Staying despite multi-hazard risk: Photovoice stories from upland Nepal

Abstract ID: 3.11429 | Accepted as Talk | Talk/Oral | TBA | TBA

Robin Abbing (0)
Maharjan, Amina (1)
Robin Abbing ((0) University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010, Vienna, Vienna, AT)
Maharjan, Amina (1)

(0) University of Vienna, Universitätsstraße 7, 1010, Vienna, Vienna, AT
(1) ICIMOD, Lalitpur, Nepal

(1) ICIMOD, Lalitpur, Nepal

Categories: Fieldwork, Hazards, Migration, Mobility
Keywords: Immobility, Place attachment, Natural hazard risk

Categories: Fieldwork, Hazards, Migration, Mobility
Keywords: Immobility, Place attachment, Natural hazard risk

The content was (partly) adapted by AI
Content (partly) adapted by AI

Why do people stay in areas of increasing natural hazard risk? This study focuses on risk perceptions and migration decision-making in a multi-hazard context of upland Nepal. Since the catastrophic earthquake of 2015, the landscape of many valleys in northern Nepal have become increasingly unstable, resulting in recurring landslides, floods and rockfall events. Additionally, climate change is accelerating glacier retreat in the whole of the Hindu Kush Himalayas, heightening the risk of glacial-lake outburst floods (GLOFs).

In this high-risk setting, the study used qualitative and participatory methods to study the lived experiences and perceptions of natural hazards among the residents of a village in the Bhote Koshi valley. Using Photovoice, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, complex mobility dilemmas were revealed: while most residents are highly aware of the increasing risks, many also feel deeply attached to their land, often resulting in a state of immobility. Notably, those who remain are predominantly the most financially vulnerable, or are constrained by age, gender or class and caste in their mobility potential (motility).

Yet, to categorise this as ‘involuntary immobility’ or ‘acquiescent immobility’ proved inadequate and overly simplistic, as it does not fully capture the residents’ experiences. Rather, their immobility is the outcome of a combination of both positive and negative factors and exists on a continuum between choice and inevitability– or ‘voluntary’ and ‘forced’ as often used in (im)mobility literature.

The findings of this study question the practical applicability of (im)mobility categorisations as conceptualised through the aspirations-capabilities framework. They emphasise the need for a more nuanced understanding of immobility that is rooted in human experience. Such insights are vital to informing inclusive policymaking that enhances the mobility potential and adaptive capacity of people who remain in places exposed to high environmental risk.

N/A
NAME:
TBA
BUILDING:
TBA
FLOOR:
TBA
TYPE:
TBA
CAPACITY:
TBA
ACCESS:
TBA
ADDITIONAL:
TBA
FIND ME:
>> Google Maps