Introduction

Studies show that multilateral agencies, the private and public sectors, academia, nongovernmental organizations, and local communities are increasingly underscoring the significance of inter-sectoral collaboration and partnerships for the development of sustainable resilient communities worldwide. 1 For example, the 2005 Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), a comprehensive United Nations ten-year strategy for disaster risk reduction which aimed to reduce human and material losses from disasters by 2015 and to which 168 governments were signatories, recommended and actively promoted the establishment of Public-Private Partnerships as a mechanism for reducing the underlying risk factors that contribute to disasters globally. The HFA also stressed the need to increase international and regional cooperation and support in the field of disaster risk reduction through, inter alia :

• The transfer of knowledge, technology, and expertise to enhance capacity-building for disaster risk reduction;

• The sharing of research fi ndings, lessons learned, and best practices; • The compilation of information on disaster risk and impact for all scales of

disasters in a way that can inform sustainable development and disaster risk reduction; and

• Appropriate support in order to enhance governance for disaster risk reduction, awareness-raising initiatives, and capacity-development measures at all levels, in order to improve the disaster resilience of developing countries. 2

Also, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) actively backs partnerships and networks in order to build a global community of decision-makers, advocates, and practitioners who integrate ecosystem management solutions in disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, and development strategies. Correspondingly, national governments (such as those of the US, Canada, and Australia) are adopting policy frameworks that stress the signifi cance of partnerships for disaster resilience. In the U.S., the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed A Whole Community Approach to emergency management. 3 The Australian Government’s National Strategy for Disaster Resilience states that “Disaster resilience is the collective responsibility of all sectors of society, including all levels of government, business, the non-government sector and individuals.” 4 In Canada, the Ministers Responsible for Emergency Management state, in their An Emergency Management Framework for Canada, that they “support legal and policy frameworks, programs, activities,

standards and other measures in order to enable and inspire all emergency management partners in Canada to work in better collaboration to keep Canadians safe.” 5

Similarly, the 2005-2015 Hyogo Framework for Action prioritized disaster risk reduction education in its campaign to develop “disaster-resilient communities” worldwide. 6 It called for, amongst others, the integration and infusion of disaster studies (as well as climate change consciousness and environmental education) into the curricular, co-curricular, and extra-curricular activities of educational institutions at all levels. Also, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030 calls for the “strengthening of international cooperation and global partnership.” 7

It is in that vein that Petal and Izadkhah explicated the range of formal and informal disaster risk reduction education in schools around the world with a focus on Iran. 8 For instance, earthquake education has been developed and is led by the Ministry of Education and earthquake experts at universities in collaboration with civic organizations, public agency offi cials, and policy-makers in Iran. There, formal and informal education in disaster preparedness takes place at the “nursery, elementary, secondary, and high school levels on a national scale covering both urban and rural areas” and disaster lessons are incorporated within science, geography, literature, and other curricula. 9

Thus, these two themes of collaboration and the integration of Disaster Risk Reduction education into the curricula of institutions of higher education are the subjects of the case studies in Chapters 23 and 24 . In Chapter 23 , Patricia E. Perkins examines climate-related disasters and climate justice in relation to her own work with civil society organizations and community groups in both the Global North (socially disadvantaged areas of Toronto, Ontario) and the Global South (Brazil, Mozambique, South Africa, and Kenya) aimed at developing participatory community-based programs for environmental education and climate-change awareness leading to increased political engagement by socially vulnerable people. Her specifi c emphases are on watersheds, water management, and gender equity. Perkins proposes that partnerships between university faculty/students and community-based organizations are useful in building climate justice, both locally and globally. She argues that many impacts of global climate change involve weather-related disasters and that socio-economically vulnerable people are simultaneously those most likely to be impacted by such disasters (because of their geographic location) and those least equipped to deal with those impacts (because of their weak economic and political position). She then notes that the fi eld of “climate justice” addresses these problems and is developing indicators of vulnerability, surveys of the extent of climate change-related inequities, and policy proposals to deal with them. Moreover, Perkins observes that just as in development studies more generally, there is a fundamental conceptual and practical difference between top-down mechanisms for income redistribution controlled by international institutions, and grassroots strategies involving fundamental political/economic change and a greater voice for the vulnerable, starting at the local level. Participatory-governancebased ways of addressing inequities are most consistent with climate justice.