Assessing the resilience of persons with disabilities in landslide prone areas: a case of Bushika sub county, Bududa district
MetadataShow full item record
The resilience of Persons with disabilities (PwDs) in landslide-prone areas is not well understood and yet this information is vital in reducing risks through building resilience in the disaster-prone areas. Resilience of PwDs is anchored on four factors that is risk exposure, socioeconomic, individual‟s functioning resilience, and the individual's housing infrastructure. This study, therefore, mapped the landslide susceptibility at PwD places of living and investigated the most affected disability. It also assessed the level of resilience and explored the mechanisms being used to build resilience among PwDs. Bushika being the hotspot for landslides and with the highest population of PwDs, a sample size of 55 households with PwDs above 18years was considered for snowball sampling. Key Informant Interviews (KII), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were also used to collect qualitative data. Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers and 30x30 meter SRTM DEM were used to generate the terrain factors. Descriptive and inferential statstics were computed in SPSS statistics 23 and Excel 2016. Perception-based analysis, spatial analyst tools in ArcGIS, Version 10.1, and Systems for Automated Geospatial Analysis (SAGA) version 7.7 were used in data analysis. Results showed that the majority of PwDs live in areas susceptible to landslides. There was a significant difference (Friedman‟s Test Assymp. Sig<0.05) in the level of landslide impacts. The blind and Deaf-blind were perceived as most affected by landslides with total scores of 151 and 148 all out of 160 respectively. With moderate risk exposure, the level of an individual‟s functioning and housing infrastructure were low at geometric means of 1.4 and 1.2 respectively. The socioeconomic capital was moderate at a geometric mean of 2. The overall resilience of the PwDs was low (RRI=1.57), with the majority 94% having low resilience, 3.2% lower, and 3.2% moderate resilience. Relocation, assistive devices, early warning, disaster training, participation in recovery plans, and other mechanisms such as animal keeping, constructing the protective barrier, leveling the ground before house construction were being used to cope with landslides risks. Self-help groups were distinctively perceived as most effective in building their resilience with the highest total score of 167 out of 192; stdev=42. The study recommends that more efforts should be put into groups that can be platforms for disaster trainings as well as financial support which directly stimulates infrastructural and functioning resilience of PwDs.