Local Government Profile

Kufstein, Austria  
Kufstein
Size
39,37 km²
Population
17,550
Hazard Types
Technical Disaster
Name of Mayor
Martin Krumschnabel
  • Hazard and vulnerability profile

  • Our changing climate and the increasing dependency on technology are just two out of many factors that will strongly affect all future decisions made by public authorities and cause substantial changes in the risk landscapes around the globe. At the same time, the number of critical infrastructure facilities keeps skyrocketing. This combination leads to increasing social, economic and cultural vulnerabilities of countries and municipalities, their inhabitants and economies. The hazard profile of Kufstein is dominated by the following issues:


    Major catastrophic event (motorway, railway)

    Fires in the school/ sports center, in the home for elderly people and in different parts of the village

    Storage of dangerous goods (gas station, swimming pool, district heating plant)

  • Disaster Risk Reduction Activities

  • In order to implement an efficient and cost-effective risk management (consisting of risk mapping, capacity building, measure setting) to prevent damages of urban infrastructure and the local economy as well as to reduce vulnerabilities and losses, Kufstein actively participated in the area wide risk assessment project RiMaComm (Community-Based Risk Assessment in the Province of the Tyrol). For this purpose, the Provincial Early Warning and Emergency Management Centre together with the alpS – Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Technologies developed a hands-on method for risk assessment in the public sector that follows the latest scientific findings as well the practical needs of public authorities. The result of this Public-Private-Partnership cooperation is a blend of expert- and community-based approaches that considers multi-hazard risks as well as the principles of local participation and cost efficiency.



    With the aim of creating a sense of ownership, risk management experts visited Kufstein and liaise with a set of municipality members who are often engaged in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) on a voluntary basis and dispose of a breadth of DRR know-how. Local volunteers have expertise in analyzing technical risks like fires, natural-hazard risks such as avalanches or floods and other man-made risks like blackouts or a disruption in fresh-water supply. In a workshop, the volunteers were brought together and drive the process themselves, guaranteeing an optimal participatory action this way. During the three-hour workshop, the participants were asked to contribute not only in their specific field of expertise, but also to think about potential parallel events and cascading effects. The workshop led to a deeper understanding of risk management processes and their relevance for social and economic growth as well as an increasing risk awareness of all participants.



    Under the supervision of the alpS risk management experts, the group mapped all risks for Kufstein and initiated the capacity-building process by establishing a local DRR team. This team is currently working on the implementation of technical and organisational prevention measures as well as increasing the preparedness of Kufstein in case of an emergency. Follow-up workshops and meetings are organized to carry out the action plan agreed on, and all the workshops processes and results are captured in and supported by a dynamic knowledge repository, a software tool called ORTIS.



    In addition, Kufstein, actively participated in a city to city twinning within the project called “Cross Border Risk Assessment”. Based on the experiences of alpS in the fields of risk analysis and risk management, the project attempts to compare the established and approved alpS-approach with the approach of the German “Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe (BBK)”. By doing so, a learning process for both partners should be initiated to further improve both methods. As a first step the alpS method has been applied in two municipalities in Austria (Kufstein, Ebbs) and two communities in Germany (Kiefersfelden, Raubling). Based on these results, two topics have been selected and investigated in more detail by using the BBK approach, to identify the strength and weaknesses, as well as the opportunities and threats of both methods.

  • Disclaimer

  • The documents have been posted as received. The designations employed do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or of its authorities.