Research and propose a set of minimum essentials for school safety in response to climate change for primary schools in coastal areas, vietnam

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY

DUONG HUONG GIANG

RESEARCH AND PROPOSE A SET OF
MINIMUM ESSENTIALS FOR SCHOOL
SAFETY IN RESPONSE TO CLIMATE
CHANGE FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE
COASTAL AREAS, VIETNAM

MASTER’S THESIS


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY

DUONG HUONG GIANG

RESEARCH AND PROPOSE A SET OF
MINIMUM ESSENTIALS FOR SCHOOL
SAFETY IN RESPONSE TO CLIMATE
CHANGE FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE
COASTAL AREAS, VIETNAM
MAJOR: CLIMATE CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT
CODE: 8900201.02QTD
THESIS SUPERVISOR:
DR. TONG THI MY THI
PROF. AIKO SAKURAI

Hanoi, 2021

PLEDGE

I hereby declare that I have read and understood the material explaining plagiarism and the
prevention thereof provided by Vietnam Japan University and that I understand the
procedures of accurate citation and bibliographical practice. I confirm that my thesis is the
result of my personal research and is solely my own work.

Hanoi, July 2021

Duong Huong Giang


ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The completion of this Master's thesis could not have been possible without the
participation and contribution of so many people whose names may not all be enumerated.
Their support and dedication are sincerely appreciated and gratefully acknowledged.
This thesis is dedicated and with love and gratitude to them. Firstly, I am thankful to my
tremendous supervisor, mentor, and beacon - Dr. Tong Thi My Thi, for invaluable
guidance, support, and encouragement to finish this study and other precious opportunities
in academic realm. I also would like to express my appreciation to my sub-supervisor Prof.
Aiko Sakurai for her excellent advice. Likewise, I am grateful to the lecturers and staff at
Vietnam Japan University and Ibaraki University for being patient, supportive and caring
during the thesis process. I extend my thank you to all the people who contributed to the
accomplishment of this study. At last, without my family, I would never complete this
journey.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................... i
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. ii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION............................................................................................... iii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1
1.1. The necessity of the research .................................................................................... 1
1.2. What are the minimum essentials in this study? ....................................................... 4
1.3. Research questions and research objectives.............................................................. 6
1.3.1. Research questions.............................................................................................. 7
1.3.2. Research objectives and tasks ............................................................................. 7
1.4. Objects and scope of the research ............................................................................. 7
1.5. Literature review ....................................................................................................... 8
1.5.1. Concepts of the research ..................................................................................... 8
1.5.2. Practical basis of school safety framework ........................................................ 9
CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 16
2.1. Desk review ............................................................................................................. 17
2.2. Interview and observation ....................................................................................... 17
2.3. Methods of data analysis ......................................................................................... 23
CHAPTER 3. THE STUDY SITE .................................................................................... 25
3.1. Overview of Vietnam’s coastal zone ...................................................................... 25
3.2. Damage caused by natural disasters........................................................................ 27
3.3. COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on the education sector ......................................... 29
3.4. Climate change, natural disaster and COVID-19 response policies ....................... 31
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS................................................................................................... 35
4.1. Observation of the school safety issues ................................................................. 39
4.2. Minimum essentials for school safety framework .................................................. 43
4.3. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 65
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ......................................... 69
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………….…….72
APPENDIX 1: LIST OF POLICIES USED IN THE STUDY ......................................... 77

APPENDIX 2: MATRIX OF LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR THE MASTER’S
THESIS .............................................................................................................................. 83


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. 1. Damage in the education sector of some provinces caused by natural disasters
in 2020······························································································· 2
Table 1. 2. Review of School safety projects and programs carried out during 2010-–2020
in Vietnam ························································································ 13
Table 3. 1 Number of primary schools in same areas ··········································· 25
Table 3. 2 The number of people affected by natural disasters in Vietnam from 2012 to
2017 ································································································ 27
Table 3. 3. The statistics of damage in schools caused by natural disasters in Vietnam
from 2012 to 2017 ··············································································· 28
Table 4. 1 Minumum Essentials for primary school safety ····································· 36
Table 4. 2. Indicators could be applied for larger scales ········································ 67
Table 4. 3. Restricted indicators ···································································· 67

i


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 1. Damage in the education sector caused by natural disasters in 2020 ············· 2
Figure 1. 2. Comprehensive School Safety Framework ·········································· 9
Figure 2. 1. Research framework··································································· 16
Figure 2. 2. Desk review method ··································································· 17
Figure 2. 3. List of the respondents (name of districts the brackets) ·························· 18
Figure 2. 4. Location of 10 primary schools in Quang Ninh ··································· 19
Figure 2. 5. Location of 10 primary schools in Da Nang ······································· 19
Figure 2. 6. Location of 10 primary schools in Ba Ria – Vung Tau ·························· 20

Figure 2. 7. Interview with school principal ······················································ 21
Figure 2. 8. The methodological framework of the study ······································ 22
Figure 2. 9. Qualitative research framework of the study ······································ 23
Figure 2. 10. Method of data analysis ····························································· 24
Figure 3. 1. National legal instrument underpinning the Minimum Essentials ·············· 34
Figure 4. 1. Minimum Essentials Tree for primary school safety ····························· 35
Figure 4. 2. Swimming pool and students in Phuoc Thang primary school in Vung Tau
City, Ba Ria Vung Tau province ······························································· 40
Figure 4. 3. Binh Ba primary school in Chau Duc district, Ba Ria Vung Tau province ···· 41
Figure 4. 4. Fire fighting and escape map of Hiep Hoa primary school (Quang Yen,
Quang Ninh) ······················································································ 42

ii


LIST OF ABBREVIATION

CSSF
CC
DRR
IMHEN

Comprehensive School Safety Framework
Climate Change
Disaster risk reduction
Institute of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change United Nations
Development Program
Gov
Government
GADRRRES Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in the Education

Sector
MoH
The Ministry of Health
MoET
The Ministry of Education and Training
MoNRE
The Ministry of Nature Resources and Environment
MARD
The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
SSF
School Safety Framework
SDRA
School Disaster Resilience Assessment
UN
United Nation
UNDRR
The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
UNISDR
UNDRR (formerly UNISDR)

iii


CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The necessity of the research
The effects of climate change on humans are far-reaching and have adverse consequences
on all society and nations, especially developing countries. Viet Nam is among the
world's most vulnerable countries to climate change, with children and women
particularly at risk (UNICEF, n.d.) .According to Vietnam’s nationally determined

contribution, the annual average temperature of the whole country rose by about 0.89°C.
Rainfall decreased from 1% to 7% in the Northern regions, increasing Southern areas
from 6% to 21%. It is projected that by 2100, under the high scenario, the maximum
rainfall increase could reach over 20% in most of the North, the mid-Central, parts of the
South and the Central Highlands. Compared to the base period, the average one-day
maximum rainfall rises across the country (10-70%) (UNFCCC, 2020).
On the other hand, the temperature is expected to rise by more than 3oC. As a result, the
number of vital to very strong typhoons would also increase. Thus, the change in climate
patterns exacerbates climate hazards and amplifies the risk of extreme weather disasters,
such as heatwaves, hurricanes, floods, drought (Shannon et al., 2019).
Education is the sector affected most by natural disasters in Vietnam (MARD, 2018). In
recent years, there has been increasing evidence of severe damage from natural disasters
on the education sector in regard to student lives and school collapse. The 2006 typhoon
Xangsane caused damage to 2,760 private classrooms in Da Nang city (Duong, 2020).
More than 4,000 schools were collapsed, swept away, or damaged by typhoon Damrey
(Trung, 2013). In 2017, 16 storms caused severe damage to both people and property.
According to the Vietnam disaster management authority (VDMA), 40 children had died
from natural disasters in that year. In 2020, the natural disasters caused 275 deaths, 65
missings in the whole country. VDMA announced landslides and floods were the leading
causes of respectively 130 and 97 affected people (VDMA, 2020). The Ministry of
Education and Training (MoET) reported that the education sector lost more than 600
1


billion VND due to storms and floods in 2020, especially with provinces in the middle
parts of Vietnam .
Table 1. 1. Damage in the education sector of some provinces caused by natural disasters
in 2020
Place

Damaged teaching and learning equipment

Affected
students

Quang Binh

334 schools with about 3,000 classrooms

03 drowned

Quang Tri

309 schools were flooded, 2109 classrooms were flooded, damaged

03 drowned

14,000 textbooks, 40,000 notebooks, 9,389 school bags.

01 injured

Binh Dinh

19 high schools had their roofs blown, garage collapsed, fences collapsed

Quang Nam

Many schools were flooded, wall collapsed, roof blown up, landslides;

03 drowned

(Source: MoET, 2020)
450
400

Billion
Damage in the educational
382.8

sector caused by natural disasters in 2020
(MoET)

350
300
250
Damage

200
150
80

100

70.2
36.5

50

26

8.65

0
Quang Binh

Quang Tri

Thua Thien Hue Quang Nam

Ha Tinh

Binh Dinh

province

Figure 1. 1. Damage in the education sector caused by natural disasters in 2020
(Source: MoET, 2020)

2


Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) 2015-2030 continue
emphasizing increase school resilience in article 30 (c), To strengthen, as appropriate,
disaster-resilient public and private investments, particularly through structural, nonstructural and functional disaster risk prevention and reduction measures in critical
facilities, in particular schools and hospitals and physical infrastructures(Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 | UNDRR, 2015). Such global
movements later led to Comprehensive School Safety Framework (CSSF) initiatives by
Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in the Education Sector
(GADRRRES) in 2013. CSSF shows a holistic approach to reducing risks, especially
climatic disasters, to the education sector by indicating three pillars of school safety: Safe

Learning Facilities, School Disaster Management Risk Reduction, and Resilience
Education (Comprehensive School Safety | UNDRR, 2017). With the growing
globalization of school safety and the emerging of CSSF, this initiative is then
contextualized and applied through countries in the world, especially disaster-prone
regions.
Regarding national scope, Vietnam is among countries strongly influenced by the
monsoon with a long coastal line. The impacts of climatic disasters specializing in floods
and storms in Vietnam go beyond economic and physical damages. It also takes a toll on
livelihoods, health, and education (Shaw, 2006). In the face of this concern, the
Government has issued decisions and projects regularly to provide guidelines for natural
disasters and climate change response in the education sector. For the purpose of raising
awareness of and integrate the knowledge of climate change natural disasters in schools,
MoET issued decision No. 329/QĐ-BGDĐT dated January 25th, 2014, on approving the
project "Information and raising awareness campaign on climate change response and
natural disaster management in schools in the period of 2013-2020". The decision
clarifies criteria and minimum essential for the number of students, parents, teachers
knowing natural disasters and climate change. The National Strategy for Natural Disaster
Prevention, Response, and Mitigation to 2020 have recognized the importance of disaster
3


mitigation education by integrating knowledge of disasters into the curriculum and
ensuring school safety by upgrading facilities. Toward this goal, the MoET has issued
Decision no. 3162/QĐ-BGDĐT dated in 2020 regarding the promulgation of the natural
disaster response plan of MoET for 2021-2025.
Nonetheless, these decisions and projects generally are unspecific and have not yet
reached the school level. Furthermore, most of these guidances and plans are seasonally
issued. Practically, schools would receive instruction from the People's Committee or
Committee for Natural Disaster Prevention and Control at the beginning of the school
year or/and at the beginning of the disaster/rain/storm seasons to implement some disaster

prevention activities such as school/class reinforcement, tree pruning. However, these
activities can only be reckoned as seasonal responses but not a comprehensive systematic
preparedness. Adversely, an effective disaster risk management plan needs holistic steps,
including preparedness, response, rehabilitation and reconstruction, prevention and
mitigation. Hence, there still have been huge damages as natural disasters occur annually;
especially, it takes a long time to recover fully.
Realizing the prominent role of the school safety framework (SSF) and the imperative to
enhance resilience against numerous types of disruptions that affect the continuity of
education progression, there is a need to identify a set of minimum essentials for primary
schools in the coastal community areas. SSF enables schools to build up school resilience
that can respond to multiple disruptive incidents. By adopting a set of minimum essentials
for their schools, schools ensure student's safety, facilitate DRR activities and keep their
functions running within and after disruptions. The school safety framework also enables
schools to enhance resilience by the best allocation of resources to continuity and
recovery plans (Sahebjamnia et al., 2018). The results also provide recommendations for
the Government and MoET in developing a preparedness framework for schools. The set
of minimum essentials consist of a wide range and holistic criteria divided into five
domains:

Infrastructure,

Disaster

education

and

training,

Institutional

issues,

Collaboration and Natural Surroundings.
1.2. What are the minimum essentials in this study?
4


Minimum essentials concept
 Minimum: the amount is the lowest possible (Oxford’s dictionary)/ the smallest
amount or number allowed or possible (Cambridge’s dictionary)
 Essentials: Something that is needed in a particular situation or in order to do a
particular thing (Oxford’s dictionary)/ one of the basic or most important ideas or
qualities in something (Cambridge’s dictionary)
In academic studies, the terminology “minimum essentials” is widely used to describe the
smallest requirements which need to be implemented in a particular situation to ensure
something’s function. Regarding medical education, Schwarx & Wojtczak (2002)
indicated “Global minimum essential requirements” that all graduates must have if they
wish to be called “a global physician’ regardless of where he/she is trained. The minimum
essentials requirements were divided into seven domains that covered aspects such as
knowledge, skills, professional attitudes, and behavior (Schwarz & Wojtczak, 2002). Ellis
(2013) proved the minimum essentials for school health service that show the uniformity
in practices and procedures in improving the health of school children (Ellis, 1939).
Remarkably, in 2010 The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE)
released the 2nd edition of the minimum standards for education: Preparedness,
Response, Recovery with 19 standards, which is classified into five domains. The
handbook aims to enhance the quality of educational preparedness, response and
recovery. Increase access to safe and relevant learning opportunities and ensure
accountability in providing these services (INEE, 2010).
In terms of school safety, A. Sakurai (2017) proposed the minimum essentials to

reactivate school disaster preparedness activities in Elementary Schools in Banda Aceh
City, Indonesia. These indicated essentials comprise an annual school plan involving a
tsunami evacuation drill at least once per year and a school budget for preparedness
activities. The amount of requirements is at the smallest numbers (Sakurai et al., 2018).
However, Japan or Indonesia are two natural disaster hot spots located in The Pacific
Ring of Fire. Due to the topographical features, school safety studies in these countries
5


mainly focus on tsunamis and earthquakes. These types of disasters need the quickest
responses in a very short time with an effective concise response approach. Additionally,
these countries, especially Japan, have long development history of school safety
frameworks and standards. Thus, studies are mainly concentrated on the focal point.
Adversely, Vietnam is a developing country with low socio-economic status. While other
disaster-prone countries have equipped their schools with holistic school safety elements,
Vietnam is still trying to replace semi-permanent classrooms with sturdy ones.
Furthermore, in coastal areas, storm and flood are the main types of disasters with huge.
Yet, common DRR preparedness requirements for school safety in this area are still
limited.
Five domains
Regarding resilience assessment – a tool to assess resilience against disasters
comprehensively, regarding community resilience, Sivell (2008) indicated three elements,
namely society, economy, and environment, to measure climate resilience. Likewise, C.
Susan (2010) and Joerin and Shaw (2010) chose five dimensions: society, economy,
institution, infrastructure, nature. Remarkably, to assess the school’s disaster Resilience
(SDRA), Tong (2012) proposed a set of indicators classified into five dimensions:
physical conditions, human resources, institutional issues, relationships, and natural
conditions. These dimensions cover essential holistic aspects that an ecosystem at any
level and forms need to be sustainable. The linkages among these dimensions are
undeniable.

In this study, based on those resilience assessement, the minimum essentials are divided
into five domains: natural surroundings, infrastructure and facility, disaster education and
training, collaboration, institutional issue, in which natural surroundings and
infrastructure & facility are considered base elements. Institutional issues play a role as
enabling environment that facilitates other elements. At the same time, collaboration and
education and training are focal points to implement school safety.
1.3. Research questions and research objectives
6


1.3.1. Research questions
- What are the effects of natural disasters and extreme climatic events on the
education sector?
- How policies and practice of school DRR implementation in Vietnam?
- What is a school safety framework, and what adjustments should be made to make
it adaptable for primary schools and contextualized for Vietnam?
- What is a set of minimum essentials feasible for the SSF for primary schools in
Vietnam?
1.3.2. Research objectives and tasks
Three main objectives of this study, including:
- Synthesize the impacts of natural disasters and climate change to the education
sector
- Analyze policies in school DRR and CCA
- Study the school safety framework and contextualized for Vietnam
- Propose minimum essentials for school safety framework
The research tasks:
- Literature review of school safety, socio-economic conditions, educational system,
natural disasters, and CC in Vietnam;
- Synthesis of the impacts of natural disasters and extreme climatic events on the
education sector;

- Analyze policies and practices in the education sector in terms of DRR and CCA;
- Indicators for school safety framework for primary schools in Vietnam;
- A set of minimum essentials for SSF for primary schools in Vietnam.
1.4. Objects and scope of the research
 Research object: A set of minimum essentials for school safety framework for
primary schools in Vietnam
 Research scope: Coastal areas of Vietnam
7


The scope of this study is the whole coastal area of Vietnam. The literature review, the
policies and secondary data were conducted at the national level. After preliminary,
three provinces/cities were chosen to investigate the feasibility of results: Quang Ninh
(the North), Da Nang (The Middle) and Ba Ria - Vung Tau (the South). Each
province/city is a representative of a part of Vietnam.
 Time: from September 2020 to June 2021;
1.5. Literature review
1.5.1. Concepts of the research
1.5.1.1. Comprehensive School Safety Framework
This study takes Comprehensive School Safety Framework (CSSF) as a primary source of
reference. Therefore, the indicators of the school safety framework in this study cover the
elements in CSSF. Nevertheless, it is contextualized to be suitable with the specific area
and other study site conditions.
CSSF is a term that indicates a holistic approach to reducing risks from all hazards,
especially natural disasters and extreme climatic events, to the education sector
(Comprehensive School Safety | UNDRR, 2017). Natural disasters happen in all parts of
the world, affecting enormous aspects. Nonetheless, their economic and social impacts
have been increasing. They are generally much more terrific in developing countries than
in developed ones (Parker, 2006) owing to the lack of appropriate disaster management,
low disaster resilience capacity, and preparedness. CSSF consists of three pillars, namely

Safe Learning Facilities, School Disaster Management, and Risk Reduction and
Resilience Education (Comprehensive School Safety | UNDRR, 2017), that protect
students and education officers from detrimental effects of hazards in schools, prevent
disruption of education, and enhance education resilience. In this study, the school safety
framework is built for the coastal areas - the specific areas, with minimum essentials;
Hence, a comprehensive safety framework is a prominent reference.

8


Pillar 1: Safe Learning
Facilities

Pillar 2: School Disaster
Management

Pillar 3: Risk reduction
and resilience education

•School site selection
•Building codes,
•Disaster-resilient and 'green'
design,
•Performance standards,
•Builder training,
•Construction supervision,
•Quality control,
•Remodeling, Retrofit
•Water, sanitation and hygiene

•Assessment and planning;
•Physical, environmental, and
social protection;
•Response skills and provisions;
•Representative/participatory
SDM linked to school-based
management;
•Educational continuity planning;
•Standard operating procedures;
•Contingency planning

•Education for sustainable
development
•Child-centered learning
•Formal curriculum integrations
and infusion
•National consensus-based key
messages
•Teacher training and staff
development
•Extra-curricular and communitybased informal education

Figure 1. 2. Comprehensive School Safety Framework
(Source: GADRRRES)
1.5.2. Practical basis of school safety framework
1.5.2.1. School safety practice in the World
Countries have been conducting school safety projects based on three pillars of CSSF or
typical implementation for a specific area throughout the world.
Under the “Comprehensive School Safety Policy: Case Studies” conducted by the Global
Alliance for DRR and resilience in the Education Sector, an investigating study was

carried out in nine countries. The purpose of this project was to identify trends in CSSrelated policies in the Asia-Pacific region (GADRRRES, 2017). These case studies
indicated the indispensability of each pillar in CSSF and the collaboration of related
parties in implementing and maintaining school safety.
In China, The National Primary and Secondary School Building Safety Project was
developed a year after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. The project deployed the assessment
and retrofitting or reconstruction of schools in China, including those unaffected by the
Sichuan earthquake. The project indicated how states with strong central governments
9


come up with school safety implementation. Regardless of being an initiative of the
central government, the project proved the importance of collaboration among provinces,
local

governments,

educational

institutions

and

international

organizations

in

implementing.
Regarding Japan – a country that lies along “the Pacific Ring of Fire.”, as per

GARRRES’s report, the proportion of earthquake-resistant primary and lower secondary
schools went up from 44.5% to 98% in 2002 – 2016. This was the result of the program
for Earthquake-resistant School Buildings conducted by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). Schools under MEXT’s guidelines
implemented retrofits and reconstructions in their jurisdictions. As a result, almost 52,000
primary and lower secondary schools had been either assessed as seismically safe,
retrofitted to be seismically safe, or torn down and reconstructed by 2015.
In India, Uttar Pradesh is a prone-disaster state with low socio-economic status. This area
is. In 2016, under the collaborative program with World Bank, United Nations
Development Program (UNDP), Disaster Risk Management Program and Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan (SSA), the Government developed new earthquake-resistant designs 6,850
school buildings and 82,039 classrooms planned for construction. In 2006 – 2007, over
6,844 buildings were built using the new earthquake-resistant designs.
In 2004, Uzbekistan – a state with substantial earthquake risk, established the National
Programme on School Education Development for 2004-2009. The program required
unsafe school buildings to be retrofitted or rebuilt. Over six years, the national
government worked with governmental agencies at all levels to retrofit, repair, or
reconstruct 8,501 schools applying new anti-seismic school designs.
In Cuba, the Ministry of Education deployed the MINED-developed informal DRR
education program for the whole community. The Education, Leadership, and Gender
project was to increase the resilience and enhance the response capacity of children and
communities against natural hazards.

10


California (the United States) has some of the most comprehensive disaster management
strategies. Approximately 1,000 schools developed a Safe School Plan. Thanks to the
local government, apps to educate users on disaster risks were distributed, and global
earthquake drills have the involvement of schools. These school plans are annually

updated. In addition, school committees with the participation of school-related
stakeholders were formed to facilitate the operation and collaboration.
Geographically, lying in the Ring of Fire, the Philippines is among the countries most
affected by natural disasters. Regarding policy, the Children’s Emergency Relief and
Protection Act signed by President Aquino in 2016 is considered as the most significant
strides. The act outlined specific measures to ensure the safety of children in disasters.
In Indonesia, the implementation of disaster management is regulated in the Republic of
Indonesia Law No 24, related to Disaster management. According to Konsorsium
Pendidikan Bencana Indonesia in 2011, regarding the education sector, the Indonesia
Disaster Education Association explained that to build a vigilance and safe environment
in schools and increase resilience in response to disasters, four parameters of school
preparedness should be involved, including attitudes and actions, school policies,
planning preparation, and resource mobilization. School safety implementations in
Indonesia are based on this concept.
Besides governmental projects and programs, NGOs also deployed projects and initiatives
on school safety for children. As far as the impacts of disasters on children and the
education system are accelerating in the Asia Pacific, World Vision implemented the
project Advancing School Safety in Asia with eight countries, including Cambodia,
China, Indonesia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Philippines, and Vietnam. The project
aimed to promote the application of CSSF that is considered an integrated measure to
increase resilience and respond to hazards in the education sector (World Vision, 2015b).
In the project “Comprehensive school safety initiatives – Pacific Asia” implemented in
Myanmar, Mongolia, China, Nepal, and Vietnam, World Vision conducted the project
based on three pillars of CSSF. With the goal that is “children have access to safe and
continuous quality education and their rights to survival and safety are protected in the
11


face of hazards” World Vision promoted and advocated the adoption and implementation
of the CSSF (World Vision, 2015c).

1.5.2.2. School safety practice in Vietnam
Located in disaster-prone areas, schools in Vietnam are invested in enhancing resilience
in recent years in various aspects such as infrastructures and institutional issues.
Nonetheless, these implementations are still sporadic, uncomprehensive and seasonal.
Regarding the physical aspect, the Government issued decisions intending to reinforce
school buildings in vulnerable areas. Nevertheless, in fact, coastal areas are among the
most impoverished regions. Due to the low socio-economic status of a developing
country, these projects were mainly to rebuild semi-permanent classrooms, replace
bamboo with concrete classrooms. Therefore, there still has been a long stride to walk to
achieve the true meaning of school safety in response to natural disasters.
In terms of institutional issue, Committee for Natural Disaster Prevention and Control at
schools are formed. The members of this committee in each school are the school
principal and teachers. The duties of this committee are to respond to natural disasters
(floods and storms) and ensure safety for students and teachers. This committee’s
operation is under the command of DoET, Committee for Natural Disaster Prevention and
Control at higher levels. In general, the tasks of these committees are unprofessional and
simple. These are to give directives on bracing houses, pruning trees, and making
decisions to stop or resume school before and during the disaster, recovering and
rehabilitating after the disaster. Along with projects and programs lead by the
Governments, NGOs and other organizations have implemented various projects.

12


Table 1. 2. Review of School safety projects and programs carried out during 2010-–2020 in Vietnam
No Project
Institute
Time
DRR Related contents Scope
Reference

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
1
Child-friendly school
MoET
2008 Y N N N Y National level
(MoET,
UNICEF
2009/
2008)
pilot
2013/
upscale
2
Strengthening the
MoET
2008
Y N N N N National level
(Gov,
infrastructure capacity of
2008)
schools
3
Integration of climate
MoET
2010
N Y N N N Nation level
(MoET,
change into the
2010)
curriculum

4
Integrated disaster
VNRC
2010
N N Y Y Y District: Huong (VNRC,
preparedness in Thua
Tra, Phu Loc,
2010)
Thien Hue Province
Phu Van (Thue
Thien Hue)
5
School with disaster
Tien Giang DoTE and 2011
N Y Y Y Y More than 100
(DoET,
preparedness
Asian Disaster
schools in Tien
2011)
Preparedness Center
Giang province
6
Capacity building for
SEEDs Asia
2011N Y Y N N Da Nang, Quang (Gov,
DRR education for
2013
Nam, Thua
2013)

schools in Central
Thien Hue
Vietnam
7
Introducing climate
Live and Learn
2012
N Y Y N N Hanoi, Quang
(Live and
change and DRR
Vietnam
Ninh, Hai
Learn
education into the
Phong, Danang, Vietnam,
secondary school system
and Ho Chi
2012)
Minh City
8
the Disaster Preparedness Plan International
2012 N Y Y Y Y Yen Bai, Tien
(DMC,
Program (DIPECHO)
Care
2013
Giang, Bac Can, 2011)
13

No Project

Institute

Time

Save the Children

DRR Related contents Scope
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Thanh Hoa,
Quang Binh,
Quang Tri
N Y Y N N Hoi An, Tam
Ky, Dien Ban,
Duy Xuyen,
Thang Binh, Nui
Thanh (Quang
Nam)
N N Y N Y National level

Reference

68 communes
and wards in
Quang Nam,
Quang Ngai,
Quang Tri, and
Ha Tinh
provinces

Phuoc Duc
Commune
(Quang Ngai)

(USAID,
2019)

(World
Bank,
2015)
(UNDP,
2017)

9

Capacity building for
disaster risk reduction
education for schools,
coastal communities in
Quang Nam province

SEEDs Asia

2013 2015

10

Guideline for School
Safety implementation

Live & Learn
Plan International
German Red Cross
Norad

2015

11

Building resilience to
natural hazards in Central
Vietnam

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

12

Advancing school safety
in Asia

USAID, American
2015 Red Cross, VNRC,

2020
Catholic Relief
Services, Plan
International, Save
the Children and Help
Age International
World Vision
2015

N

N

Y

Y

Y

13

Renovation of General
Education Project
(RGEP)
Strengthen school
awareness and
preparedness for

MoET and World
Bank

2016 2020

N

Y

Y

Y

N

National level

UNDP

July
2017 March

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Ha Noi, Thua
Thien Hue,
Ninh Thuan, Ho

14

(Gov, n.d.a)

(Live and
Learn
Vietnam,
2015)

(World
Vision,
2015a)

14


No Project

15

16

Institute

Tsunami/Disasters in Viet
Nam - "Schools of Son

Tinh" campaign
Five-year Program to
Strengthen Schools’
Preparedness for Natural
Disasters (2018–2023)
Viet Nam School Safety
Interventions

Time

DRR Related contents Scope
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Chi Minh city

Reference

2018 2023

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

National level

(UNDP,
2018)

Longterm

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Disaster-prone
areas

(IFRC,
n.d.)

2018

The Ministry of
Agriculture and Rural
Development
(MARD) and MoET
VNRC and DoETs

(1)

School facilities/ buildings’ safety

(2)

Integration of DRR contents into the curriculum

(3)

Extracurricular activities

(4)

Injury prevention and swimming lessons

(5)

Awareness-raising for parents/communities

As can be seen, school safety implementation and projects have been upgraded through the years along with development in
the socio-economy. Nonetheless, Still, there is a need to enhance DRR activities in schools. Firstly, issuing comprehensive
guidelines from the Government for implementation. Secondly, financial support/ particular budget for activities. Finally,
collaboration among related parties for the effectiveness and sustainability of school safety implementation.

15


CHAPTER 2. METHODOLOGY

The research adopted a mixed-qualitative method and desk review. In the first stage of the

study, based on secondary data from desk review, a framework of the research was built.
This includes a set of indicators and their minimum essentials for school safety on the
national level, specifying coastal areas. Next, this research-based evaluation collected
primary data from fieldwork to double-check the feasibility of these minimum essentials.
Before the COVID-19, it was initially planned to administer in three areas considered as
representatives for three parts of Vietnam, including Quang Ninh (the North), Da Nang
(The Middle) and Ba Ria - Vung Tau (the South). However, as the COVID-19 broke out,
the fieldwork to Ba Ria – Vung Tau had been finished. Thus, the remainders were shifted
to online platforms: interviews with school principals and NGO experts by telephone,
receiving schools’ pictures and maps by email.

Figure 2. 1. Research framework
16


2.1. Desk review
Desk review was conducted initially in this study. The secondary data was collected and
synthesized from three sources, including previous studies, current policies and programs
(mainly focus on Vietnam), and damage reports of the Vietnam disaster management
authority (VDMA). Regarding previous studies, papers in both international and Vietnam
scope were reviewed related to school safety, school DRR and school resilience
assessment in response to climate change and natural disasters. Equally important, the
studies analyzed current policies and programs on implementing school DRR in Vietnam
and countries in the World. This paper also benefited from reports of VDMA on damages
caused by natural disasters in recent years in the education sector. The desk review stage
enabled the authors to detect and specify the research problem. It also provided insights
into the theoretical and legal basis to build the school safety framework contextualized for
Vietnam

Figure 2. 2. Desk review method

2.2. Interview and observation
 Type of interview:
- Quang Ninh, Da Nang: Online semi-structured interview (google doc)
17