Challenges of Disaster Management in the Earthquake-Prone and High-Risk Region of Kuhbanan, Kerman

Abstract

Background and Aim: Identifying and transferring lessons learned from past disasters can significantly improve future disaster management performance. Although the general principles of disaster management are similar across events such as earthquakes, context-specific factors, including geographical location, scale and severity of the event, timing, and local characteristics, can shape distinct challenges and, consequently, different management approaches. Therefore, conducting case-based studies that account for the unique conditions of each disaster is essential for effective learning. This study focuses on the Kuhbanan earthquake and aims to identify management challenges arising from the specific characteristics of this region. Materials and Methods: This study employed a qualitative design using a directed content analysis approach. The study population consisted of experts, decision-makers, and frontline practitioners directly involved in managing the Kuhbanan earthquake. Using purposive sampling with maximum variation, 15 participants were selected from key organizations, including the University of Medical Sciences, the Iranian Red Crescent Society, the Provincial Crisis Management Center, and non-governmental organizations active in rescue and relief operations. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews, with questions developed based on the dimensions of the STEEPV framework (Social, Technological, Economic, Environmental, Political, and Values). Interviews continued until data saturation was achieved. Data analysis was conducted using MAXQDA software. Results: Data analysis led to the identification of 42 initial codes, 14 subcategories, and six categories aligned with the STEEPV framework. In the social dimension, key challenges included deficiencies in public and professional training systems (3 codes), weak intersectoral communication and coordination (6 codes), and inadequate responsiveness to community health needs (4 codes). In the technological domain, major limitations were observed in information management (2 codes) and the capacity of technological infrastructure (2 codes). From an economic perspective, financial constraints (5 codes) and welfare-related barriers (3 codes) were identified as influential factors. In the environmental dimension, specific geographical and climatic conditions including mountain topography, fault proximity, and mining operations (4 codes), along with unsuitable physical spaces for disaster management (3 codes), posed major challenges. In the political sphere, a noticeable gap between the government and the public (2 codes) and weak performance of some executive institutions (2 codes) were evident. Cultural and values-related challenges included specific local beliefs (1 code), inappropriate behaviors among communities and relief teams (2 codes), and insufficient consideration of regional culture in rescue and relief operations (3 codes). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that despite the relatively small scale of the Kuhbanan earthquake, many structural and managerial challenges previously observed in larger disasters were repeated. This finding highlights a chronic weakness in institutional learning and process improvement within the disaster management system. The application of comprehensive analytical frameworks such as STEEPV can assist managers and planners in understanding the complexity and interconnections of different crisis dimensions, moving beyond fragmented and reactive approaches toward more informed decision-making, enhanced stakeholder coordination, and ultimately greater community resilience. It is recommended that the findings of this study be used as a roadmap for revising national disaster management policies and for designing an integrated disaster lesson-learning system.