO/UNICEF (2012) emphasized participatory methodologies on the premise that they enhance active/experiential learning such as doing risk (hazard, vulnerability, exposure and capacity) assessment. Formal teaching in schools is often informed through academic textbooks, manuals and other scholarly tools such as publications on the subject (ibid). To galvanise DRR knowledge, ProventionWeb, in collaboration with the UNISDR developed a universal easily accessible library in DRR awareness and education that informs DRR/CC technical/scientific, and Indigenous and other knowledge systems (UNDRR, 2019). An in-depth analysis of the Platforms (Bang, 2023) reveals minimal and inadequate discussions on DRR/CC educational tools. Indigenous knowledge, community and public sensitisation/awareness campaigns were identified as the most common instruments used (ibid; see Fig. 7.5).

Fig. 7.5
A bar chart with three bars representing different aspects of educational tools. The tallest bar, with a value of “5,” represents “Community DRR education including in women's associations & community centres.” The middle bar, with a value of  “4,” represents “DRR public awareness campaigns.” The shortest bar, with a value of “2,” represents “Use knowledge to enhance DRR.”

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational tools.

Full size image

Educational Content

The goal of DRR education is to transmit knowledge on socio-environmental conditions and human actions/decisions that may enhance or limit hazards/disasters. Hence, the principal aim is to ensure the educational content can articulate disaster risks to different societal groups (families, agencies, departments, communities, policymakers, individuals, etc.), non-action and action to mitigate vulnerabilities and to recognize society’s role in creating a resilience culture (Patel, 2008; UNISDR, 2005, 2015). Just like educational tools, it has been determined that bespoke DRR education content is best for different community groups. The appropriate educational needs of the various groups can be known from educational advisors, DRR education-related textbooks, catalogues, online resources, and community leaders conversant with the profile and interests of target communities (Hogan, 1997). The content can be based on the demographic structure of the population, socioeconomic and cultural status, risk perception, gender, or employment status (Apronti et al., 2015). This is vital to ensure that DRR education meets the requirements of the appropriate groups since the needs might evolve. Integrating disaster-related topics/themes into specific school subjects such as the natural and physical sciences is popular in many countries (UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012). Risk assessment, including hazard, vulnerability, and capacity identification at all levels is a core DRR subject which according to Patel (2008) should go hand in hand with DRR planning. The analysis shows that articulation of DRR educational content is generally sparse in the ARPs with the most mentioned relating to themes on DRR, resilience, safety, disaster preparedness, and response. Figure 7.6 is an analysis of the most prominent education content.

Fig. 7.6
A bar chart with three vertical bars represents education content. The first bar, labeled “Build knowledge in various risk types including urban & climate risks,” has a value of 3. The second bar, labeled “Capacity building for resource persons & teachers for DRR education,” has a value of 2. The third bar, labeled “Build the capacity of vulnerable people & educate the population against non-violence,” also has a value of 2. The y-axis ranges from 0 to 3.5.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational content.

Full size image

Educational Organisations

Educational organisations, agencies, or bodies are vital in developing, crafting, and administering DRR education. DRR/CC education can be under the authority of various ministries with tailored responsibilities such as education, health and research (Chen and Lee, 2012; FitzGerald et al., 2010) but the Ministry of Education in most countries is in charge of disaster/CC education (Apronti et al., 2015; Chen & Lee, 2012). Disaster and emergency management agencies such as rescue and safety agencies (firefighters, police, military), disaster service providers such as NGOs and community/civil organisations can also be instrumental in fostering educational activities for risk reduction (Aghaei et al., 2018; Perry and Lindell, 2003; Siripong, 2010). In addition, Aitsi-Selmi et al. (2015) underlined the importance of financial and legal frameworks in boosting DRR education. Themes on educational organisations and frameworks were not identified in the ARP, nevertheless, the most prominent educational organisations are presented in Fig. 7.7.

Fig. 7.7
A horizontal bar chart represents education organisations. Those with a value of “5” are tertiary, university or academic institutions, along with others in the educational sector.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational organisations.

Full size image

Educational Challenges

Without diagnosing the issues plaguing DRR education in Africa, it will be challenging to mitigate them. The main challenges are limited assimilation of disaster mitigation/response in education programs; lack of impetus and resources for DRR education; divided views amongst stakeholders on how to approach DRR/CC education; non-application of DRR policies and plans; the inherent inabilities and limitations preventing a majority of the population from engaging in DRR educational activities; lack of DRR/CC skills, awareness and knowledge amongst key decision makers and sometimes in DRR educators, tutors, teachers, lecturers etc. (Aghaei et al., 2018; Bang, 2023; Chen & Lee, 2012; Porter & Graham, 2016). Although the training of teachers has been perceived as invaluable in enhancing the quality of education (Bonifacio et al., 2010), professional training of disaster educators remains limited (Chan and Lee, 2012). Language, rigid institutional/legislative frameworks, socio-economic challenges and inadequate collaboration and coordination amongst stakeholders are other barriers that need attention (Apronti et al., 2015; Gilbert, 2005). The UNFCC had noted the minimal inclusion of CC mitigation/adaptation in education programs, a view affirmed in this study since the analysis of the Platforms revealed limited discourse on DRR education challenges. The 5th ARP for DRR highlights meagre DRR educational resources limited engagements with higher education institutions and public awareness as impediments. According to a recent analysis, inadequate educational resources for DRR education/awareness, weak DRR institutional capacities lack of technical assistance in DRR education and insufficient knowledge in DRR education have been identified as the most prominent educational challenges (Bang, 2023; Fig. 7.8). If African countries had embedded DRR education into their educational frameworks, one would expect them to regularly review progress made during the Platforms, hence discussing challenges encountered and possible solutions.

Fig. 7.8
A bar chart represents three categories related to educational challenges. The first bar, labeled “nadequate educational resources for DRR education/awareness,” has a height of 3. The second bar, “Weak DRR institutional capacities & lack of technical assistance in DRR education,” also has a height of 3. The third bar, “Insufficient knowledge in DRR education,” has a height of 2.

Source Adapted from Bang (2023)

The most prominent educational challenges.

Full size image

Overall Assessment of DRR Education as a Critical Tool in the Platforms

A summary of the assessment and analysis made from the key enquiries in this chapter is presented in Table 7.1. All the 9 regional Platforms in the Table were assessed for the two main objectives of this study. First, the extent of assimilation of the DRR/CC education determinants during the Platforms (check the last row of the table) and second, the depth to which each of the determinants was discussed during the various Platforms (check the last column of the table). The depth to which each determinant was discussed during the Platforms was the criteria used for the first objective (assessed horizontally in Table 7.1). The second objective was informed by the total number of determinants discussed in each Platform, and how comprehensively the specific determinant was discussed (assessed vertically in Table 7.1).

In assessing both objectives, a Likert scale grading having attributes of “excellent”, “good”, “satisfactory”, “fair”, “mediocre” and “poor”, was employed in the analysis with “excellent” at the highest end and “poor” at the lowest end. Statistical analysis of the first objective reveals that 37.5% of the DRR/CC determinants fall under the “poor” category, 25% fall under the “mediocre” and “good” categories and just 12.5% are perceived to be “satisfactory”. Regarding the second objective, the assessment is “fair” (55.5%) and “satisfactory” (45.5%). Summarily, one can argue that an assessment of the first objective is “poor-mediocre” while the second objective is “fair”. Overall, the inclusion of DRR/CC education in the Platform is considered “Mediocre-Fair”.

This assessment may be subjective, but it provides a good indication of the seriousness with which the ARPs have taken education as a viable DRR tool. From the analysis and overall result, one can deduce that DRR education is still a superficial tool in the Platforms. Considering empirical evidence that education is effective and critical in disaster management (Adiyoso and Kanegae, 2012; UNESCO/UNICEF, 2012), there is a legitimate argument for its mainstreaming at the core of the Platforms’ risk mitigation strategy.

Conclusion: Prospects for Integrating DRR Education into the Platforms

The discourse in this chapter has focused on how DRR/CC education is perceived in the ARP. The central role of risk reduction education in CC and disaster reduction is underscored by the relevant education actions and practices required for enhanced climate and risk reduction actions within African countries. Using the determinants of disaster/climate education, the chapter analysed and assessed the extent and/or depth/scope to which the ARPs have assimilated DRR education. By applying a Likert scale analysis, an assessment of the level of assimilation of climate/disaster education in the various Platforms has been determined “mediocre- fair”.

It can be deduced from the findings that the impact of education on DRR/CC risk mitigation is not systematically evaluated during High-Level ministerial and regional gatherings. Arguably, limited feedback on the implementation of CC/DRR educational efforts from the delegates indicates that either education in risk reduction is not considered a key tool for DRM, or the relevant stakeholders do not collect education-related data, information, or facts. This has implications for effectively mitigating disaster risks in Africa, especially mainstreaming CC/DRR education into school/academic programs.

Consequently, this study recommends prioritisation of CC/DRR education during the meetings and explicit discourse on the subject to provide more insights to the participating countries. This chapter contributes to literature and knowledge on measures to enhance climate/disaster education in Africa with implications for other developing countries. In particular, the findings inform country-level CC/DRR educational policy and professional practice at the local, state (provincial) or national levels. It provides a roadmap for strategic discussions on the essence of assimilating risk reduction education as an essential and inevitable DRM instrument in Africa.