Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

282
Towards safer and more secure cities
The Hyogo
Framework recognizes
unplanned
urbanisation as a
key factor driving
increasing global
vulnerability and
losses to…disasters
The UN-Habitat
Framework on
Sustainable Relief
and Reconstruction
… identifies future
opportunities for …
integrating disaster
risk reduction and
urban development
The Hyogo Framework recognizes unplanned urbanization as
a key factor driving increasing global vulnerability and losses
to natural and human-made disasters. Detailed urbanspecific
recommendations encourage two priority actions for
urban development and land-use planning:
Institutions dealing with urban development
should provide information to the public on
disaster reduction options prior to constructions,
land purchase or land sale. (Section 3,
i (f))
Incorporate disaster risk assessments into the
urban planning and management of disasterprone
human settlements, [particularly] highly
populated areas and quickly urbanizing settlements.
The issues of informal or
non-permanent housing and the location of
housing in high-risk areas should be addressed
as priorities, including in the framework of
urban poverty reduction and slum-upgrading
programmes. (Section 4, iii (n))
In addition, international organizations are encouraged to
support states in building and maintaining urban search and
rescue capacity, mainly through the development of mechanisms
to mainstream disaster risk reduction into
development financing and assistance for urban development.
Recommendations for action also include many crosscutting
themes that apply to urban, but also to peri-urban
and rural, contexts. These include human resource development,
early warning, emergency planning, and partnerships
between local, national and international actors.
Plans for implementing the Hyogo Framework have
been agreed and explicitly acknowledge the need to break
the negative spiral of poverty, accelerated urbanization,
environmental degradation and disaster. 11 Work is required
at national and international levels to build the institutional
structures that can take the Hyogo Framework forward. A
survey of progress made at the national level in 2006
indicates that some good progress has already been made. 12
A total of 60 governments have designated focal points with
responsibility for implementing the framework and 40
countries have reported concrete disaster risk reduction
activities. Examples of reported national-level progress are as
follows:
• The strengthening of national institutions for risk reduction
has been the area where most progress has been
achieved, to date. In many countries, this is a first step
in building the organizational infrastructure from which
more targeted initiatives can be developed. Examples of
progress include work in Argentina, where the Ministry
of Federal Planning, Public Investments and Services
has embarked on a two-year national programme to
mainstream disaster risk reduction at the national,
provincial and local levels as part of an overall Federal
Land-Use Planning Strategy. In El Salvador, authorities
have developed a National Action Plan for Disaster Risk
Reduction. In Uganda, disaster reduction has been
mainstreamed into a national Poverty Eradication Plan.
Nepal has designed a national strategy and comprehensive
national plan on disaster reduction. Indonesia has
prepared a comprehensive disaster management law on
response, risk mitigation and recovery for all hazards.
Bolivia included disaster risk reduction in its national
development plan. Cuba is implementing a policy of risk
assessment in all of its development initiatives.
• National risk assessment and early warning programmes
have also been developed. There is increasing investment
in seismic hazard monitoring capacity in several
Central Asian countries. Thailand, the Maldives and ten
countries in East Africa with coastal settlements have
strengthened their capacities in flood and tsunami earlywarning
and response systems.
• Efforts by governments aimed at building a culture of
awareness through public education and information
programmes include disaster reduction in national
curricula (e.g. in Indonesia and Kazakhstan). In China,
promoting awareness through schools is complemented
by public awareness campaigns focusing on communities
and villages. There are also many examples of
graduate and postgraduate studies that have integrated
disaster risk reduction. One example is the University
of the West Indies in Jamaica.
• A national policy to reduce underlying risk factors is
essential, but requires strong political will. Some
laudable progress has already been made by India
through creating a training programme for safer
construction. Cuba and Grenada have also developed
programmes for safer construction. In Simeulue Island
(Indonesia), community knowledge has been used in
the design of local regulations and the promotion of
forest and mangrove conservation.
• The challenge of integrating risk reduction within
emergency recovery plans has already been met by
Bolivia and Guatemala. Elsewhere, while integration has
not yet been achieved, progress has been made on
strengthening disaster preparedness and response
planning in Comoros, China, the Islamic Republic of
Iran and Tajikistan. Pakistan has developed a national
scheme for volunteers and Cuba, the Dominican
Republic, Haiti and Jamaica have initiatives to increase
their preparedness and response capacity.
Integrating disaster risk reduction and urban
development
Progress is being made in bringing together urban development,
disaster risk reduction and humanitarian action. The
UN-Habitat Framework on Sustainable Relief and
Reconstruction is a key document in this process. Here, UN-
Habitat identifies future opportunities for working with the
international community, local authorities and communities
in integrating disaster risk reduction and urban development.
The vision of sustainable relief and reconstruction
encompasses all phases of disaster management, from
prevention through relief to recovery, and aims to provide a