Living with Risk. A global review of disaster reduction initiatives

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction
3
3.1. Institutional frameworks: Policy, legislation and organizational
development for national and local decision-making
Disaster risk management needs to be motivated and based within governmental responsibilities,
but its success cannot be accomplished without the benefits of widespread decision-making and
the participation of many others. Leading policy direction is crucial and legal foundations assure
a continuing legitimacy, but it is the professional and human resources delivered on the ground
that are a measure of success. For this to happen, there must be a systematic approach to relate
local decision-making processes with larger administrative and resource capabilities such as those
devised in provincial or state and national disaster plans and risk reduction strategies.
The various roles which policy determination, legal processes and the resulting evolution of
organizations play in creating a sustained, public administration environment sensitive to the
identification and management of risk are reviewed in this section. As both conditions and needs
vary with geography, as well as with a wide range of professional interests involved, some of the
selected examples of these institutional frameworks are presented in broadly described regions,
while others will reflect more topical emphasis. In all the cases though, the institutional processes
involved and organizational lessons cited may hold a much wider appeal and relevance to emerging
initiatives elsewhere. The discussion proceeds through the following headings:
• Introduction to emerging institutional frameworks for disaster reduction
• Policy frameworks in practice
• National planning processes, with multi-sectoral responsibilities and local participation
• Risk reduction plans, linked to specific responsibilities, policies, and practices
Introduction to emerging institutional
frameworks for disaster reduction
The IDNDR programme not only provided an
institutional framework for countries, but also
introduced basic concepts of disaster reduction to
administrators and professionals. It started the
task of shifting policy emphasis from post-disaster
relief and rebuilding to a more proactive
approach of disaster preparedness and mitigation.
This began a new era in disaster and risk
reduction concepts, with an important role
assigned to national planning and legislation.
Many countries prepared national action plans
for disaster risk management and presented
them to the World Conference on Disaster
Reduction held in Yokohama, Japan, in 1994.
Subsequently countries have been able to
report on their activities at regional or sectoral
meetings and at the concluding IDNDR Programme
Forum in 1999.
For a long time, the state was considered the
centre of all authority as well as action in deal-
ing with disasters. Communities were considered
generally unaware of the hazards they
faced. As a result, disaster management was
most often understood as providing relief to
victims, aiding recovery following an event,
and rebuilding damaged infrastructure. As
people tended not to think so much about disaster
reduction strategies beforehand or how to
reduce risk to disasters, politicians and official
authorities have tended to rely heavily upon
emergency assistance whenever the need arose.
These outlooks also have been perpetuated by
the extent of international funds and local
emergency allocations that easily become available
after a disaster rather than before.
Historically there have been many fewer
resources devoted to routine hazard identification
and assessment activities or to support sustained
risk management strategies in areas of
known and recurrent natural disaster risks.
This may result from an institutional lack of
appreciation for public safety and the economic
values of prevention in contrast to the cost of
replacing lost assets. Alternately, it may reflect
81