Existing disaster risk assessments often are not fully addressing the social, economic, and political factors that exacerbate vulnerabilities, leading to incomplete pictures of the situations of marginalized populations. This article looks beyond the hazard- and impact-centric nature of existing disaster risk metrics by proposing an equity-centered approach. Drawing on social justice, intersectionality, and targeted universalism theories, the study highlights the need for metrics that capture systemic inequities, overlapping vulnerabilities, and structural barriers. The article applies qualitative research, using a comparative case study, drawing upon selected disaster cases, and existing metrics used by UNDRR and humanitarian organizations. The results of the study are: 1) Equity-relevant indicators exist but are not mainstreamed, meaning social justice, intersectionality, and targeted universalism principles remain underrepresented in disaster risk metrics. 2) The gaps are also found in current global risk frameworks, such as the exclusion of stateless populations, gender-based violence, and intersectional vulnerabilities. 3) Exemplary metrics that represent social justice, intersectionality, and targeted universalism are proposed by incorporating some disaggregated data (e.g., by sex, age, disability, income) and equity-focused indicators. The study recommends harmonizing existing disaster risk reduction-oriented frameworks with humanitarian crisis metrics to create an inclusive, just approach and fairness for all. • We should consider more equity-centered metrics for disaster risk assessment . • Social justice, intersectionality, targeted universalism theories support equity perspective. • Current global frameworks overlook systemic inequities and intersectionality. • Factors like statelessness, gender-based violence, and structural barriers are excluded. • This article calls for integrating disaggregated data and equity-focused indicators. • This article suggests harmonizing DRR frameworks with humanitarian metrics. • Such harmonization is important to create a more inclusive and just assessment.
Jaziar Radianti (Sun,) studied this question.