Making Cities Resilient Report 2012

Chapter 6.
Conclusions of the report
This report set out to review trends in urban resilience and identify factors that contribute to or enable
progress in reducing risk at the local level. Through analysis of case material provided by cities and
Partners participating in the Making Cities Resilient Campaign, several broad conclusions are evident:
1. Innovation abounds despite variable baseline urban conditions.
2. The Making Cities Resilient Campaign has triggered new momentum.
3. Commitments to date can be strengthened and extended.
1. Innovation abounds in very diverse settings
The city cases reviewed in this report are very diverse with varying levels of socio-economic development,
size and economic bases. Cities as apparently different as Pune in India, Kampala in Uganda and San
Francisco in California have demonstrated a common ability to further strengthen their capacities,
commitment and, ultimately, reduce losses – regardless of their baseline conditions.
Moreover, cities reported here include some that had historically given little attention to issues of disaster
risk and resilience and others that have already established a solid foundation for urban resilience. Some
cities such as Siquirres, Beirut and Dubai have taken their first steps through small but focused activities
that initiated more sustained action. Cities with more mature mechanisms in place, such as North
Vancouver, Mumbai, Makati and Albay Province, demonstrated more active leadership through revisiting
the impact of their own efforts and sharing insights with others.
“Governments at all levels must focus less
on what is destroyed by natural hazards
and more on what can be improved. The
challenge facing governments is not
always about a lack of money, but about
understanding how you spend the resources
you do have. This is where the Campaign
is playing a critical role now and will
continue to do so in the future. Educating
communities and governments at all
levels about the vulnerabilities linked to
rural-urban migration and the importance
of investing in critical infrastructure,
especially roads, flood defenses and
protecting schools and hospitals, should
be a strong focus for the campaign going
forward.”
Hon. Byarugaba Alex Bakuuda,
Member of Parliament, Uganda.
In small urban centres, activities tend to focus on upgrading
and repeated cleaning of drainage systems to cope with
floods, or putting in place early warning systems to reduce
vulnerability to storms. Here, local governments often rely
on community participation, as well as input from NGOs
and local universities. In large cities, disaster risk reduction
is more complex. It requires an institutional process that
encompasses strategic planning, assigned budgets, and a
more sophisticated understanding of multi-hazard risk and
vulnerability and how they are interconnected.
In describing the broad range of activities that they have
undertaken, cities have been able to identify enabling
factors contribute to progress:
• Leadership and political will
• Sustainability at local level
• Engagement in high impact activities early on
• City-to-city learning and international support
• Integrating disaster risk reduction as a cross-scale
and multi-sector issue
• Addressing existing infrastructure deficits
Yet, beyond these features, cities remain as centres of
culture and innovation. The innovative spirit of the local
governments participating in the Campaign is evident
across the board.
76 | Making Cities Resilient Report 2012