Transferability of International Flood Recovery Governance to Hat Yai, Thailand: A Qualitative Comparative Study
Abstract
Objective: Post-disaster recovery is increasingly guided by Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) and Build Back Better (BBB) frameworks, yet recovery in many middle-income urban settings remains focused on restoration rather than future risk reduction. This study examined how governance mechanisms from international flood recovery cases could inform context-sensitive reforms in Hat Yai, Thailand.
Material and Methods: We used a qualitative comparative policy-learning design combining a structured synthesis of peer-reviewed literature on flood recovery governance in Japan and the Netherlands, a review of Hat Yai-specific literature, and in-depth interviews with eight residents affected by the November 2025 flood. Data were analyzed using an integrated framework combining PDNA, BBB, and policy learning across five governance dimensions.
Results: Recovery in Japan and the Netherlands was supported by institutionalised governance mechanisms linking recovery with long-term flood risk management. In Hat Yai, recovery remained centred on emergency coordination and short-term restoration despite strengthened preparedness and community resilience. Across five dimensions, mechanisms with the potential for contextual adaptation were identified and synthesised into three domains: (i) institutionalised recovery governance and policy learning, (ii) risk-aligned recovery financing and spatial planning, and (iii) institutionalised participation and protection of vulnerable groups. Unlike the reference cases, Hat Yai remained more dependent on emergency structures, household adaptation, and informal community networks.
Conclusion: Governance transferability should be understood as contextual adaptation rather than direct policy replication. Strengthening recovery governance, risk-aligned financing and spatial planning, and inclusive participation could advance long-term flood risk reduction in Hat Yai and similar middle-income urban settings.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
McGlade J, Bankoff G, Abrahams J, Cooper-Knock S, Cotecchia F, Desanker P, et al. Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction 2019. Geneva: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction; 2019.
Gasparini P, Manfredi G, Asprone D. Resilience and sustainability in relation to natural disasters: a challenge for future cities. Cham: Springer; 2014.
Adekola O, Adekola J. Post-disaster needs assessment as a strategic recovery planning process. In: Research handbook on flood risk management. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2024;p.275-86.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015-2030. Geneva: UNISDR; 2015.
Djalante R, Holley C, Thomalla F. Adaptive governance and managing resilience to natural hazards. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 2011;2:1-14.
Narawaew H, Kamolvej T. Disaster management comparative case study: Pak Kret Municipality, Nonthaburi Province, Hat Yai Municipality, Songkhla Province and Don Chimphli Sub-District, Chachoengsao Province. J Thai Ombudsman 2018;11:43-64.
Mohammadi S, De Angeli S, Boni G, Pirlone F, Cattari S. Current approaches and critical issues in multi-risk recovery planning of urban areas exposed to natural hazards. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2024;24:79-107.
Dolowitz DP, Marsh D. Learning from abroad: the role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance 2000;13:5-23.
Marks D. The urban political ecology of the 2011 floods in Bangkok: the creation of uneven vulnerabilities. Pac Aff 2015;88:623-51.
Narawaew H, Kamolvej T. Disaster management comparative case study: Pak Kret Municipality, Nonthaburi Province, Hat Yai Municipality, Songkhla Province and Don Chimphli Sub-District, Chachoengsao Province. J Thai Ombudsman 2019;11:35-82.
Thai Water. Hat Yai flood situation summary, November 2025 [homepage on the Internet]. Bangkok: Thai Water; 2025 [cited 2026 Aug 12]. Available from: https://www.thaiwater.net/uploads/contents/current/2025/hatyai_nov/summary.html
Puri A, Elkharboutly M, Ali NA. Identifying major challenges in managing post-disaster reconstruction projects: a critical analysis. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2024;107:104491.
Safapour E, Kermanshachi S, Pamidimukkala A. Post-disaster recovery in urban and rural communities: challenges and strategies. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2021;64:102535.
Islam S, Chu C, Smart JC, Liew L. Integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation: a systematic literature review. Clim Dev 2020;12:255-67.
Koike T. Evolution of Japan’s flood control planning and policy in response to climate change risks and social changes. Water Policy 2021;23(Suppl 1):77-84.
Nakamura S, Oki T. Paradigm shifts on flood risk management in Japan: detecting triggers of design flood revisions in the modern era. Water Resour Res 2018;54:5504-15.
van Herk S, Rijke J, Zevenbergen C, Ashley R. Understanding the transition to integrated flood risk management in the Netherlands. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2015;15:84-100.
van Buuren A, Ellen GJ, Warner JF. Path-dependency and policy learning in the Dutch delta: toward more resilient flood risk management in the Netherlands? Ecol Soc 2016;21:43.
Reed SO, Friend R, Jarvie J, Henceroth J, Thinphanga P, Singh D, et al. Resilience projects as experiments: implementing climate change resilience in Asian cities. Clim Dev 2015;7:469-80.
Siripornanon S, Wisutthimasarn P. Public participatory disaster management model: a case study of the Asian cities climate change resilience network in Hat Yai, Songkla province, Thailand. J Assoc Res 2020;21:193-207.
Liefferink D, Wiering M, Crabbé A, Hegger D. Explaining stability and change: comparing flood risk governance in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and Poland. J Flood Risk Manag 2018;11:281-90.
Sae-jern N, Suwanchatree N, Chub-uppakarn T, Chalermyanont T. Assessment and comparison of urban flood vulnerability index: a case study of Hat Yai, Chiang Mai and Ubon Ratchathani. J Sci Technol MSU 2022;41:164.
Chongwilaikasaem S, Chalermyanont T. Flood hazards and housing prices: a spatial regression analysis for Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand. Int J Hous Mark Anal 2023;16:1052-70.
Hegger DL, Driessen PP, Wiering M, Van Rijswick HF, Kundzewicz ZW, Matczak P, et al. Toward more flood resilience: is a diversification of flood risk management strategies the way forward? Ecol Soc 2016;21:52.
Konami T, Koga H, Kawatsura A. Role of pre-disaster discussions on preparedness on consensus-making of integrated flood management (IFM) after a flood disaster, based on a case in the Abukuma River Basin, Fukushima, Japan. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2021;53:102012.
Kaufmann M, Lewandowski J, Choryński A, Wiering M. Shock events and flood risk management: a media analysis of the institutional long-term effects of flood events in the Netherlands and Poland. Ecol Soc 2016;21:36.
Songwathana P, Sae-sia W, Damkliang J, Kongkamol C. Preparing community health leaders to safely transfer vulnerable flood victims. Health Emerg Disaster Nurs 2019;6:9-14.
Tanongsak W, Sitthisak O, Boonchuay K. Prototype application for tracking and helping the elderly in flood situations. Parichart J 2024;37:225-40.
Ahrens J, Rudolph PM. The importance of governance in risk reduction and disaster management. J Contingencies Crisis Manag 2006;14:207-20.
Pelling M. Adaptation to climate change: from resilience to transformation. London: Routledge; 2011.
Hudson P, Botzen WJW, Kreibich H, Bubeck P, Aerts JCJH. Evaluating the effectiveness of flood damage mitigation measures by the application of propensity score matching. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2014;14:1731-47.
Hallegatte S, Rentschler J, Walsh B. Building back better: achieving resilience through stronger, faster, and more inclusive post-disaster reconstruction. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2018.
Olshansky RB, Chang SE. Planning for disaster recovery: emerging research needs and challenges. Prog Plann 2009;72:200-9.
Aldrich DP. Building resilience: social capital in post-disaster recovery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2012.
Gaillard JC, Mercer J. From knowledge to action: bridging gaps in disaster risk reduction. Prog Hum Geogr 2013;37:93-114.
Kingdon JW. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd ed. New York: HarperCollins; 1995.
Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J. Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2005;30:441-73.
Argyris C, Schön DA. Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reis 1997:345-8. 39.
Sornsenee P, Sathirapanya C, Buathong N, Vichitkunakorn P, Ananchaisarp T, Suwannarat W, et al. From campus to crisis shelter: a reflective case analysis of shelter-based healthcare and enacted disaster preparedness during the 2025 Hat Yai flood. J Health Sci Med Res 2026;44:e20261444. doi: 10.31584/jhsmr.20261444.
Geater SL. Beyond flooded homes: household financial resilience, healthcare access, and economic recovery after disasters: lessons from the 2025 Hat Yai flood. J Health Sci Med Res 2026;44:e20261474. doi: 10.31584/jhsmr.20261474.
Cheh-Oh N, Wattanapiromsakul C. Pharmacological preparedness for flood disasters: lessons from the 2025 Hat Yai floods. J Health Sci Med Res 2026;44:e20261434. doi: 10.31584/jhsmr.20261434.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.