Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative study reveals key structural barriers to inclusive disaster risk reduction, highlighting the need for accessible early warnings and earmarked financing.
Persons with disabilities face disproportionate risks during disasters yet remain systematically excluded from disaster risk reduction (DRR). Despite national and international commitments to inclusive disaster governance, this exclusion persists in Zimbabwe. This study examined barriers to the meaningful participation of persons with disabilities in DRR initiatives during flood and drought events in Zimbabwe between 2015 and 2024. Using a qualitative design, the study drew on focus group discussions with persons with disabilities and key informant interviews with DRR practitioners and government officials across multiple districts. Data were thematically analysed. Five structural barriers were identified: (1) social exclusion and stigma embedded in cultural norms and institutional routines; (2) inaccessible early warning systems shaped by modality bias and informal relay; (3) physical and logistical barriers to participation; (4) limited governmental and practitioner support compounded by policy-practice gaps; and (5) resource constraints that intensified exclusionary decisions. Exclusion occurred through both acute and chronic pathways, with intersecting vulnerabilities heightening risk for women, caregivers, and persons with disabilities in remote or low-income households. The findings show that disability-inclusive DRR requires enforceable operational standards, accessible communication, stigma-sensitive emergency procedures, earmarked financing, and meaningful participation across all phases of the disaster risk cycle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mavhura et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: