Developing an Open Database to Support Forensic Investigation of Disasters in South East Asia: FORINSEA v1.0
2022
- 24Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage24
- Abstract Views24
Article Description
Arguably the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) fail to deal with root causes of disasters (Wisner; 2020) and therefore calls for science to support policy move towards more holistic solutions to disaster risk. In this context; root causes analysis has been described as “a structured investigation that aims to identify the true cause of a problem and the actions necessary to eliminate it” (DKKV; 2012; p. 12). A systematic review of 40 studies of disaster causation concluded that the FORensic INvestigations of disasters (FORIN) provides a broad and adaptable approach for the study of disaster root causes (Fraser et al.; 2016). FORIN has been developed by the IntegratedResearch on Disaster Risk (IRDR) program of International Council for Science (ICSU), International Social Science Council (ISSC) and United Nations International Strategy for disaster Reduction (UNISDR) (Oliver-Smith et al.; 2016). The FORIN approach has been used to investigate the root causes of disasters around the world. For example; to reveal the underlying causes and risk drivers in the Haitian earthquake (Oliver-Smith et al.; 2016); to inform the narratives to identify the factors that exacerbated the loss of human life in one of the most devastated local municipalities on the coast by 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (Nakasu et al.; 2017)or to understand the political ecology of the recurrent El Niño-related disasters in Peru (French et al.,2020).
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know