Science-policy integration for ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction: comparative governance frameworks and a pathway for South Asia

Effective disaster risk reduction in developing countries requires policies that are systematically informed by scientific
evidence. This paper investigates how science–policy integration for disaster management and climate adaptation has
been institutionalised in three international reference cases (Japan, the United States, and the Netherlands) and contrasts
these with current institutional arrangements in three South Asian countries (India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh). Using a
problem-driven narrative review, we synthesise information from peer-reviewed studies, core disaster and climate laws,
national plans, technical guidelines, flagship ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR) and nature-based programmes,
risk assessments, and available budget documents. A standard analytical approach was applied to trace where
science enters policy, how often risk and impact assessments are updated, how Eco-DRR is recognised and financed, and
what monitoring and review mechanisms exist. The findings suggest that the reference country systems more consistently
integrate Eco-DRR into hazard mitigation and land-use planning, supported by clearer programme funding channels and
routine review cycles that translate scientific updates into operational standards. In contrast, South Asian case studies
do have well-established formal frameworks for disaster management and climate adaptation, but Eco-DRR remains
fragmented, project-based and weakly connected to land-use regulation and mitigation finance. Drawing on lessons from
reference cases, the paper proposes a three-part pathway for South Asia that strengthens the enabling conditions for more
predictable mitigation resourcing, creates compact national science translation hubs linked to regional consortia, and institutionalises
periodic review cycles to update standards, maps and triggers as new evidence emerges. Because Eco-DRR
expenditure is seldom reported as a distinct budget line, observations on financing reported in this study are indicative
and focus on the presence and governance of funding channels rather than on comparable shares of expenditure across
countries. The proposed framework offers a practical route for moving from pilot projects to durable, science-informed
and ecosystem-based disaster governance in South Asia and other vulnerable regions.