Introduction

Often it has been difficult for people with different capacities, especially people in vulnerable situations, to have their needs represented in disaster risk management (DRM; Nero et al., 2023; Janssen et al., 2023). Exclusion can amplify the impact of crises (Schobert et al., 2023). To build a more inclusive DRM system, engagement of people in vulnerable situations into DRM is vital. Inclusive DRM aims to address vulnerability and promote equality, requiring capacity building and empowerment (Twigg et al., 2018; United Nations, 2015). This ROADMAP2 project flash report aims to describe several good practices in engaging people in vulnerable situations in DRM, further developing the analysis started in ROADMAP project (Tagliacozzo et al., 2022).
European Union Disaster Resilience Goals stipulates the collaboration in European communities to withstand the impacts of future disasters and we need to be better prepared to act, before disasters strike (European Commission, 2023). Particularly the Goal 2 emphasises the importance of increasing disaster risk awareness and preparedness of all-of-society, involving and empowering the population groups that are in already vulnerable situations. Also the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 encourages partnerships between the communities and authorities to better understand the sources of vulnerability and defining its mitigation strategies (United Nations, 2015).
In this flash report we seek to address these goals and explore some existing good practices of engaging and empowering individuals that are already in vulnerable situations. We seek answers to the following questions.
1. What are the new or reviewed practices in engaging and empowering community members in already vulnerable situations?
2. What has been the rationale in developing such practices? Which problems in DRM (e.g. experiences in specific crises) have led to the development and use of this practice?
3. What has made this practice particularly well-functioning and useful for DRM, for saving the lives and health of people?
4. To whom and how the practice is implemented in real life?
5. What are the lessons learned? Feedback from implementers and target group/users of the practice.
6. To what extent the good practice achieves the desired results? To what extent reaches to the intended target population?

The report follows the methodology for identifying and assessing good practices in DRM set forth in the ROADMAP2 deliverable D3.1. In this context, good practices are defined as activities that substantially reduce disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods, health, and assets. DRM, engagement and empowerment of stakeholders and members of community that are in already vulnerable situations were considered as the key areas of relevance in the search for these good practices. Firstly, this search was conducted across academic databases using search terms such as “disaster”, “crisis”, “vulnerabilities”, “empowerment” and “engagement”. The databases used for the search were Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar. Secondly, a search for engagement practices was conducted across the websites of international organisations operating in the field of DRM, including UNDRR, WHO and GNDR. Additionally, the search for engagement practices at a national or a subnational level was conducted using Google search engine.
In identifying good practices amongst the results, the identification criteria set in ROADMAP2 (2023) deliverable D3.1 Framework for identifying and assessing good practices in DRM were applied:
• cover the DRM cycle (e.g., have been realised in prevention, preparedness, response and/or recovery phases);
• adhere to priorities and targets of the Sendai Framework for DRR;
• adhere to the UDRGs;
• consider a multi-risk perspective;
• through research and/or practice, have been applied and work in a real context in achieving outcomes and results (evidence);
• involve different types of stakeholders (international, national, local, but also different professions).