Map
Who’s most at risk?
General information
“Who’s most at risk?” is a tested and freely available educational toolkit consisting of teacher’s notes, pupil activity sheets, character profiles, key-word lists, chance cards and hazard scenario cards. It supports a 15–20 minute role-play in which pupils adopt the identities of people living in different parts of the world and physically move forwards or backwards according to statements about age, income, education, housing, disability, location and access to information or savings. Their final positions make visible which groups are most vulnerable to hazards such as floods, droughts and earthquakes, and why.
The resource responds to the need for practical, classroom-ready tools that help young people understand that disasters are not “natural” but the result of hazards interacting with patterns of vulnerability, exposure and capacity. Practical Action developed the activity within its wider work on climate resilience and disaster risk reduction, which supports communities in low-income and climate-vulnerable regions to access skills and technologies that reduce risk.
Status
Purpose
Topics For Preparedness
Hazard Type
Geographical Scope - Nuts
Population Size
Population Density
Needs Addressed
Many pupils understand “natural disasters” mainly as physical events, with limited awareness of how social inequality, livelihoods, age, disability, gender, housing conditions and access to information affect who is most at risk and who recovers fastest. “Who’s most at risk?” responds to this gap by offering a structured activity that helps young people distinguish between hazards and disasters, recognise vulnerability and resilience as socially produced, and connect risk factors to different outcomes when hazards such as floods, earthquakes or droughts occur.
The teacher notes, used to set up and coordinate the game, specifically list some vulnerable groups including children and older people, people with disabilities, people living in rural areas or urban slums (lacking infrastructures), low income households with fewer resources to recover from disasters
The solution is made freely available and therefore managed autonomously by the teachers and schools which use it as an educational tool. At a meta-governance level, the game mentions several stakeholders governing different aspects of the mitigation measures proposed, such as local development organisations distributing resources, public infrastructure managers, the media for sharing information.
Through the debrief discussion, teachers are encouraged to ask what helps people prepare and how families or communities could reduce their risk (e.g. planning evacuation routes, saving, seeking information), linking to follow-on STEM challenges that focus on flood-resilient housing and agriculture.
The resource illustrates contrasting infrastructure situations (e.g. presence/absence of bridges, urban slums vs. better-built houses), but does not specify a single real setting. In terms of the schools using the activity, the infrastructure requirement is minimal.
The purpose is to build awareness among young people of how vulnerability and resilience are shaped, stimulate critical reflection on justice, inequality and access to information in disaster risk, and prepare pupils to engage more meaningfully in later STEM projects or community DRR initiatives.
Teachers steer the activity eliciting the participation of -pupils. Activities include role-play with individuals character profiles, guided movement exercises to visualise vulnerability, plenary debrief.
Pupils influence how the activity unfolds (through their decisions to move and interpret statements) and contribute ideas during debrief, but they do not make formal DRR decisions for actual communities. The main influence is on their own perceptions and, potentially, on school projects that follow (e.g. design challenges).
The activity strengthens resilience in the long term by helping young people understand what makes people vulnerable to disasters and what supports recovery. It develops empathy as well as analytical skills, encouraging pupils to recognise inequality, exposure and access to resources as key risk factors. By linking the activity to later STEM design challenges, it also builds confidence in identifying solutions, not just problems.
Vulnerable Groups
Governance
Emergency Preparedness
Infrastructure Readiness
Engagement Level
Empowerment Level
Implementation
“Who’s most at risk?” turns abstract disaster-risk concepts into a lived classroom experience. Pupils embody different characters and physically move in response to vulnerability statements and hazard scenarios, making inequality and exposure instantly visible. The method is simple, low-cost and highly participatory, encouraging critical reflection rather than rote learning. It also links directly to STEM design challenges, supporting a shift from understanding risk to imagining practical solutions.
English
The resource is produced by Practical Action, an international non-governmental organisation headquartered in the United Kingdom.
For decades, Practical Action has implemented disaster-risk-reduction and climate-resilience programmes in partnership with local authorities, NGOs and communities. Its work integrates technology, livelihoods, communication and social inclusion to reduce exposure to hazards and strengthen community-level preparedness. The school programme draws directly on these insights to support accurate and responsible learning.
Initially developed by PracticalAction, the activity is mainly implemented by secondary-school teachers in geography, science and STEM subjects, working directly with pupils aged 11–18. It is also occasionally facilitated by NGO educators and youth-work practitioners in non-formal learning settings.
Teachers download the free resource pack, print the activity sheets and prepare a space large enough for pupils to move safely. Each pupil receives a character profile and takes part in a guided role-play where they move forward or backward depending on vulnerability statements and hazard scenarios. A facilitated discussion follows, helping pupils reflect on why certain people are more at risk and what can reduce that risk
Very few external resources are needed: mainly teacher preparation time, printed materials and an open space such as a classroom or hall. The resource pack itself is free to download, so financial requirements for schools are minimal.
The core activity takes around 15–20 minutes, with additional time recommended for reflection, discussion and follow-on project work. Schools often integrate it into a single lesson or as the starting point for a longer STEM or geography module.
Experience of the Implementing Organisation in DRM
Target Audience
Resources Required
Timeframe & Phases
Participation Results
Embodied and participatory methods help young people grasp complex risk concepts far more effectively than lecture-style teaching. Seeing vulnerability physically represented in the classroom generates engagement and critical thinking, which can then be channelled into problem-solving through linked STEM challenges.
There are no specific challenges associated with the role-play, except for students’ misplaced assumptions on natural disasters, hazards and vulnerability. The objective of the game is to make them sensitive and prepared rowards thrse subjects.
The main risks relate to misunderstanding or oversimplifying sensitive social issues rather than physical danger. These are mitigated through careful facilitation, age-appropriate language and reflective discussion.
Risk & Mitigation Plan
Scalability and Sustainability
Because the resource is free, lightweight and printable, schools can use it repeatedly with minimal ongoing cost. Practical Action maintains the materials online and promotes them through education networks, supporting long-term accessibility.
The activity is highly adaptable. Teachers can adjust the characters or scenarios to reflect local contexts while keeping the underlying structure intact. It fits easily into existing curricula and can be delivered in many different learning environments, from formal classrooms to informal youth groups.
Innovation lies in the pedagogy rather than the technology. The role-play format transforms abstract concepts such as vulnerability, exposure and resilience into a lived, felt experience for pupils, helping them internalise the idea that disasters are socially shaped.
Direct costs are limited to printing and staff preparation time. This makes the activity easy for schools to sustain independently.
Operational costs (e.g. printing materials) are very limited.
Embodied and participatory methods help young people grasp complex risk concepts far more effectively than lecture-style teaching. Seeing vulnerability physically represented in the classroom generates engagement and critical thinking, which can then be channelled into problem-solving through linked STEM challenges.