Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

168 Natural and human-made disasters … cities experience both large and small disasters, but the latter are seldom systematically recorded and often ignored… Box 7.1 Key terminology Disasters and their component parts Disaster: a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses that exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources. A disaster is a function of risk processes. It results from a combination of hazards, human vulnerability and insufficient capacity or measures to reduce the potential negative consequences of risk. Natural disaster: a serious disruption to human systems triggered by a natural hazard causing human, material, economic or environmental losses that exceed the ability of those affected to cope. Human-made disaster: a serious disruption to human systems triggered by a technological or industrial hazard causing human, material, economic or environmental losses that exceed the ability of those affected to cope. Natural hazards: natural processes or phenomena occurring in the biosphere that may constitute a damaging event. Natural hazards can be classified by origin (geophysical or hydrometeorological), and they can vary in magnitude or intensity, frequency, duration, area of extent, speed of onset, spatial dispersion and temporal spacing. Human-made hazards: danger originating from technological or industrial accidents, dangerous procedures, infrastructure failures or certain human activities that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation. Examples of human-made hazard include industrial pollution, nuclear activities/accidents and radioactivity, toxic wastes, dam failures, and industrial or technological accidents (explosions, fires and spills). Human vulnerability: the conditions determined by physical, social, economic and environmental factors or processes that increase the exposure and susceptibility of people to the impact, or outcomes, of hazards. Coping capacity: the means by which people or organizations use available resources and abilities to face identified adverse consequences that could lead to a disaster. In general, this involves managing resources, both in normal times as well as during crises Source: adapted from ISDR, 2004a or adverse conditions. The strengthening of coping capacities builds resilience to withstand the effects of natural and humaninduced hazards. Adaptation: adaptation refers to human action taken to reduce exposure or sensitivity to hazard over the long term. Managing disaster risk Disaster risk reduction: an overarching term used to describe policy aimed at minimizing human vulnerability and disaster risk to help avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards within the broad context of sustainable development. Mitigation: structural (e.g. engineering) and non-structural (e.g. land-use planning) measures undertaken to limit the severity or frequency of natural and technological phenomena that have the potential to become hazardous. Preparedness: activities and measures taken in advance to ensure effective response to the impact of hazards, including the issuance of timely and effective early warnings and the temporary evacuation of people and property from threatened locations. Response: the provision of assistance or intervention during or immediately after a disaster to meet the life preservation and basic subsistence needs of those people affected. It can be of an immediate, short-term or protracted duration. Recovery: decisions and actions taken after a disaster with a view to restoring or improving the pre-disaster living conditions of the stricken community, while encouraging and facilitating necessary adjustments to reduce disaster risk. Recovery affords an opportunity to develop and apply disaster risk reduction through rehabilitation and reconstruction measures. Resilience: the capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to change by coping or adapting in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction. addresses the basic needs of survivors. As soon as possible, and often with some overlap, disaster response is followed by the more developmental agenda of recovery. At all stages, from pre-disaster to relief and recovery, there are opportunities to address the root causes of human vulnerability, such as (among others) unsafe housing, inadequate infrastructure, poverty and marginalization. Bringing these elements of risk reduction together can help to make individuals, groups and cities more resilient. THE SCALE OF DISASTERS Most cities experience both large and small disasters, but the latter are seldom systematically recorded and are often ignored, even by the local news media. More often than not, there is no mention of ‘small disasters’ in the policy statements of government or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). 1 Yet, for those involved, small events can be as destructive as large events causing injury and death and undermining livelihoods. The impact of small disasters is particularly worrying because, while there is no systematic data, many commentators argue that the aggregate impact of small events in cities exceeds losses to the low-frequency, high-impact hazards that capture news headlines. There is no agreed upon definition, such as the scale of human or economic loss, for what makes a disaster small or large. In practice, the scale ascribed to a disaster is context dependent. Ten people being killed by a landslide in
Disaster risk: Conditions, trends and impacts 169 Rio de Janeiro might be considered a small event by urban authorities; but the same event in the much smaller city of Castries, Saint Lucia, may well be considered of national significance. Table 7.1 outlines those characteristics that can be used more objectively to identify similarities and differences between small and large disasters. Human vulnerability also plays a large role in determining the scale of disaster. Small hazard events can be turned into large disasters where high vulnerability means many people are at risk, emergency response is inadequate and critical infrastructure is fragile. Where vulnerability is low, emergency services are adequate and critical infrastructure is resilient, large disasters can be avoided even from large hazards. Successive disasters can reduce the resilience of people or households to subsequent shocks and stresses. Small disasters can pave the way for large events by eroding people’s assets and the integrity of critical infrastructure, progressively lowering society’s thresholds of resilience. 2 Large events that damage critical infrastructure or urban economies will similarly undermine the capacity of individuals or emergency services to resist even everyday hazards, potentially making small disasters more frequent. Everyday hazards may be hard to avoid for those at risk and, indeed, become an intrinsic part of livelihood and survival strategies. In this way, everyday hazards and small disaster losses can mistakenly become accepted as an expected part of life. In turn, this can have the perverse effect of lowering the willingness of individuals at risk or development agencies to invest in risk reduction, 3 thus creating a vicious circle where poverty and marginalization coincide with disaster risk. Everyday hazards and small disasters differ from large disasters in that they are often seen as a problem of technological efficiency and infrastructure management – in other words, as problems of development. This has two consequences. First, everyday hazards tend to be managed by specialists from diverse fields, including engineering, medicine, land-use planning and chemistry, making integrated risk reduction more difficult. Secondly, social dimensions are easily overlooked by technological professions and planning agencies that dominate these areas of work. Episodic hazards and large disasters pose an even greater challenge to sustainable urbanization. This is because they are too often seen not as problems of development, but as problems for development. Predominant strategies for dealing with risk and loss from large disasters focus on emergency response and reconstruction – not in addressing underlying failures in development that lead to human vulnerability. The risk reduction approach taken by this <strong>Global</strong> <strong>Report</strong> calls for small and large disasters to be seen as problems of development, requiring changes in development paths as well as in disaster response and reconstruction to build resilient human settlements. Small disasters URBANIZATION AND DISASTER RISK Large disasters Scale of risk Individuals and small groups Communities, city regions, cities, global Systems at risk Individual health and livelihoods, Social stability, critical infrastructure, urban subcomponents of critical infrastructure, economies, ecosystem services local economic or ecological systems Examples of associated Localized hazard events such as tidal Widespread hazard events such as a severe trigger hazard flooding or irresponsible driving earthquake or major release of toxic chemicals Frequency of hazard event High (‘every day’) Low (‘episodic’) Strategic importance to Aggregate loss high Huge loss from individual events development planning Data sources Emergency services, local news media National and international emergency relief agencies and news media Dominant actors in Family, neighbours, emergency services Family, neighbours, emergency services, military response or civil defence, national and international humanitarian actors The last decade has seen an unprecedented number of disaster events unfold worldwide. The global incidence and impacts of disasters from 1996 onwards illustrates extensive damage both in terms of mortality and economic losses (see Table 7.2). 4 Transport accidents 5 and floods were the most frequently reported disasters. Impacts were highest for natural disasters, with earthquakes and tsunamis being the deadliest. Floods and windstorms accounted for the greatest number of disaster events and also affected the greatest number of people. Windstorms were most costly compared to other disaster types. Even with a time span of ten years, comparing the frequency and impacts of disaster types can be problematic. Large infrequent events, such as the Indian Ocean Tsunami, or individual flood or earthquake events can distort aggregate measurements of impacts associated with each hazard and disaster type. Far longer time spans would be needed to capture infrequent disaster types. However, longer time spans would subject disaster impact data to the effects of changing underlying human development contexts, including urbanization. In the new urban millennium, natural and humanmade disasters are likely to have their greatest impact in cities where half of humanity is expected to reside. The world will become predominantly urban, with the total urban population expected to reach 5 billion by 2030, while rural populations will begin to contract from 2015 onwards. 6 The location of major urban centres in coastal areas exposed to hydro-meteorological hazards and in geologically active zones is an additional risk factor. The concentration of Table 7.1 Small and large disasters In the new urban millennium, natural and human-made disasters are likely to have their greatest impact in cities… Table 7.2 <strong>Global</strong> extent and impacts of disasters by hazard type (total 1996–2005) Source: EM-DAT, CRED database, University of Louvain, Belgium, www.emdat.net Number of Mortality People Economic damage events affected (US$ millions, 2005 prices) Avalanches/landslides 191 7864 1801 1382 Earthquakes, tsunamis 297 391,610 41,562 113,181 Extreme temperatures 168 60,249 5703 16,197 Floods 1310 90,237 1,292,989 208,434 Volcanic eruptions 50 262 940 59 Windstorms 917 62,410 326,252 319,208 Industrial accidents 505 13,962 1372 13,879 Miscellaneous accidents 461 15,757 400 2541 Transport accidents 2035 69,636 89 960
Page 3:
ENHANCING URBAN SAFETY AND SECURITY
Page 6 and 7:
First published by Earthscan in the
Page 8 and 9:
INTRODUCTION Enhancing Urban Safety
Page 10 and 11:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The preparation of
Page 12 and 13:
x Enhancing Urban Safety and Securi
Page 14 and 15:
xii Enhancing Urban Safety and Secu
Page 16 and 17:
xiv Enhancing Urban Safety and Secu
Page 18 and 19:
xvi Enhancing Urban Safety and Secu
Page 20 and 21:
xviii Enhancing Urban Safety and Se
Page 22 and 23:
LIST OF FIGURES, BOXES AND TABLES F
Page 24 and 25:
xxii Enhancing Urban Safety and Sec
Page 26 and 27:
xxiv Enhancing Urban Safety and Sec
Page 28 and 29:
xxvi Enhancing Urban Safety and Sec
Page 30 and 31:
xxviii Enhancing Urban Safety and S
Page 32 and 33:
xxx Enhancing Urban Safety and Secu
Page 34:
xxxii Enhancing Urban Safety and Se
Page 38 and 39:
4 Understanding Urban Safety and Se
Page 41 and 42:
1 CHAPTER CURRENT THREATS TO URBAN
Page 43 and 44:
Current threats to urban safety and
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
2 CHAPTER VULNERABILITY, RISK AND R
Page 59 and 60:
Vulnerability, risk and resilience:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
29 simply ‘give up’ in the face
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75:
Page 80 and 81:
46 Urban crime and violence Box II.
Page 82 and 83:
48 Urban crime and violence it has
Page 84 and 85:
50 Urban crime and violence Formal
Page 86 and 87:
52 Urban crime and violence Contact
Page 88 and 89:
54 Urban crime and violence Per 100
Page 90 and 91:
56 Urban crime and violence Burglar
Page 92 and 93:
58 Urban crime and violence Percent
Page 94 and 95:
60 Urban crime and violence Figure
Page 96 and 97:
62 Urban crime and violence Table 3
Page 98 and 99:
64 Urban crime and violence Youth g
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
68 Urban crime and violence Type of
Page 104 and 105:
70 Urban crime and violence From a
Page 106 and 107:
72 Urban crime and violence One vio
Page 108 and 109:
74 Urban crime and violence High ho
Page 110 and 111:
76 Urban crime and violence Abused
Page 112 and 113:
78 Urban crime and violence General
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
82 Urban crime and violence porate
Page 118 and 119:
4 CHAPTER URBAN CRIME AND VIOLENCE:
Page 120 and 121:
86 Urban crime and violence UN-Habi
Page 122 and 123:
88 Urban crime and violence Box 4.2
Page 124 and 125:
90 Urban crime and violence Box 4.4
Page 126 and 127:
92 Urban crime and violence Legisla
Page 128 and 129:
94 Urban crime and violence above w
Page 130 and 131:
96 Urban crime and violence Campaig
Page 132 and 133:
98 Urban crime and violence Availab
Page 134 and 135:
100 Urban crime and violence Box 4.
Page 136 and 137:
102 Urban crime and violence In som
Page 138 and 139:
104 Urban crime and violence Initia
Page 140 and 141:
106 Urban crime and violence The mo
Page 142:
108 Urban crime and violence Vander
Page 146 and 147:
112 Security of tenure Box III.1 Se
Page 148 and 149:
5 CHAPTER SECURITY OF TENURE: CONDI
Page 150 and 151:
116 Security of tenure Table 5.1 A
Page 152 and 153: 118 Security of tenure Fully legal
Page 154 and 155: 120 Security of tenure Box 5.4 Secu
Page 156 and 157: 122 Security of tenure Urban tenure
Page 158 and 159: 124 Security of tenure At least 2 m
Page 160 and 161: 126 Security of tenure Market-based
Page 162 and 163: 128 Security of tenure Box 5.11 Urb
Page 164 and 165: 130 Security of tenure Operation Mu
Page 166 and 167: 132 Security of tenure Control of l
Page 168 and 169: 134 Security of tenure Box 5.18 Sec
Page 170 and 171: 136 Security of tenure NOTES 1 Habi
Page 172 and 173: 138 Security of tenure Box 6.1 The
Page 174 and 175: 140 Security of tenure It would be
Page 176 and 177: 142 Security of tenure Box 6.7 Land
Page 178 and 179: 144 Security of tenure Box 6.10 Wha
Page 180 and 181: 146 Security of tenure Box 6.12 Evi
Page 182 and 183: 148 Security of tenure Box 6.15 Con
Page 184 and 185: 150 Security of tenure Box 6.18 Vio
Page 186 and 187: 152 Security of tenure The
Page 188 and 189: 154 Security of tenure Box 6.24 Lan
Page 190 and 191: 156 Security of tenure The state is
Page 192 and 193: 158 Security of tenure Housing righ
Page 197 and 198: Over the last three decades, natura
Page 199 and 200: Introduction 165 One of the key tre
Page 201: 7 CHAPTER DISASTER RISK: CONDITIONS
Page 205 and 206: Disaster risk: Conditions, trends a
Page 229 and 230: 8 CHAPTER POLICY RESPONSES TO DISAS
Page 231 and 232: Policy responses to disaster risk 1
Page 251: Policy responses to disaster risk 2
Page 254 and 255:
220 Natural and human-made disaster
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266:
Page 270 and 271:
236 Towards safer and more secure c
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
11 CHAPTER ENHANCING TENURE SECURIT
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
276 Enhancing Urban Safety and Secu
Page 312 and 313:
12 CHAPTER MITIGATING THE IMPACTS O
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334:
Page 338 and 339:
304 Summary of case studies Since i
Page 340 and 341:
306 Summary of case studies • The
Page 342 and 343:
308 Summary of case studies tions w
Page 344 and 345:
310 Summary of case studies environ
Page 346 and 347:
312 Summary of case studies others.
Page 348 and 349:
314 Summary of case studies purpose
Page 350 and 351:
316 Summary of case studies These e
Page 352 and 353:
318 Summary of case studies develop
Page 354 and 355:
320 Summary of case studies tion ex
Page 356 and 357:
322 Summary of case studies Housing
Page 358 and 359:
324 Summary of case studies Prolong
Page 360:
326 Summary of case studies momentu
Page 364 and 365:
330 Statistical annex Islands, Micr
Page 366 and 367:
332 Statistical annex NOMENCLATURE
Page 368 and 369:
334 Statistical annex Population, u
Page 370 and 371:
336 Statistical annex SOURCES OF DA
Page 372 and 373:
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Page 380 and 381:
Page 382 and 383:
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
Page 388 and 389:
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
Page 400 and 401:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
Page 414 and 415:
Page 416 and 417:
Page 418 and 419:
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
Page 424 and 425:
Page 426 and 427:
Page 428 and 429:
Page 430 and 431:
Page 432 and 433:
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440 and 441:
Page 442 and 443:
Page 444 and 445:
410 TABLE C.7 continued Enhancing U
Page 446 and 447:
Page 448 and 449:
Page 450 and 451:
Page 452 and 453:
Page 454 and 455:
Page 456 and 457:
Page 458 and 459:
Page 460 and 461:
Page 462 and 463:
Page 464 and 465:
Page 467 and 468:
INDEX ACHR (Asian Coalition for Hou
Page 469 and 470:
Index 435 security of tenure 134 co
Page 471 and 472:
Index 437 domestic abuse see intima
Page 473 and 474:
Index 439 hazard management 169 haz
Page 475 and 476:
Index 441 Kosovo, security of tenur
Page 477 and 478:
Index 443 participation 38, 296-299
Page 479 and 480:
Index 445 individual 34-35 municipa
Page 481 and 482:
Index 447 gun ownership 78 Homeless
show all

Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?