Analytical And Consensus
Building Participatory Tools
Roshni Chatterjee
GCOE-HSE Project, Mumbai Base
Kyoto University
Mumbai, India
roshni.rc@gmail.com

Suhajyoti Samaddar
Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto
UniversityKyoto, Japansamaddar@imdr.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp

Bijay Anand Misra
GCOE-HSE Project, Mumbai Base
Kyoto University
Mumbai, India
bijayanand. misra@gmail.com

Hirokazu Tatano
Disaster Prevention Research Institute,
Kyoto University
Kyoto, Japantatano@imdr.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp145Adoption of preventive measures at household level andcommunity level is instrumental for reducing flood damageand loss.
The international commission of the Rhine (2002)
estimates that long term precautionary adaptation byhousehold at risks by flooding, such as installation ofprotective barriers can reduce monetory damage by as muchas 80%

146

Technology / Innovation

147

Diffusion or adoption of new technology/ knowledge is instrumental for
148
Integrated Disaster Risks Management

Advantages and disadvantages of the technology
is unknown to the potential users

The idea in thenew message
contains
Uncertainty
Its risky to makedecision149

Tools• There can be two types of disaster mitigation
tools:

Researcher’s Tool
• Scientific tool

Professional’s Tool
• Implementable at Grass
Root Level
150

Tools• Self Efficacy
Researcher’s • Collective
Tool :Efficacy• Yonmenkaigi
Practitioner’sSystem Method
Tool:

151

Self efficacy
Self Efficacy : Perceived Self-efficacy is a judgment of capability to execute
given types of performance. It is concerned with perceived capability.

“Self Efficacy is the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute thesources of action required to manage prospective situation”(Bandura, 1986)

Selfefficacy=Can doWill do“Can” is a judgment of capability“Will” is a statement of intention

152

High Self-Efficacy

Low Self-Efficacy

153

High Self Efficacy“The problem is too easy to solve”

Low Self Efficacy“The problem is too difficult to solve”

Attitude Development by Self Efficacy of Individual
154

155

Bandura ( 1977) –Behavior and behavioral change depend on both outcome
expectations or response efficacy and personal efficacy
expectation.
Outcome expectations ( Response efficacy) consists ofbelief about whether a particular act will lead to particularconsequences .They are beliefs about consequences of anact.

Self Efficacy refers to person’s expectations regarding hiscapability to realize a desired behavior. It does not reflect a
person’s skill , but rather one’s judgment of what one can dowhatever skills one possess.
156

During the Coping Process, a Person Considers -1) Which coping strategies areavailable

2) The likelihood that some strategy
will result in the expected outcome

3) Whether he can use the copingstrategy effectively

Outcome
Expectancy/ Response
Efficacy

Self Efficacy

157

Research Question – 1
How self-efficacy influence individual intention to adopt preventive measure or coping
behavior?

Objective – 1
To find out the role of self efficacy in the process of preventive
measure adoption and to find out the relation between risk
perception, response efficacy and self efficacy in the process ofadaptive behavior?
Self Efficacy

Risk
Perception

Intention

Preventivebehavior
Adoption

Response Efficacy
158

Model to explain behavioral intention and the role or influence of Self – Efficacy

Dimensions of Perceived Efficacy( Self efficacy, Group Efficacy/ Collective Efficacy)People do not live their lives autonomouslyMany of the outcomes they seek are achievable only throughinterdependent efforts. Hence, they have to work together to secure what
they can not accomplish on their own.
People’s Shared beliefs in their collective power to produce desired results
is a key ingredients of collective agency

A group’s attainments are the product not only of shared knowledge andskills of the different members, but also of the interactive, coordinative andsynergetic dynamics of their transactions. Therefore, perceived collectiveefficacy is not simply the sum of the efficacy beliefs of individual members,
rather it is an emergent group level priority. A group operates through thebehavior of its members.
159

Yes, I can

Self-Efficacy

Yes,
We canYes,
We canYes, I can

Collective- Efficacy

Perceived collective efficacy resides in the minds ofmembers as beliefs in their group’s capability
160

Collective- Efficacy

in
Disaster risks Management/ Preparedness Context

Group Efficacy

Institutional Efficacy

Government/InstitutePeople beliefs about their collectivepower or capacity they can perform withthe help of power or capacity of relatives,neighbors, religious and socialorganizations

People Beliefs about theircollective power or capacity canbe achieved by the joint effort oflocal community and local
government and non161
governmental organizations

???
• What I can do alone to prevent flood risks ?
• What we all (neighbors, religious and politicalgroups) can do to prevent flood risks?
• What we can do by the help of local
Government to prevent flood risks?

162

Objective – 2• To find out the perceived self -efficacy andcollective-efficacy of the community for floodrisks reduction

163

How do self-efficacy expectations develop?

164How do self-efficacy expectations develop?
 Performance Accomplishment: People learn through experience . Selfefficacy expectations increase through successive mastery of behavior
while repeated failures lower them.
 Vicarious Experience : Other people serve as a frame of reference. Self
Efficacy appraisal are specially sensitive to vicarious information if people
have little prior experience with certain behaviors and if the criteria forevaluating performance diverse or vague.
 Social persuasion : is another means to insert or to increase efficacy
expectations in individuals. People who are persuaded verbally are more
likely to mobilize more effort than if they remain convinced of theirincapability.
 Emotional states of people can influence self efficacy as well. If people
have too much arousal, they are less inclined to expect success than ifthey have moderate levels of arousal. For example, having tremblinghands during a driving test might cause a person to think that they are very
nervous and unable to drive well.
165PROFESSIONAL’S TOOLYONMENKAIGI SYSTEM METHOD(YSM)
Participatory Disaster Risk Mitigation
Technique Through CollaborativeAction Plan166

Objective

The primary objective of the YSM is to develop a
collaborative action plan for a community in aworkshop with a disaster risk context.

167

First Application• Yonmenkagi System Method (YSM) is utilized for developing
collaborative action plans for disaster reduction activities atthe community level.
• The Yonmenkaigi Sytem Method was initially designed andused for collaborative action-plan development for a small
group in community-citizen vitalization initiatives called
Machizukuri, in a mountainous municipality of Chizu Town,
Tottori, Japan (1996, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2010).
• Now, YSM has been applied to both rural and urban areas inJapan as well as Indonesia (2009), and Korea (2009).
168Basic Characteristics of YSM in Kyoto,
Japan•The YSM workshop provides a platform of face to facecommunication for participants to become aware of the concernsof others, to discuss the current state of their community and tocollaboratively develop an implementable action plan.

•In this workshop method, the process of making collaborative
action plans is systematically developed.
•In the YSM, participants serve the roles of both planners andexecutors as subjects of the action plans.

169

Basic Characteristics of YSM in Kyoto, Japan
Application

Disaster mitigation and prevention

Objective

Collecting visions and hopes of residents for proactive
disaster reduction planning

Who Decides Theme andScenario

Facilitator suggests guidelines and participants
determine the theme and scenarios.

Participants

Self-governed Community Association for Disaster
Reduction (as representatives of residents)

Facilitator

Specialists

Typical Size

One Team (8 to 16 people); Four Groups (2 to 4 peopleeach)

Outcomes

Developing an action plan for disaster reduction for thelocal community

170

YSM
• The Yonmenkaigi system serves as a means to move from risk
awareness to action plan development for disaster reduction.

Risk AwarenessAction PlanDevelopment

171

Participants / Stakeholder Identification
General (Japan):
1. Top Management
2. Public Relations &Communication
3. Human Resources
4. Physical Resources

Mumbai (Dharavi):
1. Government
2. NGO
3. Community
4. Civil Bodies

172Process of YSM
The process of the Yonmenkaigi System Method consists of fourmain steps:••••

carrying out a SWOT analysis,completing the Yonmenkaigi Chart,
debating andpresenting the action plan chart•The fundamental principle of YSM is consensus.
•All steps in YSM could start only if each step get consensus fromall participants.
173

Role of Facilitator
In summary the roles of the facilitator during the YSMWorkshop are:
1. To helps the workshop participants understand theircommon objectives, potentials and problems
2. To encourage the workshop participants in deliberating theirideas
3. To assist the workshop participants in achieving the consensus
on the action plan
4. To guide the process of YSM workshop
174

Process of YSM
Identify Strength,Weakness,
Opportunities, Threats

SWOT
ANALYSIS

Determine theme/goal
Determine time-frame
Assign Roles/Grouping

YONMENKAIGICHARTGenerate And Cluster Ideas

DEBATE

Enhance And Re-Cluster Ideas

ACTION PLAN
CHART

Present Action Plan Chart(Collective Commitment)
175

SWOT Analysis
Strength

Opportunities

Weakness

ThreatThe SWOT analysis helps to understandthe situation of current and future
condition regarding the community, andthe participants know each other’sideas and views with an opportunity toshare
theirinformation,
which
eventually leads to a holistic and moredetailed view of future action plan.
Each participants write their ideas
about the SWOT factors using fourtypes of colour cards, corresponding tothe four SWOT categories ofStrengths,Weaknesses, Opportunities,Threats.
Participants then determine thetheme/goal of the action plan and thetime-frame for conducting the same.176

Typical Pattern of Yonmenkaigi Chart
Group A (Management)

Plan ‘a’Group C(HumanResources)

Group D(PhysicalResources)
Plan ‘c’THEMEPlan ‘d’After 1 year
Within 1 year
Within 6 months

Plan ‘b’

Within 3 months

Group B (Communication)
177

DebateOnce each group completes the articulation of its action components,
debating among groups is carried out to enhance the collaborative action
plan.
The Yonmenkaigi System Method offers two types of debating:general debatinginverse debating
Role

Management

Communication

General Debate

Group AGroup B

Inverse Debate

Group B

Group ARules•Defend Own Group•Criticize the Other Group
178

General Debate & Inverse Debate
Management

HumanResourcesGroup A

PhysicalResources

Plan ‘a’Group CPlan ‘c’THEME

Plan ‘d’Group D

After 1 year
Within 1 year
Within 6 months

Plan ‘b’

Within 3 months

Communication

Group B179

An example of Yonmenkaigi Chart

Before Debating…

After Debating…
180

Action Plan Chart
Finally, participants develop an action plan chart based on debating result.
Action plan components are rearranged by a time frame and the roles of thefour groups, management (M), PR & information (I), soft logistics (S), and hard
logistics (H).
In this phase, participants decide and prioritize the action plans based on a timescale.
3 months6 months

1 yearBeyond 1year

Group AGroup B
Group CGroup D

Based on the Action Plan Chart, the participants are requested to make apresentation by roles and timelines of their entire action plan to an audience
who has not been directly involved in making the plan.

181

Case Studies of YSM

182

YSM in Shuhchi Community, Kyoto, Japan

Debating Process in Shuhachi Community YSM workshop

The Yonmenkaigi Chart After Debating in Shuhachi Community YSM workshop

183

YSM in Shuhchi Community, Kyoto, Japan
Partial Contents of the Action Plan Chart prepared in Shuhchi Community:184

Some More YSM Case Studies
YSM has also been appliedin the following places:

YSM in ShuhachiCommunity

1.
2.
3.
4.

YSM in Kemiren
VillageIndonesia
Kemiren Village
Sindumartani Village
Kepuharjo Village

YSM inSindumartani
Village

YSM inKepuharjo Village

185

Reference-Albert Bandura, 2006 : Guide For Constructing Self-Efficacy Scales, Self-Efficacy
Beliefs of Adolescents- Hein de Vries, Margo Dijkstra and Piet Kuhlman (1988) : Self-efficacy: the thirdfactor besides attitude and subjective norm as a predictor of behavioral
intentions, HEALTH EDUCATION RESEARCH, Vol.3 no.3 1988
- Albert Bandura and Nancy E. Adams ( 1977) : Analysis of Self-Efficacy Theory ofBehavioral Change, Cognitive Therapy and Research, VoL 1, No. 4, 1977, pp.
287-310- Albert Bandura and Daniel Cervone , ( 1983) : Self-Evaluative and Self-Efficay
Mechanism governing the Motivational Effects of Goal System , Journal of
Personality and Psychology, Vol. 45, No. 5, 1983
-Barry J Zimmerman and Albert Bandura and Manual Martinez –Pons , ( 1992) :Self Motivation for Academic Attainment : The role of Self Efficacy Beliefs andPersonal Goal Settings, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 29, No. 3,
pp – 663 – 676- Torsten Grothmann And Fritz Reusswig, (2006): People at Risk of Flooding: WhySome Residents Take Precautionary Action While Others do not., NaturalHazards (2006) 38: 101–120
186

Thank You187