A Comparative Analysis of Safety and Road Networks in Barangay Matina Aplaya, and Pangi, Davao

City
Kevin A. Pagayaman1 and Ar. Renato C. Pareñas2

1. Student, B.S. in Architecture Program, The University of Mindanao, [email protected]

2. Professor, College of Architecture and Fine Arts Education, The University of Mindanao,
[email protected]

Abstract: A natural disaster such as floods poses a threat to humanity and risks the community's condition. In
Davao City, several identified barangays are prone to flooding; these include the research area Matina Aplaya
and Pangi. This study aims to determine the formal aspects and compare the resiliency of safety and the road
networks of two barangays using the tool developed from Australia, the Community Disaster Resilience (CDR)
Scorecard. Analyzing the safety and road networks of each community it seeks: how CDR Scorecard contributes
to flood-vulnerable communities in Davao City in achieving resilience? In this context, survey questionnaires
were distributed and collected from 248 respondents in each barangay and compared using Descriptive
Analysis. Also, semi-structured interviews are conducted for both community leaders and officers to support the
discussion. Analysis of the response showed that Barangay Matina Aplaya was more effective than Barangay
Matina Pangi by community disaster resilience in safety and road networks. Based on the four indicators;
connectedness, the level of risk and vulnerability, procedural supports, and available resources, the barangay
Matina Aplaya bounce-back higher when a disaster such as floods happens in the community. The enhancement
of safety and security measures, the stormwater drainage, geometrical aspects, and other factors are essential to
increase the community's resiliency.

Keywords: Community Disaster Resilience; vulnerability; flooding; CDR components; safety; road networks

1. Introduction Association (PAGASA), the number of typhoons

enters annually to the Philippine Area of
Among the natural hazards, a disaster that is Responsibility (PAR) was on average 20 storms.
frequently experienced and presents major threats Most of the typhoons that landed in the country
in agriculture, infrastructure, and mainly to the had high maximum sustained winds with heavy
people is probably in water-related rainfalls. They left the country with casualties and
risks[CITATION Lee \p 745-780 \l 1033 ] . damages alongside [ CITATION PAG18 \l 1033 ].
Among all the continents, Asia got the top rank of On 8 November 2013, a tropical storm hit in the
damages on socio-economic developments. From Visayas Group of Islands with home to seventeen
the past 30 years, 40% of total events of flood million people named Typhoon Haiyan; it is a
occurred in Asia, compared to any other Category 5 storm, classified as a super typhoon.
continents: America (25%), Africa (17%), Europe Historically, typhoon Haiyan was the most
(14%), and Oceania (4%). The regional powerful typhoon that hit the Philippine Area of
distribution states that South Asia has a great Responsibility (PAR), with sustained winds of 195
extent of flooding every year, with a percentage of mph- 235
39, following South-east Asia (about 30%) mph and it is one of the most devastating typhoons
[ CITATION Kab03 \l 1033 ] . In January 2012, of all time. The deadliest typhoon disturbed about
Cambodia described the floods as a significant 14 million people across 44 provinces, displacing
calamity that had informed over a decade. Over 4.1 million people, made casualties of more than
1.5 million people throughout the region were in 6,000 people, and 1800 people were missing.
the worst condition [CITATION Hun11 \l 1033 ] .
In Vietnam, a 17-hour storm occurred and left a This paper focuses on the safety of residents
hundred people dead, with hundreds of households and the road networks of a flood-vulnerable
destroyed. Since the start of the year 2017, community. The goal of this paper is to determine
Vietnam has been repeatedly stricken by a dozen the standardization and resiliency of safety and
storms and left 13,000 people killed and caused road networks of each barangays and compare
more than 6.4 billion dollars of property damage in them with the use of the balanced and appropriate
Vietnam over the past two decades, according to tool, the Community Disaster Resilience (CDR)
scorecard developed in Australia.
World Bank [ CITATION Vic17 \l 1033 ]. In the
Philippines, according to Philippine Atmospheric,
2. Review of Related Literature
Geophysical, and Astronomical Service

1
 2.1 Risk Reduction Flood Early Warning
Reducing risk for a particular section of a road
network implies influencing disaster occurrence, Flood early warning systems aim to give the
frequency, or intensity and decreasing the accountable person time before the actual issues
vulnerability of a specific sector. In the event of a begin to consider appropriate steps. It can be
reduction in the likelihood of a natural disaster, useful to expect the state of a road network during
surveillance is present for the timely warning, a flood to avoid the use of highways at risk and to
changes to flood control made for water flow define the safest access paths for rescue services
channels and suitable forest cover planting is to the impacted regions [ CITATION Ver10 \l
carried out, along with other interventions 1033 ]. A storm usually causes heavy rainfall,
[ CITATION Bil14 \l 1033 ]. fast and colossal spring, or strong river flow.
There are ways to reduce the vulnerability of road
networks; these are: 2.2 Road Networks Resilience Frameworks

A study by Vugrin et al. (2011) developed an

Enhancement of road segment resistance extensive infrastructure and economic system
resilience assessment framework. From this
Road sections threatened by a natural disaster context, system performance metrics and
need to be modified to increase their physical measurement methodologies are relevant to both
strength. For this reason, construction works must natural and artificial disruption occurrences
obtain. Examples include the conversion of influencing all 18 critical infrastructure and
communication on embankments, the essential resources. They described resilience as
development of deeper road foundations on follows: "Due to the occurrence of a specific
slopes, and the improvement of drainage systems disruptive case, a system's resilience to that case
is the capacity to effectively decrease both the
[ CITATION Bil14 \l 1033 ].
magnitude and length of the deviation from
targeted system performance concentrations." In
Maintenance his study, there is also a list of essential system
capabilities that figure-out system resilience:
Highway managers must suitably organize absorptive capacity, adaptive capacity, and vital
inspections and maintenance. Personnel need to capacity. Applying this resilience assessment
work with data acquisition, assess whether current structure allows for a thorough assessment of
drainage systems need to redesign, and lastly, system resilience and guides how to further
identify a particular inspection and maintenance improve system resilience.
action plan. Activities related to data should
The Victoria Transport Policy Institute
concentrate on the following [ CITATION clarifies that different levels of transport
Han10 \l 1033 ]: information on hazards and resilience can help assess. These levels include
vulnerabilities, site background information, early the citizen, the community, design, financial, and
warning systems, database data conservation. strategic planning levels. A system with more
significant variation, duplication, effectiveness,
Monitoring and strength in critical parts will be more
resilient. Such characteristics assist the system in
Measurements of water levels can provide useful accommodating a wide variety of user needs and
data on how the system reacts to particular circumstances. Finally, the RPN was used to
weather conditions, such as heavy rain. determine the resilience ranking of road corridor
Modifications in reaction over time also indicate sections, the economic significance of units, and
when maintenance is necessary. The following metrics for resilience assessment based on
may apply to monitor systems: [ CITATION alternative paths [ CITATION Ure10 \l 1033 ].
Han10 \l 1033 ]. Local weather stations, water-
level sensors in maintenance holes wells, Adams et al. (2010) developed a method to
groundwater tubes, ditches, retention ponds, assess the resilience rating of road corridor
streams, and reservoirs. segments. Robustness metrics include alternating

2
route lengths, changing travel time, changing Equation Modeling, data from a significant study
traffic loads on alternative paths, and changing of public road users analyzed. Based on the
service levels. For identifying alternative corridor outcomes, the Malaysian government advised
paths, ArcGIS used. The risk priority number concentrating on controlling overloaded heavy
(RPN) on a scale with values between one to 10 cars in minimizing harm to the road infrastructure
using the failure mode and effect (FMEA) of the country. However, the road maintenance
technique for the hydrological, overloading, and program could be enhanced, and signs from this
research indicate a better design for maintenance
weather-related failure calculation methods was a
and coherent execution. Not least, because the
factor of vulnerability in road segment sections
hypothesis test findings firmly indicate that road
and current structures in road sections.
damage leads to accidents, road security depends
to some extent on certain road surface conditions.
Tacnet et al. (2012), in exceptional 2.3 Road Networks Standardization and
circumstances of time and safety, a road must link Geometrical Aspects
geographic regions and enable the transport of
people and products. Failures may involve both Elements of roadways such as pavement
users (vehicles, passengers, transported goods), slope, gradient, right of way, etc., influence
support infrastructure (road, safety equipment, transport in different ways. The central part of the
bridges, etc.) and transport function. Therefore, a pavement is moderately elevated and sloped to
route struck by natural events has two either side to avoid water from being ponded on
implications: on the one-part, human beings and the highway's ground. It will disintegrate the
vehicles can be wounded or damaged, riding quality as there will be many failures such
respectively. On the other hand, traffic
as potholes, etc., on the pavement. The minimum
disturbance can have profound indirect
lane width should provide to decrease the
implications: road closures result in economic
possibility of accidents. The vehicle speed will
effects, social implications, or security-related
effects that are difficult to evaluate. The also decrease, and it will also be more time
methodology needs to assess the vulnerability of consuming to reach the destination. The right-of-
roads, including the direct and indirect impacts of way should administer. If its width becomes less,
natural events. The volume of indirect exposure is it will be challenging to expand in the future and
directly related to the road's significance. A adversely affect the community's growth
structural Analysis Networks and decision [ CITATION Mat09 \l 1033 ].
analysis of multicriteria are used to consider the
distant characteristics of road closures and A provision that has been effective up to
evaluate their relative effectiveness. GeographLab this moment provides information in the level of
software is used to compute structural measures standards and technical requirements for the
and analyze the importance and pressure. To development of multiple living units on the same
conclude, the development of the software is still lot on which apartments, rowhouses, or a group of
in progress. single-detached building. This law was issued on
Road network plays an essential part in the 19 February 1977, the Presidential Decree 1096,
achievement of each nation's economy known today as the National Building Code of the
[ CITATION Jar13 \l 1033 ]. Road transport is Philippines. The purpose of this is to obtain
the primary mode of domestic transportation uniform standards and requirements on building
design, construction use, occupancy, and
[ CITATION Aga10 \l 1033 ] . It is, therefore,
vital to maintaining a reliable and sustainable maintenance in line with the policy of the state to
road infrastructure for economic growth and safeguard life, health, property, and public
social progress [ CITATION Fra11 \l 1033 ] . welfare. The Department of Public Works and
Damaged roads are regarded as significant Highways (DPWH) must compile these rules and
contributors to deadly accidents in motor vehicles regulations. This compilation was eventually
[ CITATION Far12 \l 1033 ] . The study of Shehu approved as the "Implementing Rules and
et al. (2014) enhances knowledge of variables that Regulations" ( IRR) of the code.
contribute to the disruption to Malaysian road
infrastructure to inform optimum maintenance
schemes and remedial actions. Using Structural

3
 questionnaires were the result computation
source. The two (4) polls were damaged by heavy
rain, and this means that four surveys out of 500
questionnaires distributed in both barangays were
Figure 1: Minimum width of RROW
eliminated from the analysis and comparison.
3. Methodology The researcher used Mean and Standard
Deviation as a statistical tool to achieve the result
This study is was conducted to comply and
from the data gathered. The following statistical
evaluate the safety and road networks based on
tools were used for data computation.
standardization of 2 selected communities and
Mean. It used to determine the level of resilient
determine and measure their resiliency through
through every four components from the CDR
the framework chosen. After the completion of
Scorecard
data gathering and collection, the comparison and
Standard Deviation. It is used to measure the
analysis of 2 barangays regarding their capacity
variability of the scores of the mean. The lower
of resilience discussed. The focus of this research
its value, the consistent the respondent's score
was on the resiliency of the two barangays. To
was.
gather the necessary data, the researcher employs
Descriptive analysis using quantitative methods.
In interpreting the data, the table below with 5-
In quantitative methods focus on testing theories
point Likert Scale used from 5 the highest score
and hypotheses [ CITATION Str19 \l 1033 ],
and one as the lowest score.
which helps this study execute the data gathering
accurately. This method requires statistical and Descriptiv
numerical analysis through questionnaires and e
Range
surveys [ CITATION Bar10 \l 1033 ]. In Equivalent
qualitative methodologies, this enables the
4.20 – 5.00 Always
researcher to study in-depth and detail chose
3.40 – 4.19 Very frequent
problems without being restricted by 2.60 – 3.39 Rarely
predetermined assessment categories [ CITATION 1.80 – 2.59 Very Rarely
Mar14 \l 1033 ]. It includes focus groups, 1.00 – 1.79 Never
interviews, case studies, and literature reviews
[ CITATION Str19 \l 1033 ]. The importance of
conducting qualitative methods is to gather the
data coming from the selected officers of the
barangay, such as the barangay captain. It has to
succeed due to in-depth information integrating
the statement of the problem and objectives of
this study. The researcher also includes published
studies to support the goal and contribute to
Figure 2: 5-point Likert Scale
analyzing road network resilience in each
barangays.

The use of survey questionnaires containing a

list of CDR components, community
connectedness, level of risk and vulnerability,
planning and procedures, and available resources
are the focus to determine and measure the safety
and road networks of each barangays.

4. Result and Discussion

From a total of 250 questionnaires distributed

in each barangay, only 248 completed

4
Table 1: Descriptive results of the indicators of community disaster resilience in Barangay
Matina Aplaya
Standard
Safety and Road Networks Mean Description
Deviation
A. Community Connectedness
1. Do you feel your population is engaged with
organizations (e.g., clubs, service groups, sports teams, 2.83 0.93 Rarely
chapel, library?
2. Do community members have access to a range of
communication methods to gather and share information 2.69 0.73 Rarely
during times of emergency?
3. What is the level of communication between the local
2.81 0.83 Rarely
governing body and the population?
Category mean 2.77 0.83 Rarely

B. Level of risk and vulnerability

1. How often that this area is prone to flooding? 2.98 0.84 Rarely
2. Are you afraid or worried that your community could
2.93 0.68 Rarely
be isolated during an emergency event?
3. Do yourself or the members of the family
independently move to safety? (e.g., in- 2.83 0.83 Rarely
___institutionalized, mobile with own vehicle, adult)
4. Are the members of the community have a problem
2.84 0.72 Rarely
crossing the roads during an emergency such as floods?
Category mean 2.90 0.77 Rarely
C. Procedures that support community disaster planning, response,
and recovery
1. To what extent and level are households within the
community engaged in planning for disaster response 3.12 1.02 Rarely
and recovery?
2. How often that planned activities to reach the entire
2.63 0.82 Rarely
community about all-hazards resilience?
3. Does the community meet requirements for disaster
readiness (informed public, communication ___plans, 2.54 0.81 Very Rarely
regular drills or exercises, etc.)?
4. Do post-disaster event response is active in your
2.64 0.81 Rarely
community?
Category mean 2.73 0.90 Rarely

D. Available emergency planning, response, and recovery resources

1. How comprehensive is the local infrastructure

emergency protection plan? (e.g., water supply, 2.91 0.81 Rarely
___sewerage, power system)
2. What proportion of the population with skills useful in
emergency response/ recovery (e.g., first aid, safe food 2.66 0.81 Rarely
handling) can be mobilized if needed?
3. To what extent are all educational institutions
(public/private schools, all levels including early child 2.69 0.82 Rarely
care) engaged in emergency preparedness education?
4. How are available medical and public health services
2.65 0.80 Rarely
included in emergency planning?
5. Are readily accessible locations available as evacuation 2.44 0.85 Very Rarely

5
or recovery centers (e.g., school halls, community or
shopping centers, post office) and included in resilience
strategy?
Category mean 2.67 0.83 Rarely

4.1 Community Connectedness

The availability of emergency resources has a
In Barangay Matina Aplaya, In Category A, category mean of 2.67, which means the
Connection of the Members, based on the table community has rarely prepared resources. The
above, the residence is rarely connected with highest standard of the category is item number 1
other community members with a category mean with 2.91, which is sometimes comprehensive on
of 2.77. The highest mean of the group is item the local infrastructure emergency protection
number 1 with 2.83, which community members plan. The lowest standard is item number 5 with
engage in clubs and organization, and item 2.44, which means the community has rarely
number 2 has the prepared the accessible location for evacuation or
lowest mean with 2.69 in which members of the recovery centers.
community have access to communication Community
Red Caution Going
methods such as gathering and sharing Resilience
Zone Zone Well
information. Components
25% 26-75% 76-
Community
(1.00- (1.26- 100%
4.2 Level of Risk and Vulnerability Connectedness
1.25) 3.75) (3.76-5)
25% 26-75% 76-
Risk and
In the level of risk and community (1.00- (1.26- 100%
Vulnerability
1.25) 3.75) (3.76-5)
vulnerability, among the items number, all got 25% 26-75% 76-
rarely risked and vulnerable. The highest mean Planning and
(1.00- (1.26- 100%
Procedures
2.93, item number 2, which is community 1.25) 3.75) (3.76-5)
members are seldom afraid during an emergency 25% 26-75% 76-
Available
(1.00- (1.26- 100%
event. On the other hand, the lowest mean is 2.83 Resources
1.25) 3.75) (3.76-5)
item number 3, which is rarely moved by Table 2: Community Disaster Resilience Scorecard
institutionalized vehicles from the local
government during an emergency event. Overall,
this component has a category mean of 2.90. Community Score
Resilience (Category
4.3 Procedures that support community disaster
Components Mean)
planning, response, and recovery Community Caution Zone
Connectednes 2.77
The procedures that support community s
disaster planning, response, and recovery have a Risk and Caution Zone
2.90
category mean of 2.73, which means community Vulnerability
members are sometimes witnessing the methods. Planning and 2.73
Caution Zone
The item with the highest standard of 3.12 in Procedures
Available Caution Zone
which community households are engaged in 2.67
Resources
planning for disaster response and recovery. The Average 2.78 Caution Zone
lowest mean is 2.54, which has very rarely met
the requirements for disaster readiness informing Table 3: Barangay Matina Aplaya Scorecard
public awareness such as drills, exercises, etc.
The score of Barangay Matina Aplaya is based
4.4 Available emergency planning, response, and on a simple equation. The computation process is
recovery resources adding only the mean of each question of each
component, next was dividing it by the number of
items, and the answer will be the average of the scores

6
 or the category mean. It will process on each
component.

According to the Torrens Resilience Institute

(2015), if the overall score is number 3.76 or
higher, the community is likely to be extremely
resilient to disasters such as floods. If the total
score is below the number 1.25, the town is much
more likely to suffer significantly in an emergency
or have great difficulty recovering.

The individual scores in one component tend to

be much lower than in the other three; that aspect of
resilience should probably be the highest priority
for community action. In Barangay Matina Aplaya,
the average score is 2.78; therefore, the community
is in the caution zone and has less difficulty
recovering from the disaster.

Table 4: Descriptive results of the indicators of community disaster resilience of Barangay Matina Pangi
Standard
Safety and Road Networks Mean Description
Deviation

A. Community Connectedness
1. Do you feel that your population is engaged with
organizations (e.g., clubs, service groups, sports 2.79 0.84 Rarely
teams, chapel, library?
2. Do community members have access to a range of
communication methods to gather and share 2.42 0.85 Very Rarely
information during times of emergency?
3. What is the level of communication between the 2.71 0.87 Rarely
local governing body and population?
Category mean 2.64 0.86 Rarely
B. Level of risk and vulnerability
1. How often that this area is prone to flooding? 3.90 1.33 Very Frequent
2. Are you afraid or worried that your community 2.71 0.82 Rarely
could be isolated during an emergency event?
3. Do yourself or the members of the family
independently move to safety? (e.g., in- 2.77 0.82 Rarely
___institutionalized, mobile with own vehicle,
adult)
4. Are the members of the community have a
problem crossing the roads during an emergency 2.68 0.92 Rarely
such as floods?
Category mean 3.02 1.12 Rarely
C. Procedures that support community disaster planning, response,
and recovery
1. To what extent and level are households within the
community engaged in planning for disaster 2.70 0.84 Rarely
response and recovery?
2. How often that planned activities to reach the 2.85 0.89 Rarely
entire community about all-hazards resilience?
3. Does the community meet requirements for
disaster readiness (informed public, 2.66 0.88 Rarely
communication ___plans, regular drills or
exercises, etc.)?

7
4. Do post-disaster event response is active in your 2.13 1.15 Very Rarely
community?
Category mean 2.59 0.99 Very Rarely
D. Available emergency planning, response, and recovery resources
1. How comprehensive is the local infrastructure
emergency protection plan? (e.g., water supply, 2.77 0.88 Rarely
___sewerage, power system)
2. What proportion of the population with skills
useful in emergency response/ recovery (e.g., first 2.56 0.85 Very Rarely
aid, safe food handling) can be mobilized if
needed?
3. To what extent are all educational institutions
(public/private schools, all levels including early 2.68 0.98 Rarely
child care) engaged in emergency preparedness
education?
4. How are available medical and public health 2.50 0.96 Very Rarely
services included in emergency planning?
5. Are readily accessible locations available as
evacuation or recovery centers (e.g., school halls, 2.53 0.95 Very Rarely
community or shopping centers, post office) and
included in resilience strategy?
Category mean 2.61 0.93 Rarely

resilience. The lowest mean is 2.13 in item

number 4, which post-
4.5 Community Connectedness

In Barangay Matina Pangi, it has a category

mean of 2.64. Item number 1 has the highest
mean of 2.79, which community members Disaster event response is infrequent around
sometimes feel that their population is engaged in the community.
an organization, clubs, service groups, etc. The
lowest standard from each item number is 2.42, 4.8 Available emergency planning, response, and
which community members rarely have access to recovery resources
a range of communication methods such as
The community in Barangay Matina Pangi has
gathering and sharing information.
a category mean of 2.61 in available planning,
4.6 Level of Risk and Vulnerability response, and recovery resources. The highest
mean is 2.77, which the local infrastructure, such
as water supply, sewerage, canals, etc., are rarely
comprehensive around the community. The
The level of risk and vulnerability of Matina
lowest mean of this category is 2.50, which is the
Pangi has a category mean of 3.02. The highest
city rarely has available medical and public health
mean is 3.90 in item number 1, which is the
services included in emergency planning.
community area is very frequently prone to
flooding. The lowest mean is 2.68 in item number
4, which the members of the community
sometimes have a problem in crossing roads
during an emergency event such as floods.

4.7 Procedures that support community disaster

planning, response, and recovery

The support procedures have a category

mean of 2.59. The highest norm is from the
questions is 2.85, which is the community has
rarely planned activities about all-hazards

8
 Community Score
Resilience
Components
Community 2.64 Caution Zone
Connectedness
Risk and 3.02 Caution Zone
Vulnerability
Planning and 2.59 Caution Zone
Procedures
Available 2.61 Caution Zone
Resources
Average 2.71 Caution Zone
References
Table 5: Barangay Matina Pangi Scorecard

The Barangay Matina Pangi has already the

result using the Community Disaster Resilience
Score. Every component is in the caution zone
with an average score of 2.71; therefore, the
community is causing less disturbance to the
locals when a disaster happens. Also, the
barangay can recover in a medium-paced process
based on the result of each component.

5. Conclusion

From the result of both flooded areas

barangay in Davao City, therefore, the researcher
then concludes that based on the four (4)
components of the CDR Scorecard, the Resilience
capacity of the studied areas were determined and
measured. Furthermore, the researcher also
determines a better community based on the
resilience scores. The barangay that can bounce-
back and recover from disasters such as floods is
the Barangay Matina Aplaya. The barangay
Matina Apalaya got a higher total score of being a
resilient community with 2.78. In the caution
zone, on the other hand, the Barangay Matina
Pangi has 2.71 overall resilience scores.
Adams, T., Bekker, K. & Bier, V. M., 2010. Operational resiliency of Beloit-Hudson interstate highway
corridor. s.l.:Wisconsin Department of Transportation Research \& Library Unit.

Agarwal, S., Yadav, S. & Singh, S., 2010. DEA based estimation of the technical efficiency of state
transport undertakings in India. Opsearch, Volume 47, pp. 216-230.

Alesch, D., Arendt, L. & Holly, J., 2009. Long-term community disaster recovery: Managing in the
aftermath. Public Entity Risk Institute, Fairfax, VA.[Google Scholar].

Alfieri, L. et al., 2012. Operational early warning systems for water-related hazards in Europe.
Environmental Science \& Policy, Volume 21, pp. 35-49.

Andrews, L., Higgins, A., Andrews, M. & Lalor, J. G., 2012. Classic Grounded Theory to Analyse
Secondary Data: Reality and Reflections. Grounded Theory Review, Volume 11.

9
Anon., 2008. Stratified Random Sampling Method. [Online]
Available at: https://explorable.com/stratified-sampling
[Accessed 24 July 2019].

Anon., 2011. Thailand Floods. [Online]

Available at: httpswww.asiainsurancereview.comMagazineReadMagazineArticleaid=34926
[Accessed 5 July 2019].

Anon., 2017. Davao City Flood. [Online]

Available at: httpswww.sunstar.com.pharticle151865
[Accessed 6 July 2019].

Anon., n.d.

Arbon, P. et al., 2016. Measuring disaster resilience in communities and households: pragmatic tools
developed in Australia. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Volume 7,
pp. 201-215.

Asian Development Bank, 2013. Annual Evaluation Review 2013. [Online]

Available at: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/evaluation-document/36102/files/2013-aer.pdf
[Accessed 18 September 2019].

Assembly, U. G., 2015. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015--2030. Resolution
A/Res/69/283, Volume 1516716.

Balharith, S., 2016. MOHAMED RASHID BALHARITH EST.. [Online]

Available at: http://www.balharithest.com/manpower.htm
[Accessed 6 September 2019].

Balica, Sf and Douben, Nicolas and Wright & Nigel , G., 2009. Flood vulnerability indices at varying
spatial scales. Water science and Technology, 60(2571-2580), pp. 2571-2580.

Barbie, E., 2010. The science of social research. s.l.:Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Baumeister, R. F. & Leary, M. R., 1995. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a
fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, Volume 117, p. 497.

Bene, C. et al., 2012. esilience: new utopia or new tyranny? Reflection about the potentials and limits of
the concept of resilience in relation to vulnerability reduction programmes. IDS Working Papers, Volume
2012, pp. 1-61.

Berdica, K., 2002. An introduction to road vulnerability: what has been done, is done and should be done.
Transport policy, Volume 9, pp. 117-127.

Bil, M. et al., 2014. Road Network Segments At Risk-Vulnerability Analysis and Natural Hazards
Assessment. s.l.:s.n.

Blaikie, P., Cannon, J., Davis , I. & Wisner, B., 2005. At risk: natural hazards, people's vulnerability and
disasters. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.

Bles, et al., 2012. Investigation of the blue spots in the Netherlands National Highway Network. Deltares
rapport, pp. 1205568-000.

Casamayor, L. A., 2019. Sunstar Davao. [Online]

Available at: https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1806775
[Accessed 6 September 2019].

Chandler, D., 2012. Resilience and human security: The post-interventionist paradigm. Security dialogue,
Volume 43, pp. 213-229.

10
Cohen, O. et al., 2013. he conjoint community resiliency assessment measure as a baseline for profiling
and predicting community resilience for emergencies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
Volume 80, pp. 1732-1741.

Cools, J., Innocenti, D. & O'Brien, S., 2016. Lessons from flood early warning systems. Environmental
Science & Policy, Volume 58, pp. 117-122.

Corps, M. & Action, P., 2010. Establishing Community Based Early Warning System-PRACTITIONER'S
HANDBOOK.

Cova, T. & Conger, S., 2004. 2004transportation,. New York: McGraw Hill, New York.

Cutter, S. L., Burton, C. G. & Emrich, C. T., 2010. Disaster resilience indicators for benchmarking
baseline conditions. Journal of homeland security and emergency management, Volume 7.

Dapitanon , M., 2019. Sunstar Davao. [Online]

Available at: https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1812221
[Accessed 10 September 2019].

Department for International Development, 2012. Multi-Hazard Disaster Risk Assessment, s.l.: DFID.

Dinh, L. T., Pasman, H., Gao, X. & Mannan, S. M., 2012. Resilience engineering of industrial processes:
principles and contributing factors. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Volume 25, pp.
233-241.

Dummett, C., 2009. Community Based Disaster Preparedness. Volume 1.

EEA, 2003. External Cost of Transport. Copenhagen.

Fares, H. et al., 2012. odelling the performance of pavement marking in cold weather conditions. Structure
and Infrastructure Engineering, Volume 8, pp. 1067-1079.

Frangopol, D. M., 2011. Life-cycle performance, management, and optimisation of structural systems
under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges 1. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, Volume
7, pp. 389-413.

Frazier, T. G., Thompson, C. M., Dezzani, R. J. & Butsick, D., 2013. Spatial and temporal quantification
of resilience at the community scale. Applied Geography, Volume 42, pp. 95-107.

Grasso, V. F. & Singh, A., 2011. Early warning systems: State-of-art analysis and future directions. Draft
Report, UNEP, Volume 1.

Hallegatte, S., 2012. A cost effective solution to reduce disaster losses in developing countries: hydro-
meteorological services, early warning, and evacuation. s.l.:The World Bank.

Hansson, K., Hellman, F., Grauert, M. & Larsen, M., 2010. The Blue Spot Concept-Methods to predict and
handle fl ooding. 1st ed. s.l.:Road Directorate, Danish Road Institute.

Hayes, A., 2019. Stratified random sampling. [Online]

Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/stratified_random_sampling.asp
[Accessed 22 July 2019].

Hofstetter, C., 2013. Contour Map Creator 0.313. [Online]

Available at: https://contourmapcreator.urgr8.ch/
[Accessed 2 Sepetember 2019].

Hollnagel, E., 2011. Prologue: the scope of resilience engineering. Resilience engineering in practice: A
guidebook.

Homeland Security, 2016. Natioinal Disaster Recovery framework. 2nd ed. s.l.:FEMA.

Hosseini, S., Barker, K. & Ramirez-Marquez, J. E., 2016. A review of definitions and measures of system
resilience. Reliability Engineering \& System Safety, Volume 145, pp. 47-61.

11
Hughes, K. & Bushell , H., 2013. A Multidimensional Approach to Measuring Resilience.

Hunt, L., 2012. Asia Counts Flood Cost. [Online]

Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2011/11/asia-counts-flood-costs/
[Accessed 5 July 2019].

Investopedia, 2017. Standard Deviation Meaning. [Online]

Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/standarddeviation.asp
[Accessed 20 September 2019].

Ismail, M., Chan, N., Zakaria, N. & Ghani, A., 2015. A review of standard operating procedures (sop) used
in flood relief operations during the December 2014 flood in Pahang. Proseedings Transformasi Sosial, pp.
18-27.

Jarboui, S., Pascal, F. & Younes, B., 2013. Public road transport efficiency: A stochastic frontier analysis.
Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, Volume 13, pp. 64-71.

Jenelius, E. & Mattsson, L., 2015. Road network vulnerability analysis: Conceptualization, implementation
and application. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Volume 49, pp. 136-147.

Johnson, L. A. & Hayashi, H., 2012. Synthesis Efforts in Disaster Recovery Research. International
Journal of Mass Emergencies \& Disasters, 30(2).

Johnson, L. & Olshansky, R. B., 2013. The road to recovery: Governing post-disaster reconstruction. Land
Lines, 25(3), pp. 14-21.

Kabat, P., Van , S. & Henk, 2003. Climate changes the water rules: how water managers can cope with
today's climate variability and tomorrow's climate change. 1st ed. Netherlands: WaterandClimate.

Keating, A. et al., 2017. Development and testing of a community flood resilience measurement tool.
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, Volume 17, pp. 77-101.

Krzhizhanovskaya, V. V. et al., 2011. Flood early warning system: design, implementation and
computational modules. Procedia Computer Science, Volume 4, pp. 106-115.

Landry, C. E. & Li, J., 2012. Participation in the community rating system of NFIP: Empirical analysis of
North Carolina counties. Natural Hazards Review, 13(3), pp. 205-220.

Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B., 2014. esigning qualitative research. s.l.:Sage publications.

Martin, R., 2011. Regional economic resilience, hysteresis and recessionary shocks. Journal of economic
geography, Volume 12, pp. 1-32.

Mathew, T. V., 2009. Factors Affecting Transportation. [Online]

Available at: https://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/~vmtom/1100_LnTse/103_lnTse/plain/
[Accessed 4 August 2019].

McAllister, T., 2015. Research needs for developing a risk-informed methodology for community
resilience. Journal of Structural Engineering, Volume 142, p. C4015008.

McAllister, T. P., 2015. Community resilience planning guide for buildings and infrastructure systems.
Volume 1.

McDonald, N., 2010. Organizational Resilience and Industrial risk. In: W. D. L. N. Hollnagel E., ed.
Resilience engineering: concepts and. s.l.:USA: Ashgate Publishing Company, pp. 155-79.

Messner, F. & Meyer, V., 2006. Flood damage, vulnerability and risk perception--challenges for flood
damage research. In: Flood risk management: hazards, vulnerability and mitigation measures.
s.l.:Springer, pp. 149-167.

12
Mojzik, M. & Prantl, M., 2006. Ventusky. [Online]
Available at: https://www.ventusky.com/
[Accessed 2 Septermber 2019].

Nagoya University, 2010. Disaster Mitigation Research Center. [Online]

Available at: http://www.gensai.nagoya-u.ac.jp/en/index.html
[Accessed 3 September 2019].

National Building Code, 2005. IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE NATIONAL
BUILDING CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (PD 1096). pp. 82-86.

Noji, E. K. & Lee, C. Y., 2005. Disaster Preparedness. nvironmental health: from global to local, 1st edn,
pp. 745-780.

Ocampo, Y. D., 2017. Floods Hit Davao. [Online]

Available at: https://www.pressreader.com/search?query=CDRRMO%20floods%20hits
%20davao&languages=en&groupBy=Language&hideSimilar=0&type=1&state=1
[Accessed 21 July 2019].

Office of the Barangay Matina Aplaya, 2018. Disaster and Risk Reduction in Barangay Matina Aplaya. 1st
ed. Davao city: s.n.

Ouma, Y. & Ryutaro, T., 2014. Urban flood vulnerability and risk mapping using integrated multi-
parametric AHP and GIS: methodological overview and case study assessment. Water, Volume 6.6, pp.
1515-1545.

PAGASA, 2006. Flood hazard and vulnerability mapping of Davao City. [Online]
Available at: http://scinet.dost.gov.ph/union/ShowSearchResult.php?
s=2&f=&p=&x=&page=&sid=1&id=Flood+hazard+and+vulnerability+mapping+of+Davao+City&Mtype
=REPORTS
[Accessed 6 July 2019].

PAGASA, 2018. Typhoon Watch 2018:List of typhoons in the Philippines. [Online]

Available at: httpvisitpinas.comtyphoon-watch-2018-list-of-typhoons-in-the-philippines
[Accessed 5 July 2019].

Park, J. et al., 2013. Integrating risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering
systems. Risk Analysis, Volume 33, pp. 356-367.

Pfeiffer, C., Obrist, B., Henley, B. & Ahorlu, C., 2013. Social resilience: a new approach in mitigation
research. Evidence for Policy Series, Global Edition, Volume 14, pp. 1-4.

Philippine Statistics Authority, 2017. Population Density of Davao del Sur. p. 4.

Plate, E. J., 1997. Flood risk management: a strategy to cope with floods. In: Proceedings of the European
meeting on the Oder Flood. s.l.:s.n., pp. 115-128.

Posey, J., 2009. he determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the municipal level: Evidence
from floodplain management programs in the United States. Global Environmental Change, 19(4), pp.
482-493.

Pregenzer, A., 2011. Systems resilience: a new analytical framework for nuclear nonproliferation. Office
of Scientific \& Technical Information.

Price-Robertson, R. & Knight, K., 2012. Natural disasters and community resilience. Child Family
Community Australia Paper, Volume 3, pp. 2-13.

Rampell, C., 2012. Comparing Recessions and Recoveries: Job changes. [Online]
Available at: https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/comparing-recessions-and-recoveries-job-
changes-4/
[Accessed 12 July 2019].

13
Renald, A., Tjiiptoherijanto, P., Suganda, E. & Djakapermana, R. D., 2016. oward resilient and sustainable
city adaptation model for flood disaster prone city: Case study of Jakarta capital region. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 227, pp. 334-340.

Revita, J. C., 2018. Sunstar News. [Online]

Available at: https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/413063/Business/Watershed-exec-Dont-bathe-in-Pangi-
River
[Accessed 3 September 2019].

Sakdapolrak, P. & Keck, M., 2013. What is social resilience? Lessons learned and ways forward.
Erdkunde, pp. 5-19.

Saylor Academy, n.d. Qualitative and Quantitative Research. [Online]

Available at: https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_principles-of-sociological-inquiry-qualitative-and-
quantitative-methods/s11-survey-research-a-quantitative.html
[Accessed 23 July 2019].

Schneider, S. K., 2014. Dealing with Disaster: Public Management in Crisis Situations: Public
Management in Crisis Situations. s.l.:Routledge.

Sebald, C., 2010. Towards an integrated flood vulnerability index: A flood vulnerability assessment.
Master of Science.

Sharifi, A., 2016. A critical review of selected tools for assessing community resilience. Ecological
Indicators , Volume 69, pp. 629-647.

Shehu, Z., Elma, N., Endut, I. & Holt, G. D., 2014. Factors influencing road infrastructure damage in
Malaysia. Infrastructure Asset Management, Volume 1, pp. 42-52.

Shi, T., 2017. From Comprehensive Defense to Resilient City: Strategic Conception of Shanghai's City
Security in the New Normal. China City Planning Review, Volume 26.

Singh-Peterson, L., Goode, N. & Goode, N., 2015. An assessment of community disaster resilience for
small, high-risk communities on the Sunshine Coast, Qld. Australian Journal of Emergency Management,
Volume 30, p. 35.

Skills You Need, 2011. Sampling and Sampling Design. [Online]

Available at: https://www.skillsyouneed.com/learn/sampling-sample-design.html
[Accessed 22 July 2019].

Smith, P., Brown, S. & Dugar, S., 2017. Community-based early warning systems for flood risk mitigation
in Nepal. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 17(3), pp. 423-437.

Streefkerk, R., 2019. Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research. [Online]

Available at: https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/qualitative-quantitative-research/
[Accessed 21 July 2019].

SuperAdmin, 2011. The International disaster Database. [Online]

Available at: https://www.emdat.be/
[Accessed 10 July 2019].

Tacnet, Mermet, J.-M. a. & Maneerat, S., 2012. Analysis of importance of road networks exposed to
natural hazards. In: D. J. a. D. V. Jérôme Gensel, ed. Proceedings of the AGILE'2012 International
Conference on GIS, Avignon. Avignon: Multidisciplinary Research on Geographical Information in Europe
and Beyond , pp. 24-27.

Techopedia, 2018. Techopedia. [Online]

Available at: https://www.techopedia.com/definition/26136/statistical-mean
[Accessed 20 September 2019].

14
Teisberg, T. J. & Weiher, R. F., 2009. Background paper on the benefits and costs of early warning
systems for major natural hazards. World Bank, Washington, DC.

The Constructor, 2019. The Constructor - Civil Engineering Home. [Online]

Available at: https://theconstructor.org/construction/heavy-construction-equipment-types/26305/
[Accessed 5 September 2019].

Timmerman, P., 1981. Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society: a review of models and
possible climatic applications. Toronto: Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto.

Torrens Resilience Institute, 2015. A way to measure Community Disaster Resilience. 2nd ed. Canberra,
Australia: Emerald Publishing Group.

Torrens Resilience Institute, 2015. A way to measure Community Disaster Resilience. 2nd ed. Canberra,
Australia: Emerald Group Publishing.

Twigg, J., 2009. Characteristics of a disaster-resilient community: a guidance note (Version 2).

UNISDR, 2009. Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland.

University of Oregon, n.d. Safety and Risk Servies. [Online]

Available at: https://safety.uoregon.edu/emergency-procedures
[Accessed 21 July 2019].

Urena Serulle, N., 2010. Transportation network resiliency: A fuzzy systems approach.

Vandhiyan, R., 2012. Einstein College of Engineering Sir.C.V.Raman Nagar, Tirunelveli-12. [Online]
Available at: https://zemubarek.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/ce46-highwayengineering.pdf
[Accessed 29 July 2019].

Versini, P.-A., Gaume, E. & Andrieu, H., 2010. Assessment of the susceptibility of roads to flooding based
on geographical information--test in a flash flood prone area (the Gard region, France). Natural Hazards
and Earth System Sciences, Volume 10, pp. 793-803.

Victor, P., 2017. Flood Control in southeast Asia. [Online]

Available at: https://theaseanpost.com/article/flood-control-southeast-asia
[Accessed 5 July 2019].

Vugrin, E. D., Warren, D. E. & Ehlen, M. A., 2011. A resilience assessment framework for infrastructure
and economic systems: Quantitative

and qualitative resilience analysis of petrochemical supply chains to a hurricane. Process Safety Progress,
Volume 30, pp. 280-290.

Walliman, N., 2017. Research methods: The basics. s.l.:Routledge.

Wang, Y.-c., Shen, J.-k., Xiang, W.-n. & Wang, J.-Q., 2018. Identifying characteristics of resilient urban
communities through a case study method. Journal of Urban Management, Volume 7, pp. 141-151.

Warren, J., 2013. 2013 Typhoon Haiyan: Facts, FAQs, and how to help. [Online]
Available at: 2013 Typhoon Haiyan: Facts, FAQs, and how to help
[Accessed 5 July 2019].

Weather Station Davao (7.41 km), 2019. Weather and Climate Information. [Online]
Available at: https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Rainfall-Temperature-Sunshine,davao-
city,Philippines
[Accessed 2 September 2019].

Webster, P. J., 2013. Improve weather forecasts for the developing world. Nature 493, pp. 17-19.

15
World Wide Fund, 2018. Protecting the Davao Gulf. [Online]
Available at: https://wwf.org.ph/what-we-do/food/davaogulf/
[Accessed 2 September 2019].

Youn, B., Hu, C. & Wang, P., 2011. Resilience-driven system design of complex engineered systems.
Journal of Mechanical Design, Volume 133, p. 101011.

Zahran, S., Brody, S. D., Highfield, W. E. & Vedlitz, A., 2010. Non-linear incentives, plan design, and
flood mitigation: the case of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's community rating system.
Journal of Environmental Planning and Maangement, 53(2), pp. 219-239.

Zolli, A. & Healy, A. M., 2013. Resilience: Why Things Bounce Back. 2nd ed. Nre York: Simon &
Schuster.

16
17