Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

202
Natural and human-made disasters
Box 8.6 Community action builds leadership and resilience
in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic
The Dominican Disaster Mitigation Committee (DDMC) is a national non-governmental organization
(NGO) that, with support from the Organization of American States (OAS), has sought
to build local capacity as an integral part of its disaster risk reduction work in the city of Santo
Domingo.
Activities implemented by the DDMC include community mapping of local hazards,
vulnerabilities and capacities, as well as leadership training. Communities are then invited to
draw up competitive proposals for hazard mitigation projects where costs are split between
DDMC and the local community. This approach generates multiple outputs. At one level, a risk
reduction project is supported. More fundamental is the experience gained by grassroots
actors of undertaking risk assessments and developing project proposals for external funding.
The DDMC will only cover 50 per cent of the costs for any project proposal, requiring the
community to raise additional funds or resources in kind through labour. The DDMC will also
not provide financial support for any additional projects, thereby encouraging local actors to
build on their experience to apply for funding from other NGO or government sources.
Seven communities in Santo Domingo have taken part in the programme, with 2000
people benefiting directly. Activities have included building local sewer systems, storm drains, a
flood dike and an anti-landslide wall. Building local capacity in the communities has not only
reduced risk, but has also enhanced disaster response. In one community, Mata Mamon, in 1998,
Hurricane Georges caused damage to 75 per cent of houses. It was the local community who
managed aid distribution when the first supplies arrived after ten days.
Source: Pelling, 2003; see also Dominican Association of Disaster Mitigation, www.desastre.org/home/index.php4?lang=esp
While community
solidarity can be an
asset for disaster
risk reduction,
communities are not
inherently harmonious…
Venezuela. This community was among those exposed to the
extreme flooding and landslides of 1999, which killed
30,000 people. According to an official from the organization
Ecumenical Action-ACT: 26
… the organization of the neighbourhood and
the solidarity of the people saved hundreds of
lives … as the flooding progressed, community
members mobilized to assist one another.
Neighbours who knew each other and had
worked together for years communicated
swiftly the news of the rising water. Older
residents were helped from their homes by
younger neighbours. When a few were reluctant
to leave because they didn’t believe the
threat or because they were afraid their few
possessions could be stolen, neighbours broke
down doors and carried people forcibly to
safety… In one incident where we were trying,
unsuccessfully, to kick down the heavy door of a
woman who refused to leave her house, a young
gang member came along, pulled out a pistol
and fired into the lock, allowing the door to be
opened. The gang member then pointed his gun
at the woman and ordered her out of her house.
Seconds after she left the dwelling, the house
fell into the raging current … perhaps as few as
15 people died, a very small figure compared to
other similar neighbourhoods where hundreds
lost their lives.
The urban population is a key resource during times of disaster,
as demonstrated in Mexico City, where, following the
1985 earthquake, up to 1 million volunteers helped in
rescue and relief operations. 27
Where disaster risk is a dominant aspect of everyday
life, it can become a concern around which local associations
organize and remain engaged with development. A great
diversity of local associations can contribute to disaster risk
reduction, including kinship, religious and gender- or youthbased
groups, as well as groups organized around particular
interests, such as sports, environmental or social improvement.
All of these groups, and not only those that are
development or disaster oriented, can play a role in building
networks of support and, thus, disaster resilience. It is those
communities who have a rich stock of associations that are
also most likely to engage in risk reduction at the local level.
Furthermore, local associations can act as intermediaries,
conveying information between local residents and external
actors seeking to build local resilience. They can also enrich
externally funded risk reduction projects by sharing knowledge
of local customs, environmental hazards, social
vulnerability and capacity.
While community solidarity can be an asset for disaster
risk reduction, communities are not inherently
harmonious entities. Rather, they are heterogeneous and are
often cross-cut by internal competition, information
asymmetries and socio-economic inequality. This can undermine
community-level risk reduction projects, leading to
interventions exacerbating inequalities and undermining
collective resilience. For example, in many communities,
women may predominate in the membership of community
groups, but may be excluded from leadership. This is a
missed opportunity. 28 An Indian NGO, Swayam Shiksam
Prayong, has attempted to address this concern by enacting a
philosophy of not only rebuilding physical structures, but
realigning social relations in post-disaster periods. A priority
was to work with women to facilitate their visions of life
after the earthquake, which included, for example, assigning
land titles to both women and men. 29 Box 8.7 offers some
examples of ways in which women have taken a lead in
reducing local disaster risk.
External agencies seeking to work with communitylevel
partners in disaster risk reduction must also be
cautious not to assume that community leaders represent
the best interests of local residents. Following the Bhuj
earthquake in Gujarat (India) in 2001, international and
government aid prioritized speed in distribution of goods,
which enabled high-cast groups to capture a disproportionate
amount of aid at the expense of lower-cast groups and
Muslims. 30 This observation underlines the advantages of
disaster risk reduction and response work that is built on
sound knowledge of local political and social rivalries, as well
as capacities for collective action to build resilience.
Building the capacity of local authorities is also vital
for disaster risk reduction. The Asian Urban Disaster
Mitigation Program (AUDMP) works to build local- and citylevel
capacity across Asia. One of its projects in the city of
Ratnapura (Sri Lanka) seeks to improve the disaster risk
management capacity of local authorities by providing them
with improved tools and skills. This involved the development
of a methodology for identifying hazards and
determining potential losses. Outputs have included the