Ultimately, the Community involvement is the key. Building a resilient society with appropriate coping mechanisms is the basic principle behind any DRR. And the other stake holders are like the Local Government and other competent authorities like National disaster Management Authority;  the NGO Networks; Volunteer Groups; the Financing Institutions; private/business ; the media; Red Cross society; hospitals and fire Fighting and other services; academic community; UN bodies. Timeliness is the essence in DRR and how quickly these stake holders act and work together is important ultimately. Each stakeholder has his/hr own responsibility in different phases of  Disasters ( such as Disaster Prevention, Preparedness, Response, Relief and Mitigation )

Dear Jayaraman,

While the questions as posed are focused on the three issues of stakeholder identification (who are?);  and their subsequent roles and effectiveness, there is already a number of literature cover those areas. I believe, the scope of the question could be narrowed further to a particular context, industry, scenario etc. Notwithstanding that, the first port of call would searching for articles from either the 'Management Decision'' 'Built Environment and Project Asset Management' & 'International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment'. One such study that comes to mind on 'disaster risk reduction process' particularly the 'stakeholders issues' is as follows:

Baroudi, B. and Rapp, R.R. (2014), "Stakeholder management in in disaster restoration projects", International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 5, Iss. 2, pp. 182-193.

On the other hand, the first bit of of your question related to 'Who are the stakeholders engaged in disaster risk reduction....", I believe the following might help you in general classification

Mainardes, E.W., Alves, H. and Raposo, M. (2012), "A model for stakeholder classification and stakeholder relationships", Management Decision,  Vol. 50, Iss. 10, pp. 1861 - 1879.

Finally, the following might provide the answers to the 'why' some the roles and approaches might be effective.

Mojtahed, S.M.H. and Oo, B.L. (2014), "Stakeholders' approaches to disaster risk reduction in built environment", Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol. 23, Iss. 4, pp. 356 -369.

The above references are just indicative of the literature available.

All the best,

Nicholas

Nicholas

thanks. Small correction though. The question was posed by Majeed. I only answered his question. Hope Majeed is reading your answer too

I have read the answer, thank you so much gentlemen. 

Dear Jayaraman,

Apologises for this  error. Should have read clearly the initial posting.

Kind regards,

Nicholas

You missed the role of media, which should be taken seriously in accounti when dealing with invisible and unpredictable risks

Can I suggest to have a look at the crucial role perception palys, e.g.

Blennow K, Persson J (2009) Climate change – motivation for taking measure to adapt. Global Environ. Change, 19:100–104.

Blennow K, Persson J, Tomé M, Hanewinkel M (2012) Climate change: believing and seeing implies adapting. PLOS ONE, 7(11):e50181.

Blennow K, Persson J, Wallin A, Vareman N, Persson E (2014) Understanding risk in forest ecosystem services: implications for effective risk management, communication and planning. Forestry, 87:219-228.

You should take into account Social Amplification of Risk Framework.

Suggested readings:

Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., Pidgeon, N., & Slovic, P. (2003). The social amplification of risk: assessing fifteen years of research and theory. The social amplification of risk, 1, 13-46.

Rosa, E. A. (2003). The logical structure of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF): Aferatheoretical foundations and policy implications. The social amplification of risk, 47.

Masuda, J. R., & Garvin, T. (2006). Place, culture, and the social amplification of risk. Risk analysis, 26(2), 437-454.

Smith, D., & McCloskey, J. (1998). Risk and Crisis Management in the Public Sector: Risk Communication and the Social Amplification of Public Sector Risk. Public Money and Management, 18(4), 41-50.