Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Introduction
165
One of the key trends observed in this part of the
report is that strengthening local resilience or the capacity of
local actors to avoid, absorb or recover from the shock of
disasters through targeted interventions is now recognized
as a vital component of risk reduction. Resilience is closely
linked with access to economic, social, political and physical
assets, and is constrained by the institutional environment of
the city and its wider political–administrative context.
Enhancing social networks of support and reciprocity is one
way of improving local resilience. Legal frameworks can also
be used to invoke the rights of communities to protection
and access to resources during and after disasters. Also
important is the strengthening of household economies
through finance provision and support of livelihood activities.
Challenges to the building of local resilience remain;
yet, innovative strategies, such as piggybacking risk reduction
onto existing local activities, present opportunities.
The availability of information on hazards and vulnerability
enables effective early warning (and its four
components of knowledge, monitoring and warning,
communication and response capacity) in the face of disaster
risk. Although significant gains have been made in collating
scientific information on approaching risks and hazards,
communicating this information to risk managers in a timely
and appropriate manner has not been easy. It is also important
that information flows are transparent and clear and
help to build trust between those communicating and receiving
the information. Where information on imminent
hazards has not been available or failed to be communicated,
potentially avoidable losses have been magnified unnecessarily.
Evidence suggests that the more localized early warning
and response knowledge can be, the more resilient these
systems are in times of disaster. Successful examples of
people-centred early warning systems that build communication
systems on top of existing networks used in everyday
activities exist and are highlighted in this part of the report.
The concentration of infrastructure and buildings in
cities, including their spatial layout, is a key source of vulnerability
in the face of disasters. However, with adequate
planning and design, capacity for regulation, and commitment
to compliance or enforcement, potential risks in the
built environment of cities may be reduced. For instance, a
fundamental tool for integrating disaster risk reduction
within urban development initiatives is land-use planning.
Likewise, building codes are essential for ensuring safety
standards in components of the urban built environment.
Yet, enforcement and implementation of these guidelines
and regulations remain problematic. Particularly challenging
is planning in small urban centres where resources are
limited, but population growth (often into new areas of risk)
is rapid, and in informal or slum districts of large cities
where there is limited power to enforce land use. In both
cases, greater inclusion of those at risk in land-use and
planning decision-making offers a way forward. Imaginative
thinking to overcome the challenge of land-use planning
implementation has included suggestions that, as well as
being enforced by law, building codes should operate on a
system of incentives and support for training of informalsector
builders.
Protecting critical infrastructure and services will
influence response and reconstruction capacity in the period
after a disaster has struck a city. The potential for cascading
events to affect multiple infrastructure systems makes it
paramount that critical infrastructure and services are
protected and, where possible, managed independently of
each other to prevent contagion effects. However, networks
of communication and exchange between such services are
vital in ensuring a certain minimum level of functioning
during and after a disaster.
In the post-disaster period, municipal authorities and
local governments are best placed to coordinate relief and
reconstruction efforts. Partnerships with community groups
and international development and humanitarian agencies
are necessary in pre-disaster planning, which is needed in
allocating responsibilities and developing operating guidelines
for relief and reconstruction. Reconstruction should
also be seen as an opportunity to build risk reduction into
development. However, reconstruction programmes may
even fail to return survivors to pre-disaster conditions.
Useful lessons on integrating long-term development goals
within reconstruction work are emerging from recent disasters,
such as the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. Where
development and humanitarian agencies have worked
together, as in the involvement of UN-Habitat in the reconstruction
of parts of Pakistan following the 2005 earthquake,
there are more grounds for optimism.
The difficulties faced by national and city governments
in obtaining funding for risk reduction or
reconstruction can (and do) preclude the development of
relevant policies in these areas. Moreover, national budgets
tend to prioritize relief and reconstruction activities.
Likewise, much of the funding provided by international
organizations and governments for disasters through
bilateral and multilateral channels is mostly for recovery
and reconstruction activities. Some governments do not
set aside budgets for relief and reconstruction activities,
but rather draw on contingency funds in the aftermath of a
disaster. During recent years, however, the value of investing
in risk reduction is being recognized and reflected in
international and national funding for disaster-related
interventions. This is partly due to evidence illustrating
significant cuts in the economic, social and environmental
costs of disaster where a risk reduction approach is
adopted.
As in the case of natural and human-made disasters,
risks arising from traffic accidents can be prevented and/or
minimized through targeted policies and interventions.
Transport and urban planning, promotion of safe road-user
behaviour and traffic management are some of the key
strategies for improving road safety. Without building the
necessary institutions and awareness for road safety,
however, vulnerability to road traffic accidents cannot be
reduced. It is equally important to collect and disseminate
traffic accident data in order to formulate relevant policies,
legislation and interventions. An important trend in recent
years is that road safety has gained prominence globally, as is
evidenced by extensive international cooperation in this
area.