In a very particular view, as planning by capabilities (CBP) methodology depends on extensive adaptation to a country's culture and legal framework, we will analyze Paul Davis’s concept of CBP: "It is planning, in the face of uncertainties, to make it possible to obtain adequate resources to meet a wide range of challenges and circumstances existing today, within an economy that demands choices."

Natural disasters can be considered the most unpredictable events of our time, despite all the scientific efforts to detect them early. These phenomena undoubtedly cause concern for any country.

Given this scenario, we must recognize that the challenge cited by Davis is not the event itself, but its consequences for the population.

A foresight team is responsible for accurately predicting the potential impacts of a disaster when it occurs and conducting a thorough analysis of the needs of a country's disaster prevention and response system.

Depending on the structure chosen by the country for this governance, it is also necessary to analyze whether there is a common language between disaster relief agencies. Let me explain with an example:

In Brazil, a hybrid disaster governance system exists where each of the twenty-six states and one federal district manage their systems. However, they also have the option to integrate into a centralized system coordinated by the federal government.

The administration states that resources, training, and equipment are decentralized. This structure and governance model increase the likelihood of variations in procedures, training, and technical terms.

This example requires the establishment of protocols and a common language, to design the elements that would generate such response capacities (which is common to all) today, including the life cycle of the equipment, and the turnover of personnel, among others.

After the foresight analysis, options may arise for obtaining, based on the gaps identified between the current structure and the desired/necessary one, resources because of their forecast:

1) Invest in training and equipment for better disaster response.

2) Study methods to reduce impact or rearrange warning and construction structures in vulnerable areas (e.g., civil construction standards, warning systems).

3) etc

In a straightforward and concise manner, this outlines the relationship between capability/capacity development and disaster governance.

Also consider informal approaches https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/1/8 and https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i4.3077

Incorporation of Community-based awareness and preparedness for all types of disasters. Govt. can act as a pivot for coordination between different stakeholders.