A global review of disaster reduction initiatives - Welcome to the ...

DLiving with RiskA global review of disasterreduction initiativesPreliminary versionGeneva, July 2002Prepared as an inter-agency effort coordinated by the ISDR Secretariat withspecial support from the Government of Japan, the World MeteorologicalOrganization and the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (Kobe, Japan)International StrategyISDRfor Disaster ReductionETSISANRREDUCTIONENCUnited NationsWMOASIARET

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe ISDR Secretariat gratefully acknowledges the many individual and institutional contributions for the global review of disasterreduction initiatives received from around the world.The material in this review was drawn from special ISDR studies carried out by regional partner organizations, solicitedinputs from UN agencies, experts and individuals, and from publicly available information. In addition, a questionnaire wascirculated by the Secretariat to all countries for self-assessment of their institutional and policy development, risk assessmentsand planning for disaster risk reduction. Valuable contributions were also made by members of the Inter-Agency Task Forceon Disaster Reduction. Additional contributions have been provided by participants in the on-line debate, held in preparationfor the World Summit on Sustainable Development, organized by the NGO network Multi Stakeholder Forum for Our CommonFuture and the ISDR Secretariat during May, 2002 (see: www.earthsummit2002.org).An Advisory Panel comprising experts from around the world (see below) met twice to provide guidance for the preparationof the report.FundingSpecial appreciation is extended to the Government of Japan, the Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) and the WorldMeteorological Organization (WMO) who kindly contributed funds and resources for the realisation of this project. AdditionalISDR resources were drawn from contributions received from the Governments of Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland,Germany, Iceland, the Philippines, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and from the World Bank.Regional contributors• Central America: Coordination Center for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPREDENAC), withsupplementary input from North America• Andean nations: Andean Development Corporation (CAF) Disaster Prevention Programme (PREANDINO), with supplementaryinput from South America• Caribbean: Caribbean Disaster and Emergency Response Agency (CDERA)• Asia: Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) with supplementary input from ADRC, Japan, Iran and Kazakhstan• Pacific island states: South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC)• Southern Africa: Disaster Mitigation for Sustainable Livelihoods Programme (DiMP), University of Cape Town, with supplementaryinput on the Horn of Africa and North Africa• Central Europe: Central European Disaster Prevention Forum (CEUDIP)• Europe: European Directorate General Joint Research Centre (JRC) with additional contributions from Germany andSwitzerland.Advisory PanelGerhard Berz, Member of Executive Management, MunichRe, GermanyIan Davis, former Professor at University of Cranfield, UKCorazón de León, former Chair, Civil Service Commission, Government of the PhilippinesClaude de Ville de Goyet, former Chief of the Disaster Preparedness Program, PAHO/WHO, Washington D.C.Robert Hamilton, International Council for Science (ICSU) and National Academies, USA.Isabelle Milbert, Professor, University Institute for Development Studies (IUED), Geneva , SwitzerlandEvans A. Mukolwe, Director Coordinator, Scientific and Technical Programmes, WMO, GenevaSatoru Nishikawa, Executive Director, ADRC, Kobe, JapanIndividual contributorsThe ISDR Secretariat thanks all those individuals, country and agency representatives who have provided contributions orcomments and who have helped in reviewing the current preliminary text of this review. The list is long and not all are mentionedby name. Special thanks are extended to Kenzo Oshima, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs,whose encouragement and support throughout the process have been very valuable, and to Professor Denis Martin Benn,former interim Director of the ISDR Secretariat, who launched the idea of a global review on disaster reduction initiativesin 2001.1

Bastien Affeltranger, FranceTom Alcedo, CARE, IndiaMargaret Arnold, DMF, World Bank, Washington D.C.Andrea Athanas, Shell Global SolutionsYasemin Aysan, UNDP, GenevaDjillali Benour, University of Bab Ezzour, AlgeriaNeil Britton, New ZealandJohn Campbell, University of Waikato, New ZealandBarbara Carby, ODPEM, JamaicaEd Clay, ODI, UKHe Changchui, FAO, RomeJeremy Collymore, CDERA, BarbadosLouise Comfort, University of Pittsburg, USAClaude De Ville de Goyet, PAHO, Washington D.C.Amod Dixit, NSET, NepalNorberto Fernandez, UNEP, NairobiDaria Ferrari, OCHA, GenevaHenry Gaudru, Société Volcanologique Européenne, FranceMohsen Ghafory-Ashtiany, IIEES, IranJohann Goldammer, GFMC, GermanyRobert Hamilton, National Research Council, NationalAcademies, USAMaria Hartl, former DAW/UNDESA, New YorkTom Harrer, MozambiqueAilsa Holloway, University of Cape Town, South AfricaKari Juhani Keipi, IADB, Washington D.C.Sylvester Kalonge, USAID, ZambiaKamal Kishore, ADPC, ThailandAllan Lavell, FLACSO and LA RED, Costa RicaAlessandro Loretti, WHO, GenevaKirsi Madi, UNICEF, GenevaJean-Pierre Massue, EUR-OPA Major Hazards, Council ofEurope, Strassbourg, FranceAlan Mearns, SOPAC, FijiStefan Micallef, UNEP, NairobiTanya Miquilena de Corrales, PREANDINO/CAF,VenezuelaStuart Mustow, Hazards Forum, UKJaromir Nemec, CEUDIP, Czech RepublicAli Neumann, SDC/PREVAC, NicaraguaChristopher Newhall, University of Washington, USASaturo Nishikawa, ADRC, Kobe, JapanToshiyasu Noda, former Disaster Preparedness Office,Cabinet Office, JapanEva von Oelreich, IFRC, GenevaKenji Okazaki, UNCRD, Kobe, JapanBrett Orlando, IUCN, SwitzerlandMary Otto-Chang, York Centre for Applied Sustainability,CanadaDennis Parker, Middlesex University, UKJean Luc Poncelet, PAHO, Washington D.C.Carlos Manuel Rodríguez Otero, Instituto de PlanificaciónFísica, CubaTim Radford, UKBadaoui Rouhban, UNESCO, ParisJack Rynn, AustraliaJohn Scott, USARajib Shaw, UNCRD, Kobe, JapanJan Sheltinga, UNCCD secretariat, BonnJosephine Shields, IFRC, GenevaOwen Shumba, SAFIRE, ZimbabweAnil Sinha, National Centre for Disaster Management, IndiaFranz Stoessel, PLANAT, SwitzerlandKen Sudo, JICA, Japan, Institute of Seismology, KazakhstanJason Switzer, IISD, Geneva, SwitzerlandPablo Torrealba, CEPREDENAC, PanamaChristopher Tucker, OCIPEP, CanadaJaime Valdés, UN-HABITAT, GenevaDewald Van Niekerk, African Centre for Disaster Studies,South AfricaAna Lisa Vetere A., European Commission, JRC, ItalyCarlos Villacis, Kennedy School of Government, HarvardUniversity, USAFlorian Wieneke, CubaDonald Wilhite, National Drought Center, University ofNebraska, USAZheng Yuan-Chang, National Committee ISDR, ChinaKarl-Otto Zentel, DKKV, GermanyDave Zervaas, CRID, Costa RicaReplies to the ISDR questionnaire on disaster reduction were received from:Angola, Armenia, Bangladesh, Bahrain, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cook Islands,Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Guam, Honduras,India, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Laos, Lebanon, Lithuania, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mexico,Monaco, Mongolia, Nauru, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Salomon Islands, Samoa, SriLanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.The production team for the global reviewISDR Secretariat: Mohamed Abchir, Pedro Basabe, Marie-Lou Darricau, John Harding, Abdullahi Majeed,Helena Molin Valdés (editorial and project coordination), Marianne Muller, Elina PalmMain consultants: Terry Jeggle, Haris Sanahuja, Carmen SchlosserSpecial advisor: Ian DavisEditorial support/proof reading: Michelle Katz, Fabien Nathan, Cristian NitschDesign and layout: Mario Barrantes ZünigaOther current and former ISDR Secretariat staff contributed in many different ways:Christine Alessi, Nicole Appel, Sálvano Briceño (ISDR Director), Stephanie Boubault, Astrid Gallecier, Elena Dokhlik, Sam Hammond,Susanne Jacobsen, Francesco Pisano, Christel Rose, Etsuko TsunozakiPhotos: ADRC, ISDR Secretariat, MünichRe, PAHO, GFMC2

UNITED NATIONSNATIONS UNIESFOREWORDIn recent years the world has witnessed an interminable succession of disasters -- floods, storms,earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions and wildfires that have claimed many thousands of lives, causedmaterial losses in the tens of billions of dollars, and inflicted a terrible toll on developing countries in particular,where disasters divert attention and resources needed desperately to escape poverty.Communities will always face natural hazards, but today's disasters are often generated by, or at leastexacerbated by, human activities. At the most dramatic level, human activities are changing the natural balanceof the earth, interfering as never before with the atmosphere, the oceans, the polar ice caps, the forestcover and the natural pillars that make our world a livable home. But we are also putting ourselves in harm'sway in less visible ways. At no time in human history have so many people lived in cities clustered around seismicallyactive areas. Destitution and demographic pressure have led more people than ever before to live inflood plains or in areas prone to landslides. Poor land-use planning; environmental mismanagement; and alack of regulatory mechanisms both increase the risk and exacerbate the effects of disasters.Living with risk: a global review of disaster reduction is the first comprehensive effort by the UnitedNations system to take stock of disaster reduction initiatives throughout the world. Coordinated by thesecretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), the report discusses current disastertrends, assesses policies aimed at mitigating the impact of disasters, and offers examples of successful initiatives.It also recommends that risk reduction be integrated into sustainable development at all levels - global,national and local.Most of all, Living with risk shows that we are far from helpless in the face of natural hazards. Earlywarning and risk reduction measures have been important factors in helping to reduce significantly the numberof people who lose their lives to disasters. New planning and forecasting tools are helping to mitigate thedevastation regularly wrought by floods. We can and must build a world of resilient communities and nations.I hope that this publication reaches the widest possible readership and rouses the international community todo its utmost to better equip people everywhere for life in our hazard-filled planet.Kofi A. AnnanSecretary-GeneralJuly, 20023

IntroductionThis is a preliminary version of Living with Risk - a global review of disaster reduction circulated for consultation.It includes a compilation of initiatives and reference information. It focuses on disaster risk reduction asenvisioned in the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Therefore, it does not discuss specific experiencesof disaster preparedness, response or recovery. It is intended for practitioners in disaster management,environmental and sustainable development, to provide guidance, policy orientation and inspiration.It is a first effort to collect and systematise information on disaster risk reduction initiatives, by illustrating thefull range of activities and some of the many actors involved. While it is still limited geographically, it has thegoal to reach common understanding of the issues.The review is based on examples of activities and various applications, identifying trends where possible. Itstarts with the important contexts of sustainabledevelopment surrounding disaster risk reduction,followed by a chapter on risk trends and assessment.Sections then describe some of the different elementsof disaster risk reduction illustrated from global,regional and national examples. Policy and institutionalframeworks; knowledge and informationmanagement; and the application of specific measures,such as environmental management, land useplanning, engineering protection of critical facilities,financial tools and early warning systems are highlightedelements. A section on relevant internationalagendas and the role of the different parts of theUnited Nations involved with disaster risk reductionprovides for fuller understanding of the linksbetween them. Finally, the report outlines some ofthe challenges for the future by suggesting the needIn recent years, there has been a major conceptualshift in how people seek to cope with disastersfrom natural hazards. While humanitarianresponse capacities are vital and need continuedattention, the focus on addressing risk underlinesthe recognition that human interventiondesigned to reduce the vulnerability of communitiesand assets can reduce the impact of disasters.Gradually environmental and developmentstakeholders are becoming more involved in themanagement of risk and vulnerability reductiondue to its close interaction with natural resourcesmanagement.for setting specific targets and monitoring progress. The report provides users with reference material and adirectory of many international, national and educational organizations dedicated to risk reduction.Some development organizations have published reports and adopted policies to address disaster risk in thecontext of development. These are valuable tools and help increase public and political interest in risk reductionand the objectives of ISDR. For example, in 2001, UNDP prepared a vulnerability risk index for leastdeveloped countries and is currently preparing a World Vulnerability Report, which focuses on the links betweendevelopment and disasters. UNEP has released the Global Environmental Outlook, GEO3, in 2002 prior to theWorld Summit for Sustainable Development, which includes a thorough analysis of environmental changeand vulnerability with a special section on disasters. In its reports for 2001 and 2002, the World Bank analysedthe relations between environment, poverty and natural disasters. The International Federation of Red Crossand Red Crescent Societies publishes its World Disasters Report annually. This year 2002, the focus is on reducingrisk.Yet, a comprehensive and systematic review of ongoing initiatives is still lacking. The elaboration of a comprehensiveframework to measure disaster risk reduction efforts over time, which could set the ground fordeveloping specific risk reduction targets and thereby contribute to enhancing capacities in governments andcommunities is also needed. This review is a step in that direction, inviting consultation and partnership.4

A more vulnerable worldThe trend shows increasing losses from disasters (see chapter 2). The reason is both simple andcomplex – it has to do with how people and societies are becoming more vulnerable. Although thefrequency of dramatic natural events may be constant, human activities contribute to theirincreased intensity. It depends on development practices, environmental protection, regulatedgrowth of cities, distribution of people and wealth in the safest places, and government structures.Human activity also has an impact on the planet’s climate, which will result in increased sea levelsand potential disasters.The number of people at risk has been growing by 70 to 80 million per year. More than 90 percent of population growth is in the developing world, among people with the smallest share ofresources and the biggest burden of exposure to disasters.In theory, natural hazards, including earthquakes, floods, drought, storms, tropical cyclones andhurricanes, storm, wildfire, tsunami, volcanic eruptions and avalanches, can threaten everyone. Inpractice, proportionally, they tend to hurt the poor most of all. This is because the poor outnumberthe rich, and live in greater density in more poorly built housing on land most at risk.The price of life, like the price of liberty, is constant vigilance. Natural hazards are constant threats.But every year the potential loss to life and livelihood soars as people converge in cities, where nowhalf of the people of the planet live. With the growth of the cities, and population, come changesin the landscape – and the disruption of natural ecosystems.Hillsides are cleared of trees for building materials andfirewood, but not replanted. Wetlands are drained tomake space for new housing or workplaces. Rivers areengineered to follow unnatural routes. But with no trees,there is more erosion, and more silt to clog the rivers. Allof these things make landslides, floods or drought morelikely – and when they happen, more devastating.People who have to struggle every day just to survive donot have the time or the strength to worry about more distantenvironmental and natural hazards. So a disasterreduction strategy is inseparable from social and economicdevelopment, and from thoughtful environmentalmanagement. These three things are at the heart of sustainabledevelopment.A disaster reduction strategy must therefore be built onsustainable development policies, which take into accountthe potential risks for disasters and plan to reduce theserisks, involving everyone and providing not just help buthope.6

“Imagine all the people…”It would be quite possible to imagine a community or even a nation that lived with a regard fornature, despite its hazards, thanks to a coherent disaster risk reduction strategy in place.Housing would be built out of appropriate materials, adapted to local conditions and according tobuilding codes. Its houses, hospitals, schools, markets, factories, government offices, power suppliesand other critical services would be on the sites least exposed to risk.Inhabitants would maintain forested or wetland areas as a form of natural flood control, as sourcesof local renewable revenue, and as security against other threats such as erosion and landslide.People and government officials would be aware that a hazard that threatened one family or settlementwould also be a threat to all. They would maintain a network of early warning and watchfulness,linked to the experts who monitored weather signals or seismic instruments.Elected or traditional leaders would have regular dialoguenot just with local, regional or national govern -ment officials and citizens, but also with the governmentagencies and scientists. Village councils would haveensured structures that serve as safe shelters in acyclone, or ground safe for livestock in the event offlood. Schools would teach children what to do when theriver rises, or the earth begins to shake. Farmers wouldhave granaries or fodder stores safe from storm andabove any likely flood level.Health facilities would be safe, and health centres wouldwork with communities to reduce risk from disaster.Householders would have small but secure savings tohelp them through disruption caused by storm or inundation.These communities would accept that information andcommunication were the most important elements of all.People would routinely listen to daily weather reports,and follow local political and economic debate throughradio, newspapers or television. Such communitieswould be more likely to shore up their own flooddefences, maintain their drainage or secure their ownhousing against destruction, by communal action. Legislatorswould understand that public safety was part oftheir obligation and administrators, of course, would beexpected to police such legislation.It is possible...Safer communities, living with acceptable risk, doexist in, among other places, New Zealand, California,Japan, along the Gulf of Mexico andamong the low-lying coastal regions of westernEurope. All these regions are potentially vulnerableto natural hazard. All have suffered from theimpacts of major natural disasters but have metthem with lower loss of life and greater economicresilience. The difference is that these placesbelong to richer nations – rich enough to believethat life can and will always improve. Economicwealth is not the only factor in reducing risk.Political will and a communal sense of hope arepart of the collective protection against calamity.Chile and Colombia have local disaster risk managementcommittees watching for future trouble.Bangladesh long ago established a local earlywarning system to alert the millions at risk whenfloods and tropical cyclones threaten. Safer fromthe hazards of weather or tectonic forces, peoplecan begin to build more economically secure livesfor themselves and their children.7

Chapter1Living with risk - focus ondisaster risk reduction1.1 Setting the scene - understanding disasterrisk reduction1.2 Contexts and processes linked to disaster riskreduction: sustainable development9

Eruption of Mount Agung, Bali, IndonesiaInk painting by Ida Bagus Nyoman Rai (1915-1999)Mount Agung is Bali’s highest and most sacred mountain. In 1963 it erupted for the first time in living memory. Entire villagesand temples were toppled or burned under the lava. Those more prepared saved their lives and escaped with only afew possessions.

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSource: OFDA/CRED International disaster database, 2002Includes: drought, earthquake, epidemic, extreme temperature, famine, flood, industrial accident, insect infestation, miscellaneous accident,slide, transport accident, volcano, wave/surge, wild fire, wind stormDespite losses of US$ 30 billion in 2000, anamount that must, unfortunately, be termedmoderate in comparison to the average ofannual losses during the past decade, both thenumber of major natural disasters and theircosts have increased rapidly in recent years.In 2000, the insurance industry recorded 850major loss events in the world, one hundredmore than the previous record year in 1999.While the losses recorded in 2000 were lowerthan the US$ 100 billion incurred in 1999,they provide little comfort to the overall trendduring the past decade. Overall the 84 greatnatural disasters recorded in the 1990s werethree times as many as those that occurred inthe 1960s, whereas the combined economiclosses of US$ 591 billion were eight timesgreater than those of the 1960s.Ten thousand people died in natural disastersin 2000, compared to more than 70,000 in theprevious year, or over 500,000 in the previousten years. These figures must be treated withcaution, as the social and economic cost of disastersis difficult to estimate. By and large,insurance claims tend to be misleading as anestimate of the economic impact of disasters.Considering insured damage claims for the1999 floods in Austria, Germany and Switzerland,at least 42.5 per cent of damage was coveredby disaster insurance. But in Venezuelathe same year, only four per cent of flood dam-age was covered. For more information ontrends in disaster impact, see chapter two.Generally, disaster statistics tend to be moreprecise on a smaller scale; in particular on thenational and regional level where the evaluationof damages is undertaken in a more systematicmanner, based on agreed methodologies.However, this is not the case in all regionsand notably in Africa, where the lack of coherentdisaster-related figures means the impact ofdisasters is highly underestimated. In addition,mega-disasters receive much media attentionand the setbacks that these events create in thedevelopment process are well noted, whilesome experts estimate that if the perniciouseconomic impact of the smaller, but recurrent,disasters were assessed, all of these figureswould be much higher.Not appropriately reflected in these statisticsare the millions of poor people who have seentheir lives indirectly shattered by the economicimpact of the natural disasters, their ability toraise a modest income reduced or annihilatedand the prospect to escape poverty postponedindefinitely. These losses, modest in absoluteeconomic terms, are devastating at a social andsometimes political level.There is a demand for reliable and systematicdata on disasters by the development sector toassess their socio-economic impact in the short12

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1term and, even more importantly, in the longterm, if the consequences of the many smallerand unrecorded disasters could be taken intoaccount. While attempted in limited areas, apressing need remains to consistently documentthese incremental and often recurrentlosses that are continuously eroding the capacitiesof communities to grow and develop.While hazards may induce a crisis, it is nowwidely understood that prevailing conditionswithin any group of people in a society candetermine the extent of their susceptibility orresilience to loss or damage. There is insightacross a growing number of professional fieldsand in some governments that different populationsegments can be exposed to greater relativerisks because of their socio-economic conditionsof vulnerability. Because of this, disasterreduction has become increasingly associatedwith practices that define efforts to achievesustainable development. Equally, as the possibilityof human-induced influences on climatechange are better understood, the detrimentaleffects of forestry exploitation become evident,or the effectiveness of earlier engineering solutionsfor controlling natural phenomena arequestioned, the relationships between humanactions, environmental stewardship and disasterrisks are becoming ever more crucial.It is remarkable that disasters not only affectthe poor and traditionally vulnerable countriesbut also those thought well protected: Canada,the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Poland,the United Kingdom and the United Statesexperienced record-setting floods in recentyears of such magnitude that previouslyaccepted procedures for protection and thinkingabout the utility of structural barriers haveto be re-evaluated.The extraordinarily heavy rainfall associatedwith hurricane Mitch caused a landslide at theCasita volcano in Nicaragua that was 18 kmlong and 3 km wide, and totally destroyedthree towns and killed more than 2,000 people.Torrential rains triggered the landslide ofdenuded and unstable slopes in Venezuela in1999 with more than 20,000 fatalities.Less than two years later, one of the earthquakesin El Salvador caused a landslide on aslope destabilized by deforestation and slopemining, burying almost 500 people living inill-placed communities that were probablycompromised at least in part by lax control ofbuilding regulations.In 2001 similarly disastrous floods and mudslidescaused more than 800 fatalities, most extraordinarilyin the Algerian capital, Algiers. The mostsevere winter storms in a century swept throughCanada in 1998, through Western Europeancountries in 1999, and the following year inMongolia, with even greater loss of livelihoodsand longer-term consequences because of thedecimated flocks of nomadic herders.Effects of hurricaneMitch in Tegucigalpa,Honduras, 199813

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesOldcoastlineDebrisflowimpactareaNew coastlineThe village of Carmen de Uria, Venezuela, was completely covered by the debris flow in December 1999. Thelocation of the former settlement is marked. Source: Prof. Roberto Prado, 1999.In the past three years, severe earthquakes in Colombia, Greece, India, Peru, Taiwan and Turkeyhave shaken previously complacent official views on building practices. El Salvador experiencedtwo major earthquakes within one month, one of them measuring 7.6 on the Richter scale, the secondstrongest in 90 years.Meanwhile during 2001, persistent drought conditions eroded already fragile livelihoods inAfghanistan (which also experienced an earthquake in 1998 and 2002) and in several other countriesof Central Asia, in Eastern and Southern Africa, and in much of Central America. The consequencesof uncontrolled wildfire and related conditions of severe atmospheric pollution and hazeintruded into neighbouring areas of North-Eastern Africa, Central and North America, South-East Asia, Southern Europe, and within individual states of Australia.The El Niño/La Niña events of 1997-1998 were the most intense occurrence of this cyclical climaticphenomenon during the twentieth century. Beyond representing economically costly variationsto normal climate expectations, these events also created conditions around the world, whichspawned extensive flooding, extended drought conditions and widespread wildfires.14

The shift towards disaster reductionIn all of these cases the drama of the disastersand the urgent international activities to provideemergency relief assistance, command the attentionof the international media – generally onlyfor a few days. The consequences of the disasterslast much longer and are more poignantly measuredin solitude: lives lost, livelihoods disrupted,property destroyed and often increasingly fragileenvironments damaged. All of these lossesimpede the development of the human conditionand often sacrifice previously hard-won individualand national accomplishments. They alsocompromise both immediate and long-termresources upon which current societies, as well asfuture generations, depend.The subject of disaster and risk reduction drawsits relevance from earlier contributions and previouspractices in the disaster managementfields, where traditionally the focus has been onpreparedness for response. Before proceedingfurther though, it is important to establish acommon understanding of the basic tenets ofdisaster reduction that this review addresses.Thus, the review’s outlooks, abilities and practiceswill be clearly distinguished from the conventionalunderstanding of expressions related toemergency or disaster management issues.Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionThose closest to affected populations – politicalauthorities, professionals from many differentfields, commercial interests, public organizations,educational institutions and local community leaders– are increasingly recognizing the essential publicvalue of sustained efforts to reduce the social,economic and environmental costs of natural disasters.There has, for example, been a tidal change inthe understanding of countries in Central Americaover the past three years, following the repeateddevastating effects of natural disasters. There isnow increased emphasis placed on risk, and anacceptance that disaster, development and environmentalproblems are inextricably linked.Disaster reduction policies and measures need to beimplemented, with a twofold aim: to enable societies tobe resilient to natural hazards while ensuring thatdevelopment efforts do not increase vulnerability tothese hazards.This understanding is essential if communities areto become more resilient to the effects of hazards sothat disaster losses can be reduced in coming years.These activities make the news much less often,perhaps because they are mostly concerned withpeople during their ordinary work, focused onincorporating risk awareness into their daily existence.1Some Major Catastrophes in the 20th Century

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesLearning risk reduction frompractices in the pastThere are early historical examples of societies protectingtheir people and their important resources. This was accomplishedfirst, by anticipating potential catastrophes based onknowledge of hazardous conditions and possible destructiveevents, then by investing in protective measures. Inca rulers,living in the Andes between the thirteenth and fifteenth century,took great care to create terraces on steep slopes to conservethe scarce soil and water necessary for their crops.Many of these terraces remain today, as do similar constructionsmaintained for over a thousand years in themountain provinces of Indonesia and the Philippines.Local crop preservation techniques were alsoused as a hedge against possible drought or otherconditions of food shortage.Traditional practices of farmers around the worldhave been influenced by locally developed knowledgeof weather patterns or naturally occurringindicators in plants and animals, to forecast particularlyharsh conditions. If imprecise, such methodsdid demonstrate an awareness of potential riskthat led people to consider alternate courses ofaction in order to protect their livelihood.More recently, with the increase of scientificknowledge, policies have developed in somecountries that have tried to protect people from orto control the forces of nature. With mixed successover the long term, these efforts grew from conceptsseeking to prevent or to reduce the immediateconsequences of potentially hazardous conditionsand the adverse effects that they could causeto nearby human life, habitation and property.The Japanese experience of monitoring volcanicactivities, early warning and effective evacuationfrom Mount Usu in Hokkaido is a telling exampleof how science and technology do save livesand assets.16Structures were built in places to provide protection fromfloods, like the embankments in Shanghai and Singaporewhich have protected lucrative commercial and port activitiessince the middle of the nineteenth century.Low countries in Northern Europe, such as the Netherlands,are famous for having constructed an extensive systemof sea dykes that have both reclaimed land and protectedinhabitants from flooding since the eighteenth century.In Viet Nam, villagers are obliged to clean, repair andstrengthen their crucial irrigation channels and sea dykesprior to the start of every annual cyclone season. This wasrecognized as a necessary precaution to ensure the continuedcultivation of rice, on which the society depends.Traditionally, Pacific islanders built their houses from local,lightweight, but strong materials that could absorb torrentialrains, yield superficially to the high winds of typhoonsand withstand the shaking of earthquakes.Long-accepted policy measures and principlesdesigned to prevent forest fires are now understoodto have created conditions of fuel accumulationthat resulted in more intense, uncontrollable,and ultimately more costly, wildfires at alater date. Now more subtle measures are beingemployed in managing the relationship betweennatural fire hazards, human use of forested naturalresources and sustainable environmental benefitsfor a vital society.

Taking these developments into account, duringthe past 30 years, there has been a continuousevolution in the common understanding andpractice of disaster management. To differentpolitical constituencies or various professionalinterests at particular times, there have beenmany different approaches to addressing catastrophiccircumstances from natural hazardsand their impacts on societies. These bodies ofpractice have variously been known as emergencyassistance, disaster response, humanitarianassistance, civil defence, civil protection,homeland security and disaster prevention.Currently, a more holistic approach focussingon risk and vulnerability has brought about theconcept of risk reduction or disaster risk management.There is no doubt that the role of relief assistanceduring the acute phase of a crisis willremain important and need to be enhanced atall levels. However, the question must beasked: Can modern societies afford to valuetheir social and material assets only after theyhave been lost in a disaster? In many placespolitical commitment and the allocation ofresources to address hazardous conditions havebeen concentrated overwhelmingly on shorttermemergency contingencies. Much greaterattention will need to be given to protectivestrategies that can contribute to saving livesand protecting property and resources beforethey are lost.From 1990 to 1999, during the InternationalDecade for Natural Disaster Reduction(IDNDR) proclaimed by the General Assemblyof the United Nations, work was done toadvance a wider commitment to activities thatcould reduce the consequences of natural disasters,under the theme Building a Culture ofPrevention. The Yokohama Strategy and Plan ofAction for a Safer World (World Conference onNatural Disaster Reduction, Yokohama, 1994)stressed that every country had the sovereignand primary responsibility to protect its people,infrastructure and national social or economicassets from the impact of natural disasters.Experience gained since then has demonstratedthat by focusing on the socio-economic factorsinvolved, human actions can reduce vulnerabilityof societies to natural hazards andrelated technological and environmental disasters.Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionThe role of science and technologyThe idea of launching a decade dedicated to natural disasterreduction came from the scientific community.It wasmotivated by a desire to expand the scope and access ofscientific and technical abilities and knowledge for disasterreduction into the decision-making processes and widerpractical implementation.Science and technology play key roles in monitoring hazardsand vulnerabilities, developing an understanding oftheir continually changing patterns and in developing toolsand methodologies for disaster risk reduction. The disseminationand application of new strategies and measures toprotect lives, livelihoods and property within societies experiencingdynamic change are key areas of work for the scientificand technical communities. Scientific knowledge,technical expertise and experiences to reduce risk have tobe shared and made widely available as an integral part ofmulti-disciplinary technical cooperation. Efficient disasterreduction needs a mutually reinforcing interaction betweenscientists, decision-makers and informed citizens.However, the limitations of science and technology inresponding to the fundamental problems of people andpolitical processes in identifying and managing risk factorsneed to be carefully considered. An over-concentration ontechnical abilities at the expense of being able to motivatethe human aspects that compose the economic, social andpolitical dimensions of societies will continue to provide disappointingresults in effective or sustained commitments torisk reduction. It must also be recognized that in particularcircumstances science and technology can be misapplied,sometimes provoking or aggravating risks to a society.The scientific and technical applications relating to eachaspect of disaster risk reduction are extensively addressedthroughout this report.Initially, the IDNDR was influenced bylargely scientific and technical interestgroups. However, a broader global awarenessof the social and economic consequences ofnatural disasters developed as the decadeprogressed, highlighting the increasingimportance of engaging a much broadercommunity in hazard awareness and riskmanagement practices. The importance givento socio-economic vulnerability as a rapidlyincreasing factor of risk in most of today’ssocieties underlined the need to encouragethe wider participation of local communitiesin hazard and risk reduction activities.171

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesWorld Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction,Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World (May 1994)YOKOHAMA MESSAGE"We, the States Members of the United Nations and otherStates, having met at the World Conference on Natural DisasterReduction, in the city of Yokohama, Japan, from 23 May to 27May 1994, in partnership with non-governmental organizations,and with the participation of international organizations,the scientific community, business, industry and the media, deliberatingwithin the framework of the International Decade fornatural Disaster Reduction, expressing our deep concern for thecontinuing human suffering and disruption of development causedby natural disasters, and inspired by the Yokohama Strategy andPlan of Action for a Safer World…." …."adopted the followingPrinciples, Strategy and Plan for Action"181. Risk assessment is a required step for theadoption of adequate and successful disasterreduction policies and measures.2. Disaster prevention and preparedness are ofprimary importance in reducing the need fordisaster relief.3. Disaster prevention and preparedness shouldbe considered integral aspects of developmentpolicy and planning at national, regional,bilateral, multilateral and international levels.4. The development and strengthening of capacitiesto prevent, reduce and mitigate disastersis a top priority area to be addressed so as toprovide a strong basis for follow-up activitiesto the IDNDR.5. Early warnings of impending disasters andtheir effective dissemination are key factors tosuccessful disaster prevention and preparedness.6. Preventive measures are most effective whenthey involve participation at all levels from thelocal community through the national governmentto the regional and international level.7. Vulnerability can be reduced by the applicationof proper design and patterns ofdevelopment focused on target groups byappropriate education and training of thewhole community.8. The international community accepts theneed to share the necessary technology toprevent, reduce and mitigate disaster.9. Environmental protection as a componentof sustainable development consistent withpoverty alleviation is imperative in the preventionand mitigation of natural disasters.10. Each country bears the primary responsibilityfor protecting its people, infrastructure,and other national assets from theimpact of natural disasters. The internationalcommunity should demonstratestrong political determination required tomake efficient use of existing resources,including financial, scientific and technologicalmeans, in the field of natural disasterreduction, bearing in mind the needs ofthe developing countries, particularly theleast developed countries.Basis for the Strategy:"Natural disasters continue to strike and increasein magnitude, complexity, frequency and economicimpact. Whilst the natural phenomena causingdisasters are in most cases beyond human control,vulnerability is generally a result of humanactivity. Therefore, society must recognize andstrengthen traditional methods and explore newways to live with such risk, and take urgentactions to prevent as well as to reduce the effectsof such disasters. The capacities to do so areavailable."Although articulated in 1994, the principlescontained in the Yokohama Strategy and Plan ofAction for a Safer World are possibly more relevantto risk reduction now than when they wereconceived.

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1The International Strategy for Disaster ReductionIDNDR provoked the recognition that disaster reduction was a social and economic imperativethat would take a long time to fulfil.As the successor to IDNDR in 2000, the United Nations International Strategy for DisasterReduction (ISDR) was designed to foster this need by proceeding from the previous emphasis ofprotection against hazards to the processes involved in the awareness, assessment and managementof disaster risks.This development highlights the integration of disaster risk reduction into the broader context ofsustainable development and related environmental considerations. By means of this globalreview of disaster reduction initiatives, ISDR seeks to further multidisciplinary advocacy for widerprofessional understanding of disaster risk reduction practices which can be achieved by workingthrough political, professional, institutional and public collaboration.ISDR in a nutshellThe International Strategy for Disaster Reductionwas launched by the General Assembly ofthe United Nations to provide a global frameworkfor action with the objective of reducinghuman, social, economic and environmentallosses due to natural hazards and related technologicaland environmental phenomena. TheISDR aims at building disaster resilient communitiesby promoting increased awareness ofthe importance of disaster reduction as an integralcomponent of sustainable development. InJanuary 2000, through its resolution 54/219,the General Assembly established two mechanismsfor the implementation of the ISDR, theInter-Agency Secretariat and the Inter-AgencyTask Force on Disaster Reduction. This wasreconfirmed in resolution 56/195 in December2001. ISDR builds on the learning fromIDNDR, the Yokohama Strategy and Plan ofAction and the Geneva Mandate of 1999.The General Assembly also calls upon governmentsto establish national platforms or focalpoints for disaster reduction, and to strengthenthem where they already exist, with a multisectoraland inter-disciplinary approach.(a) the Inter-Agency Secretariat for the ISDR(UN/ISDR)The UN/ISDR is the focal point within theUnited Nations system for co-ordination ofstrategies and programmes for disasterreduction and to ensure synergy betweendisaster reduction activities and those in thesocio-economic and humanitarian fields.The secretariat also serves as an internationalclearinghouse for the managementand the dissemination of information, inparticular on current knowledge and statusof disaster reduction through the publicationof this global review of disaster reductioninitiatives. It develops activities such asadvocacy campaigns to promote widerunderstanding about natural hazards anddisaster risk to motivate a world-wide commitmentto disaster reduction. A particularlyimportant role is to encourage bothpolicy and awareness activities by promotingnational committees dedicated to disasterreduction, and working in close associationwith regional initiatives. An outreachprogramme has been established in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean to this effect,and plans are underway to collaborate withadditional regional institutions in Africaand in the Asia and Pacific regions.The ISDR secretariat has a facilitatingrole, bringing agencies, organizationsand different disciplines together, providinga common platform and understandingof the scope of disaster riskreduction. In this regard, one main functionof the secretariat is to support theInter-Agency Task Force (IATF) for thedevelopment of policies on natural disasterreduction.19

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives(b) the Inter-Agency Task Force on DisasterReduction (IATF/DR)The Task Force was established in2000 as the main forum within theUnited Nations system for devisingstrategies and policies for thereduction of natural hazards. It isalso tasked with identifying what islacking to improve disaster reductionpolicies and programmes andrecommending remedial actionwith particular attention to ensuringcomplementary action by thedifferent United Nations agenciesinvolved in disaster reduction.The Task Force is chaired by theUnder-Secretary General forHumanitarian Affairs of the UnitedNations and is composed of upto 14 representatives of agenciesand organizations of the UnitedNations system; up to eight representativesfrom regional entitiesand up to eight representatives ofcivil society and relevant professionalsectors. The Director of theISDR secretariat acts as the Secretaryof the Task Force.The Task Force has establishedfour Working Groups to work onclimate variability, early warning,vulnerability and risk analysis, andwild-land fires. More details ontheir work are outlined in otherchapters of this review.The Task Force has since its firstmeeting expressed interest in pursuingadditional areas, as opportunitiesallow. These includedrought, ecosystem management,land-use planning, integrating disasterreduction issues into sustainabledevelopment and nationalplanning agendas, raising the politicalprofile of disaster reduction orexploring private and public sectorpartnerships.Framework for action for the implementation ofthe ISDRThe IATF/DR, supported by the secretariat, hasformulated a framework for action for the implementationof the ISDR with four main objectives:• Increase public awareness to understand risk,vulnerability and disaster reduction.• Promote the commitment of public authoritiesto disaster reduction.• Stimulate multidisciplinary and intersectoralpartnerships, including the expansion of riskreduction networks.• Improve scientific knowledge about the causesof natural disasters, as well as the effectsthat natural hazards and related technologicaland environmental disasters have on societies.The framework also incorporates two additionalactivities specifically mandated to the ISDR secretariatby the United Nations General Assembly:• Continue international co-operation to reducethe impact of El Niño and other climate variations.• Strengthen disaster reduction capacitiesthrough the development of early warningsystems.In pursuing these objectives, the framework foraction outlines the following areas of commonconcern:• Incorporating the recognition of the specialvulnerability of the poor in disaster reductionstrategies• Environmental, social and economic vulnerabilityassessment with special reference tohealth and food security;• Ecosystems management, with particularattention given to the implementation ofAgenda 21;• Land use management and planning, includingappropriate land use in at-risk rural,mountain and coastal areas, as well asunplanned urban areas in megacities and secondarycities;• National, regional and international legislationwith respect to disaster reduction.20

Disaster risk reduction - a sharedresponsibilityGovernments and communities must understandthat disaster reduction policy is a wiseinvestment. Direction and resource allocationsoften need to be provided from higher levels ofauthority within a society, as much as decisionsand individual commitment need to growfrom the local understanding and active participationof those people most immediatelyaffected by disaster risks.Where governments have not done so already,there is a need to regain a level of wide andinclusive national participation, before a disasteroccurs. This public responsibility willrequire a collective discipline that can be sustainedthrough the education and practice ofmany trades and professions.Since disaster reduction is based on a continuousstrategy of vulnerability and risk assessment,many actors need to be involved, drawnfrom governments, technical and educationalinstitutions, professions, commercial interestsand local communities. Their activities willneed to be integrated into planning and developmentstrategies that both enable andencourage the widespread exchange of information.New multidisciplinary relationshipsare essential if disaster reduction is to be bothcomprehensive and sustainable.Vulnerability to disasters should be consideredin a broad context encompassing specificLiving with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionhuman, social/cultural, economic, environmentaland political dimensions, that relate toinequalities, gender relations and ethical andracial divisions. A disaster with all its negativeconsequences offers a good opportunity to formulateforward-looking policy concepts pertainingto social development and equity, economicgrowth, environmental quality and justice,i.e. sustainability.However, to be successful, the integration ofholistic disaster reduction strategies intodevelopment policies should happen from theoutset, thereby solving a broad range of social,economic and environmental problems as well.This requires the participation of all relevantsectors (such as environment, finance, industry,transport, construction, agriculture, educationand health). It also requires differentforms of management than in the case ofemergency or disaster management. Theresponsibilities of risk reduction are even morebroadly extended than is commonly understood.This is why the most efficient forms of hierarchical“command and control” practices forcrisis management are much less suited to thedeliberate and more widely considered formsof public, private and professional participationin risk reduction which draw their informationand inspiration from many differentsources in a society. The following chart outlinessome of these comparisons in managementapproaches (Jeggle 2001):1Emergency assistance, crisis managementPrimary focus on HAZARDS and DISASTER events.Single, event-based scenarios.Basic responsibility to respond to an event.Often fixed, location-specific conditions.Responsibility in single authority or agency.Command and control, directed operations.Established hierarchical relationships.Often focused on hardware, equipment.Specialized expertise.Urgent, immediate-to-short time frames in outlook,planning, attention, returns.Rapidly changing, dynamic information usage. Oftenconflicting or "sensitive". Primary, "authorized" or singularsources. Need for definitive "facts".Operational, or public information-based use of communications.In-out, or vertical flows of information.Matters of public security, safety.Disaster risk reduction strategiesFocus on VULNERABILITY and RISK issues.Dynamic, multiple risk issues and development scenarios.Fundamental need to assess, monitor, update.Extended, changing, shared or regional, local.Involves multiple authorities, interests, actors.Situation-specific functions, free association.Shifting, fluid and tangential relationships.Dependent on related practices, abilities, software.Specialized expertise, squared with public views.Comparative, moderate-to-long time framesin outlook.Planning, values, returns.Accumulated, historical, layered-updated,comparative, information.Open or public.Multiple and diverse or changing sources. Differingperspectives, points of view.Multiple-use, shared exchange, intersectoral use of information.Matrix, nodal communication.Dispersed, lateral flows of information.Matters of public interest, investment and safety.21

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesUnderstanding the meaning ofdisaster and risk reductionDifference between a hazardand a disaster“Strictly speaking, there are nosuch things as natural disasters,but there are natural hazards.A disaster is the result of a hazard’simpact on the society. So the effects of adisaster are determined by the extent ofa community’s vulnerability to the hazard(or conversely, its ability, or capacityto cope with it). This vulnerability isnot natural, but the result of an entirerange of constantly changing physical,social, economic, cultural, political, andeven psychological factors that shape people’slives and create the environmentsin which they live. ‘Natural’ disastersare nature’s judgement on what humanshave wrought”John TwiggDisaster reduction strategies include, first and foremost, vulnerabilityand risk assessment, as well as a number of institutionalcapacities and operational abilities. The assessment of thevulnerability of critical facilities, social and economic infrastructure,the use of effective early warning systems, and theapplication of many different types of scientific, technical, andother skilled abilities are essential features of a disaster reductionstrategy.The sharing of information and experience, both for the purposesof public information and all forms of education and professionaltraining are as important for creating a safety culture,as are the crucial involvement of local community action andnew forms of partnership motivated by cooperation and sharedresponsibilities.Fortunately, modern forms of information access and communicationscan facilitate the wider exposure and networking thatthese new and shifting forms of association require. Above all,despite these many contributions, functions associated with disasterreduction need to be viewed not as an expense, but as aninvestment in a society’s future.As common as all of these attributes are to any sustained strategyof disaster reduction, one must also take account of the variouspolitical, cultural, and social distinctions that exist amongall countries. There are fundamental elements in every disasterreduction strategy, but the priorities, relative emphasis, availableresources, and specific ways of implementation must takeaccount of practices that are most suited to local conditions,understanding and effectiveness.The graphic representation on next page describes the maincontext and activities involved in disaster risk reduction. Theseare elements to take into consideration for any disaster riskreduction strategy. The sections of the global review have beenorganized around these issues, with exception of preparedness,response and recovery initiatives.22

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1FRAMEWORK FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTIONCONTEXT:SUSTAINABLEDEVELOPMENT•Socio-cultural•Political•Economic•EcosystemsRISK FACTORSAWARENESSfor change in behaviourKNOWLEDGEDEVELOPMENT•Education, training•Research•InformationVulnerability•Social•Economic•Physical•EnvironmentalHazards•Geological•Hydrometeorological•Biological•TechnologicalVulnerability/capabilityanalysisHazardanalysis& monitoringRISK ASSESSMENTand analysisPUBLICCOMMITMENT•Institutional framework•Policy development•Legislation and codesDISASTERIMPACTRESPONSERECOVERYAPPLICATION OFRISK REDUCTIONMEASURES•Environmental management•Land use planning•Protection of critical facilities•Networking and partnerships•Financial toolsPREPAREDNESSEARLY WARNING23

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesDefining a few key termsOne of the continuous functions of the ISDR is to support a more homogeneous use of disaster related terms.This Global Review, provides concise definitions, based on a broad collection of different internationalsources, in order to create a common terminology on disaster reduction issues, useful for the public, authoritiesand practitioners. This effort will be continued in future reviews and answers a need expressed in severalinternational forums, regional commentary and national responses to the ISDR questionnaire. Keyterms used in this review are explained below. Definitions of additional terms can be found in Annex 1.HazardA potentially damaging physical event, phenomenonor human activity, which may causethe loss of life or injury, property damage,social and economic disruption or environmentaldegradation.Hazards can include latent conditions that may representfuture threats and can have different origins:natural (geological, hydrometeorological and biological)and/or induced by human processes (environmentaldegradation and technological hazards).Hazards can be single, sequential or combined intheir origin and effects. Each hazard is characterisedby its location, intensity and probability.VulnerabilityA set of conditions and processes resultingfrom physical, social, economical and environmentalfactors, which increase the susceptibilityof a community to the impact of hazards.Positive factors, that increase the ability of people andthe society they live in, to cope effectively with hazards,that increase their resilience, or that otherwisereduce their susceptibility, are considered as capacities.Risk assessment/analysisA process to determine the nature and extent ofrisk by analysing potential hazards and evaluatingexisting conditions of vulnerability/capacity that could pose a potential threat orharm to people, property, livelihoods and theenvironment on which they depend.The process of conducting a risk assessment is basedon a review of both technical features of hazardssuch as their location, intensity and probability, andalso the analysis of the physical, social and economicdimensions of vulnerability, while taking particularaccount of the coping capabilities pertinent tothe risk scenarios.Coping capabilities/CapacityThe manner in which people and organisationsuse existing resources to achieve various beneficialends during unusual, abnormal, and adverseconditions of a disaster event or process.The strengthening of coping capacities usually buildsresilience to withstand the effects of natural andother hazards.24RiskThe probability of harmful consequences, orexpected loss (of lives, people injured, property,livelihoods, economic activity disrupted orenvironment damaged) resulting from interactionsbetween natural or human induced hazardsand vulnerable/capable conditions. Conventionallyrisk is expressed by the equationRisk = Hazards x Vulnerability / CapacityBeyond expressing a probability of physical harm, itis crucial to appreciate that risks are always createdor exist within social systems. It is important toconsider the social contexts in which risks occur andthat people therefore do not necessarily share thesame perceptions of risk and their underlying causes.Resilience/resilientThe capacity of a system, community or societyto resist or to change in order that it mayobtain an acceptable level in functioning andstructure. This is determined by the degree towhich the social system is capable of organisingitself, and the ability to increase its capacityfor learning and adaptation, including thecapacity to recover from a disaster.DisasterA serious disruption of the functioning of a communityor a society causing widespread human,material, economic or environmental losses whichexceed the ability of the affected community/societyto cope using its own resources.

A disaster is a function of the risk process. It resultsfrom the combination of hazards, conditions of vulnerabilityand insufficient capacity or measures toreduce the potential negative consequences of risk.Risk managementThe systematic management of administrativedecisions, organisation, operational skills andresponsibilities to apply policies, strategies andpractices for disaster risk reduction.Disaster risk reduction(disaster reduction)The systematic development and application ofpolicies, strategies and practices to minimisevulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout asociety, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigationand preparedness) adverse impact ofhazards, within the broad context of sustainabledevelopment.PreventionActivities to provide outright avoidance of theadverse impact of hazards and related environmental,technological and biological disasters.Depending on social and technical feasibility andcost/benefit considerations, investing in preventivemeasures is justified in areas frequently affected bydisaster. In the context of public awareness raisingLiving with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionand education, prevention refers to attitude andbehaviour leading towards a “culture of prevention”.MitigationStructural and non-structural measures undertakento limit the adverse impact of natural hazards,environmental degradation and technologicalhazards.PreparednessActivities and measures taken in advance toensure effective response to the impact of disasters,including the issuance of timely and effectiveearly warnings and the temporary removalof people and property from a threatened location.Early warningThe provision of timely and effective information,through identified institutions, that allowindividuals at risk of a disaster, to take action toavoid or reduce their risk and prepare for effectiveresponse.Early warning systems consist of three elements (i)forecasting and prediction of impending events, (ii)processing and dissemination of warnings to politicalauthorities and population, and (iii) undertakingappropriate reaction to warnings.125

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives1.2. Contexts and processes linked to disaster risk reduction:sustainable developmentPolitical support for disaster risk reduction has to be established from the apex of political powerbut that can only be realistic if the perceptions of risk and the actions proposed accord with thecultural beliefs and habits of society. In today’s interconnected world, societies are confrontedwith rapid winds of change. Therefore, the value of disaster risk reduction can only be realizedthrough rigorous identification and continuous evaluation of the relationships that exist betweenthe distinctive beliefs and human conditions in which people live, the changing environmentpeople inhabit and depend upon for their livelihoods, and the immutable forces of nature. Mostimportantly, disaster risk reduction relies upon the consequences of collective decisions made andindividual actions taken – or not taken.The emergence of a disaster reduction culture is conditioned by contexts and processes that aredescribed below:• The sustainable development context, the ultimate international goal;• The political context, essential for action;• The three contexts linked to the pillars of sustainable development:(a) The socio-cultural system(b) The economic system(c) The environmental systemSustainability means recognizing and making best use of the interconnection between social, economicand environmental goals to reduce significant hazard risks. This entails the ability to reduceone’s exposure to, and recover from, infrequent large-scale, but also frequent smaller scale, naturaland human driven events.The bottom line for any country, especially the poorest, is to build sustainable communities thrivingfrom generation to generation with a social foundation that provides for health, respects culturaldiversity, is equitable and considers the needs of future generations. They require has ahealthy and diverse ecological system that is life-sustaining and productive, a healthy and diverseeconomy that adapts to change and recognizes social and ecological limits. This cannot be achievedwithout the incorporation of disaster reduction strategies, one of the six principles of sustainabilitysupported by a strong political commitment.The six principles of sustainability1. Maintain and enhance quality of life2. Enhance economic vitality3. Ensure social and intergenerational equity4. Maintain and enhance environmental quality5. Incorporate disaster resilience and mitigationinto actions and decisions6. Use a consensus-building, participatoryprocess when making decisionsSource: J. Monday, 200226

Disaster risk management and reduction areabout looking beyond hazards alone to considerprevailing conditions of vulnerability. It isthe social, cultural, economic, and political settingin a country that makes people vulnerableto unfortunate events. The basis of this understandingis simple: the national character andchosen form of governance can be as much ofa determinant in understanding the risks in agiven country, as are the various social, economicand environmental determinants.“While we cannot do away with natural hazards,we can eliminate those we cause, minimize thosewe exacerbate, and reduce our vulnerability tomost. Doing this requires healthy and resilientcommunities and ecosystems. Viewed in this light,disaster mitigation is clearly part of a broaderstrategy of sustainable development-making communitiesand nations socially, economically, andecologically sustainable.”J. AbramovitzThe motivation to invest in disaster riskreduction is first and foremost a human, peoplecentred concern. It is about improvingstandards of safety and living conditions withan eye on protection from hazards to increaseLiving with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionresilience of communities. A safer society to withstanddisasters may be argued as a case of ethics andsocial justice and equity. It is also motivated by economicgains. Socio-economic development is seriouslychallenged when scarce funds are divertedfrom longer-term development objectives to shorttermemergency relief and reconstruction needs. Itis considered by some as illusory to quantify benefitsfrom disaster reduction. They see the issue foremostas a human and social concern rather thanbased on economic rationale and efficiency. Othersadvocate that effective planning and developmentoptions can only be based on a careful estimation ofthe economic gains and poverty impacts of disasters,accompanied by economic justification for therequired investments in vulnerability reduction.Environmentally unsound practices, global environmentalchanges, population growth, urbanization,social injustice, poverty, and short-term economicvision are producing vulnerable societies. Theimpact of development on disasters should be fullyembraced if disaster risk reduction is to yield itsexpected benefits. “Instead of demonising hazardsfor their impacts on society, it would be probablymore correct to demonise society for its impacts onhazards!” (A. Lavell, IDNDR Programme ForumProceedings, 1999).1Children preparing to combatwildland fires inIndonesiaPhoto: Global FireMonitoring Centre, 200027

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe sustainable development context“Can sustainable development alongwith the international instrumentsaiming at poverty reduction and environmentalprotection, be successfulwithout taking into account the risk ofnatural hazards and their impacts?Can the planet afford the increasingcosts and losses due to so-called naturaldisasters? The short answer is, no.”ISDR background paperfor WSSD, 2002The escalation of severe disasters is increasingly posing a threat to both sustainabledevelopment and poverty reduction initiatives. As a consequenceprinciple 1 of the Rio Declaration is imperilled. This states that humanbeings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development and areentitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature. Repeatedexposure to disasters can lead to a downward spiral of poverty.It is still the post-disaster reconstruction period that provides the mostopportune time to introduce disaster reduction into sustainable developmentplanning. Therefore, political commitment and social acceptance ofthe value of risk reduction are necessary for forward-looking developerswho want to increase the sustainability of communities. When perceived asa distinct set of activities, risk management initiatives are placed in competitionwith other developmental objectives, rather than being seen as integralparts of the same whole.Regional considerationsProgress can be shown by some examples of regional strategies for sustainable development that strive to reduce vulnerabilityto disasters. In some cases, it was only after unacceptable losses occurred, or when provoked by angrydemands of the public after particularly disastrous events (e.g. after the Gujarat earthquake in India, following hurricaneMitch in Central America, or in the aftermath of the floods in Mozambique), that international developmentbanks and development assistance agencies have begun to require risk assessment and management processes to beincluded in new infrastructure development projects.• In Asia, although there have been few examples of effective, systematic and long-term integration efforts betweendisaster reduction and poverty alleviation programmes, a dialogue between the two interest groups is beginning to takeplace.In February 2001, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) organized the Asia Pacific Forum on Poverty. One of the keyfocus areas was social protection to diminish vulnerability to risks, generate employment and improve productivity andworking conditions in Asia and the Pacific. It was one of the few times that a discourse on poverty alleviation in theregion recognized disaster reduction as one of the key interventions for social protection.The region, however, has a long way to go in terms of integrating poverty alleviation and disaster reduction programmesin practice. More research is required on understanding the nature of linkages between poverty and vulnerabilityin different social, political, economic and hazard-specific contexts. Only then can specific frameworks, toolsand methodologies be developed and applied to integrate poverty alleviation and disaster reduction programmes.A notable example of an integrated program is the recent initiative of the Mekong River Commission (MRC). Followingthe extensive floods in Viet Nam and Cambodia in 2000, it developed a holistic strategy for flood management andmitigation that emphasizes land-use planning, structural measures, flood preparedness and emergency response.The Phnom Penh Regional Platform on Sustainable Development for Asia and the Pacific adopted in the participatoryphase leading up to WSSD, notes that the financial crisis of 1997, the isolation and vulnerability of Small IslandDeveloping States (SIDS) and recurrent natural disasters had posed major constraints to the achievement of sustainabledevelopment. Coping with natural disasters is perceived as an essential issue to be addressed in the region. Measuresare called for to ensure that populations suffering the consequences of natural disasters, severe environmental degradationand other relevant humanitarian emergencies are given every assistance and protection so that they can resumenormal life as soon as possible.• In the Pacific, the crucial relationships that exist between natural disaster risks, the environment and their combinedimpacts on human societies are particularly evident. In the Pacific small island states people are highly depend-

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1ent on the natural environment, and historical records testify to the devastating effects that natural disasters causein the region.There is growing concern among government officials and scientists about the potential for increasingly frequent andmore severe meteorological and hydrological hazards resulting from climate change, and how they may affect Pacificislands.• In Africa poverty levels remain high, especially among the rural poor. High levels of foreign debt have discouragedinvestment and growth. Under these austere conditions, it is unrealistic to expect significant investments at householdor national level to mitigate the impact of natural or other threats.In Southern Africa, in preparation for WSSD, the Southern African Development Community (SADC) expressed concernthat ten years after the adoption of international agreements at the United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment, Southern Africa was still “confronted by social, economic and environmental crises”.Among the core issues identified, poverty was highlighted as the primary constraint to socio-economic development, butmatters of health, food security, climate change, water availability, land degradation and market access were also cited ascritical issues. Each of these factors has a bearing on prevailing vulnerability and risk issues in the region. In a regionstill heavily dependent on agriculture to maintain household livelihoods and national food security, drought and extremerain events present serious challenges to sustainable development.The African Ministerial Statement to WSSD states that the increased incidence of natural disasters in Africa poses amajor obstacle to the African continent’s efforts to achieve sustainable development, especially in view of the region’sinsufficient capacities to predict, monitor, handle, and mitigate natural disasters.Reducing the vulnerability of the African people to natural disasters and environmental risks is mentioned as a requirementto achieve the poverty reduction goals of the Millennium Declaration alongside other basic requirements includingeconomic growth, access to sources of energy and basic health services. Extreme weather events such as floods anddroughts induced by climate change are singled out.• In Latin America and the Caribbean, the health sector has recognized that risk reduction is a key consideration for animproved health sector. The hurricanes and earthquakes affecting the region in the nineties have convinced the Pan AmericanHealth Organization (PAHO) and most health authorities that a culture of prevention must include mitigation ofstructural and non structural damages in health facilities and water supply systems. This was made clear following thecollapse of a hospital during an earthquake in Mexico in 1995. Action requires significant capital investment, a decisionin the hands of ministries and financing organizations. As a result, only a limited number of hospitals have been retrofitted,illustrating once more that disaster reduction requires a large consensus and political decisions across the board.• In Central America, natural hazards are exacerbated by the high level of vulnerability in the region. Therefore, anysustained commitment to reduce risk should be considered in the context of poverty reduction. Increasing attention isbeing given to the global notion of risk as opposed to a more restricted view of disaster management. UNDP in El Salvadoris proposing the use of risk management as a uniting concept in the design of its next five-year programme withthe government. The conceptual framework used in the Lower Lempa Valley implemented with the Salvadoran Ministryof Environment was elaborated around the notion of global or total risk, where risk reduction is regarded as a componentof development investment.The severity of the El Niño/La Niña phenomenon of 1997-1998, led to the establishment of the Andean Regional Programmefor Risk Prevention and Reduction (PREANDINO) with the objective of promoting the development of disasterrisk prevention and mitigation policies and new institutional arrangements aimed at incorporating prevention into developmentplanning.The Rio de Janeiro Platform for Action on the Road to Johannesburg 2002 was adopted by the Regional Preparatory Conferenceof Latin America and the Caribbean for WSSD. Ministers of environment and other senior representativesfrom Latin American and Caribbean countries stressed the need for actions that reduce disaster vulnerability and promotea culture of risk awareness by means of education, improved information dissemination and the use of early warningsystems.

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe political context“Managing risk depends on political will. Political will dependson political leadership and a shifting set of incentives, pressuresand polemics. The political costs of redirecting priorities from visibledevelopment projects to addressing abstract long-term threatsare great. It is hard to gain votes by pointing out that a disasterdid not happen. How can we, who see risk management as acentral priority and who have valuable technical knowledge andskills to contribute, enter this policy arena? This question is at thecentre of the [disaster risk reduction] discourse. We know nowthat we must engage, but do we know how?”I.Christoplos, J. Mitchell and A. Liljelund, 2001Political commitment is an essential quality forsustained efforts of risk reduction. Only politicalwillingness can give disaster reduction theplace it deserves. Obtaining political commitmentfrom public authorities is one of the fouroverriding objectives of ISDR to effectivelyreduce the impacts of disasters. This objectiveneeds to be addressed through increased coordinationat all levels, risk management strategiesand the allocation of appropriate resourcesincluding development of new funding mechanisms.Disaster reduction should be dealt withas a policy issue across relevant fields of gov-The political context in Southern AfricaIn Southern Africa, other forces have combined to influencethe political context of disasters. Decades of armed conflict,political instability and population displacement have conditionedmore recent approaches to disaster management. Inaddition to the loss of lives, war-related damage anddestruction to infrastructure, the prevalence of prolongedrelief operations was widespread in places, creating a senseof dependency on external assistance.International humanitarian assistance that often inundatescountries facing severe drought or flood crises, is seldomaccompanied by support for longer-term institutionalchange that promotes practical mitigation efforts. To a significantextent, the emphasis given to the urgent supply ofmaterial requirements and logistical capabilities born of crisisand responding to the needs of unsettled populations,persists long after the acute conditions have been resolved.Too often a memory of relief supplies or a legacy of externalassistance remains to discourage local initiatives or sustainedinstitutional investments in disaster risk reduction.ernment including health, agriculture andenvironment. National and regional policiesare addressed in chapter three.To be feasible, disaster reduction needs to showit is able to address short-term and immediateneeds of survival as well as to take care oflonger-term objectives of prevention andcapacity building. This approach is illustratedby efforts undertaken in the cities of Manizalesand Medellin in Colombia.There, the death toll and economic damage dueto landslides and floods have decreased considerablythanks to initiatives undertaken by themunicipalities, together with universities, the privatesector and community groups, throughreforestation, plant cover works, improveddrainage systems and engineering works. Insome cases, these investments are even generatingincome through harvesting and tourism.Political change, economic reform and developmentof public policy to protect people andresources are fundamental solutions to treatingcauses rather than only symptoms. Politiciansthat undertake no-regret policies and applyprecautionary principles in matters of environmentalprotection should be able to take thesame stance regarding disaster reduction."The state of a country's . . . political condition atthe time of the onset of a disaster is a major determinantin the impacts on society of that event."M. Glantz, 2000Similarly, the public that exercises great pressureto bring about environmental policychanges should become a political force puttingpressure on governments to protect peoplefrom disasters. If it becomes a popularissue, disaster risk reduction will gainmomentum.While disaster reduction will not reign withoutpolitical willingness, a word should also be saidabout the negative consequences political decisionscan have on disaster impacts. For example,huge hydraulic projects may change landscapereferences of communities and their perceptionof risk, thereby increasing vulnerabilityby reducing the people’s capacity to assessand anticipate hazard-related threats.30

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1Paired Perspectives: Two countries’ response to the same question in the ISDR questionnaire regarding therole of political commitment in disaster risk reduction.Country 1: A highly disaster-prone country, with considerable technical, material and financial resources,with strong political aspirations to modernize.Disaster mitigation is not a priority item, except at times of disaster. With many pressing requirements related tohealth, education, development, defence, etc., disaster mitigation must during normal times be given diminished attention.We do not think that an easy recipe exists to overcome these obstacles.Country 2: A highly disaster-prone country, with few technical, material and financial resources, and muchgreater demands to realize its strong political aspirations to develop.It has been possible for the government to institutionalise the concept of disaster management and also to generatemomentum at the grass-roots level for self-reliance in coping with and responding to disasters.Links to the pillars of sustainabledevelopmentThe socio-cultural contextThe links between disaster and the socio-culturalsystem are an important component indisaster risk reduction and a pillar of sustainabledevelopment. Social vulnerability is furtherdiscussed in chapter two.The term culture is understood in a myriad ofways and represents an extremely complexnotion. It is, therefore, useful to provide a definition.Differences exist among groups of people, andthese differences reflect a variety of factorsincluding language, socio-economic and politicalsystems, religion and ethnicity as well as historicalexperience and relationships towards nature.Each cultural group has its own set of experiencesand expectations. Furthermore, relationshipsbetween people and groups of differentcultures are often embedded in different sets ofvalues, unequal power relations with somegroups becoming dominant and others beingmarginalized. All of these factors are highly relevantin the context of natural disasters.Much early thinking about disasters was basedon a notion of nature and culture being separate.Disasters were seen as the products of aprecocious and unpredictable nature andtherefore to be out of the control of humans orreferred to in terms such as acts of supernaturalforces, or acts of god.Philosophical definition of culture: The way of life of a people,including the attitudes, values, beliefs, arts, sciences,modes of perception, and habits of thought and activity.Cultural features of forms of life are learned but are oftentoo pervasive to be readily noticed from within.Psychological definition of culture: The sum total of theideas, beliefs, customs, values, knowledge and materialartefacts that are handed from one generation to the next ina society.It became increasingly obvious that the causesof disasters are complex and that beside naturepeople are a causal factor. Looking beyondbeliefs, more and more disasters are understoodin terms of their cultural and social components.Vast differences in disaster vulnerabilityamong countries and within individual societieshave their roots in unequal sets of powerrelations, leading to unequal distribution andaccess to wealth among different cultures orpolitical settings.It is important that ownership of the disastercontext is not stripped from local people who canbe left even more powerless than would be thecase if external intervention did not occur. Thereis a growing appreciation of the need for disasterreduction activities to be based on more attentiveparticipatory approaches involving local communitiesas much as possible, considering them asproactive stakeholders and not passive targets forintervention.Common sense solutions in one cultural settingare often contrary to what may be commonsense in others. Local socio-political structures31

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesand cultural conditions such as kinshiparrangements, customary rights, communityand family networks and systems of leadershipnearly always persist during disasters and it isimportant that these are not undermined. Forexample, it is important to recognize that dealingwith death and illness is a strong culturalprocess. Where decisions about matters suchas mass burials are imposed on cultural groupsby others, serious problems can occur that disruptgrieving and have long-term social, legaland psychological consequences.The differing needs and roles of men andwomen also need to be taken into account.Men are usually seen as income generatorswhile women ensure social cohesion and continuityby taking care of children, the elderly andthe disabled. Different priorities, perceptionsand abilities to cope with abnormal situationsneed careful thinking to maximize the successof risk management and to achieve sustainabledevelopment.The impact of cultural changeon disaster resilienceCultural changes tend to reduce disaster resilience in traditionalcommunities and at the same time, disasters canexaggerate the influence these change agents exert. Whilesuch changes most probably would have happened anyway,there can be little doubt that they can be hastened bydisaster events, as the following examples from Pacificsmall island states demonstrate:• Introduction of new crops, especially cassava whichis more vulnerable to high winds than yams or taro,the common traditional subsistence crops;• Replacement of traditional hazard-resistant housingwith climatically inappropriate disaster-relief homes;• Reduced need for food preservation and storageresulting from relief supplies, especially of rice,which has become an increasingly dominant componentof diets in rural and urban areas, alike.In many cultures, attachment to place is a criticallyimportant element, thus decisions tomove people must be made carefully. In somecases, people have felt more afraid and at riskin the sites they have been moved to than ifthey had remained (even where the risk ofdeath is relatively high). In many cases peopleare also unwilling to leave a house in whichthey have invested most of their time andmoney and which constitutes their principallegacy to their children.In other instances, host communities have feltimposed upon by those who have been relocatedand violent responses are not uncommon.The issue is that relocation of communities atrisk may be scientifically the most attractiveand reasonable prevention measure but it canbe strongly opposed culturally.Cultural change is an important considerationin disaster reduction as is cultural continuity.For example, intercommunity cooperation followingdisasters was extremely commonamong traditional Pacific island communities,and to a large extent sustained by ceremonialexchange systems. These exchange networksfell away as commercial trading, often centredin colonial capitals, replaced traditional formsof exchange, colonial governments replacedtraditional political networks and missionariesdiscouraged exchanges as threats to Christianity.Relief aid also reduced the need to sustain suchnetworks. However, with the migration ofmany Pacific islanders to places such as Australia,California and New Zealand, newexchange networks have emerged. Followingdisasters, major flows of resources now enterPacific island states in the form of remittancesfrom kinfolk. Culturally, disasters have becomeimportant events through which the Pacificisland diasporas maintain links with the homeislands.An important finding of many researchersworking in developing countries or in localcommunities is that a wide variety of measuresfor reducing disasters existed in earlier, oftenpre-colonial, times. A variety of socio-culturalor economic factors mentioned have graduallyeroded these measures, undermining culturalsupport and social activities that might havecontributed to sharing the exposure to riskamong members of the community.32

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1The economic contextThe links between disaster and the economicsystem, another pillar of sustainable development,are as clear as the financial incentive fordisaster reduction. Indeed, historically peoplehave always made investments to obtain, andthen to protect, those resources that hold thegreatest value for them. This is the principlebehind insurance or other efforts to spread riskamong a community including joint ownershipor responsibility for protecting assets.The concern demonstrated by a farmer to protecta single cow, or a fisherman to mend nets in subsistenceeconomies, as well as the rapid growth ofinvestment in business continuity practices seenin more commercialised societies, validate theeconomic basis of reducing risks in order to minimizethe negative impacts of future disasters.Economics and the awareness of the importanceof disasters that increase in severity and frequencythrough human action, provide incentives fordevelopment banks and international assistanceinstitutions to integrate risk reduction in theirdevelopment strategies and to develop innovativeforms of financial investment. Some of thesestrategies are discussed further in chapter five.Risk management planning involves an estimationof the impacts of disasters on the economy,based on the best available hazard maps andmacroeconomic data. These include assessmentsof the costs of disasters, evaluation of the costsand benefits of disaster reduction and risk trans-Economic losses due to natural hazards in 2001Altogether, 700 natural hazard losses were recorded lastyear. At around US$ 36 billion, economic losses wereabout 20 per cent above the previous year’s level.Insured losses in 2001 increased by more than 50 percent compared with the previous year. Around the globe80 earthquakes produced economic losses of US$ 9 billionand insured losses of about US$ 900 million. As inprevious years, insurers’ statistics were dominated bywindstorms and floods. These accounted for more thantwo thirds of all events (480) and no less than 92 percent of all insured losses. Tropical Storm Allison (UnitedStates) triggered an overall loss of US$ 6 billion(more than half of which was insured). Typhoon Naricaused major damage in Taipei (Taiwan, Province ofChina) and generated an insured loss of US$ 600 million.Source: MunichRe, Topics (2001).fer measures (including the value of improvedforecasting systems) and incentives from theinternational community that lead towardsproactive disaster reduction projects. Such studiesare carried out through international cooperativearrangements.Given the recurrence and frequency of naturalhazards, a concerted effort will always berequired to respond effectively to them, and toassess the frequency of emergency recovery assistance,as well as the prospects of reducing damagein the future.Evidence of the economic benefits of disaster reduction effortsIn the Caribbean, empirical evidence shows that it is significantly more cost-effective to design and build a structureto standards that would withstand maximum expected wind or seismic forces in a given location, rather thanbuild to lower standards and suffer the damages.Source: OAS, 1993.Switzerland long ago recognized the value of forests in protecting important economic assets (roads, industries,infrastructure, tourism) as well as human settlements and people against avalanches and landslides. The economyprovided by the protection afforded by forests was estimated between US$ 2 billion and US$ 3.5 billion per year.Source: OFEFP, Switzerland,1999.In the United States, after the 1993 Midwest floods, government buyouts of flood-prone residents and movementof material property to areas outside the 100-year flood plain were successful in reducing flood claims in subsequentflood events. The buyout initiative resulted in a significant reduction in National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP) claims and the availability of land in floodplains for other purposes. In the long run, economic sustainabilityhazard mitigation efforts plus enhanced risk assessment utilizing appropriate tools will have environmentalpay-offs.Source: Annual Hazards Research and Applications Workshops, University of Colorado, 2001.33

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesAreas for action specific to economic aspects of disaster reduction• Assessment of natural disaster damage and loss potential (including historical perspective).• Consider costs and benefits of natural disaster management (cost-effective allocation of resources).• Assessment of hazard risks at the project appraisal stage of all potential investment projects, including costbenefitanalyses that estimate the hazard vulnerability implications of alternative levels of overall quality andstrength as well as returns to specific disaster-proofing features.• Evaluate trade-offs between quality and quantity of structural mitigation measures.• Create incentives, cost sharing and recovery for disaster reduction.• Consider disaster risk transfer and financing.• Enforce regulations under different levels of economic development and government capacity.• Determine pricing policy designed for rational use of resources (water, energy).Adapted from: C. Benson, ODI, DFID, 2001 2002.The benefits of long-term disaster management versusthe costs of repeated short-term post-disaster reconstructionneed to be documented. In view of the exorbitanteconomic and social costs of recurring disasters,long-term hazard reduction planning is, more andmore, a guiding principle and prerequisite for the sustainabilityof physical investments in need of replacement,reconstruction or construction.Improvement in, and enforcement of, regulatory frameworksof disaster reduction including disaster-relatedinsurance, building codes and land use planning willensure that infrastructure is properly sited and built tominimize damages as well as to reduce the costs of repair.This involves public insurance policy, market and regulatoryincentives for risk and vulnerability reduction, protectionagainst fluctuations in insurance/reinsuranceprices, augmentation of insurance coverage at reasonablecost and backstop financial mechanisms.The relationship between disaster and risk reductionand globalisation also needs to be researched further toexplore, on the one hand the detrimental effects ofderegulation and economic interconnection, and onthe other hand, the beneficial effects associated withtrade opportunities and economic competitiveness.In a globalizing world, the potential of risk reduction asan essential element to building competitiveness, protectinginvestment and securing trade opportunities,while ensuring that new risks are not created and businessnot interrupted, has to be fully comprehended.Annual growth Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and ocurranceof major “natural disaster” in EcuadorSource: ISDR, Central Bank of Ecuador, 200234The figure shows the grossdomestic product (GDP) ofEcuador from 1980 to 2001. Thedisruption of normal growthcoincides with the occurrence ofsome major disasters, eventhough political and other circumstancesalso have influencedthis trend. After the El Niñoevent of 1982-83 the GDPdecreased to minus 2.8 per centcompared to the previous year. In1997 a medium intensity earthquakeaffected important, economicinfrastructure, including akey oil pipeline, decreasing GDPto minus 6 per cent. The widespreaddamage by floods due tothe El Niño event of 1997-98, anearthquake in 1998 and politicalturmoil, was followed by adecrease of the GDP to minus7.3 per cent in 1999.

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reductionDisaster losses, total and expressed as share of GDP,in the richest and poorest nations, 1985-19991Adapted from MunichRe andJ. Abramovitz, 2001Although smaller in absolute figures, the percentage of economic loss in relation to the gross nationalproduct (GNP) in developing countries far exceeds that in developed countries. This fact becomeseven more relevant for small island developing states (SIDS).The economic impacts of natural disasters in Pacific small island statesExperience in Pacific small island states as in many other poor countries, shows that it is probably not the actual dollar valueof disaster losses that is most relevant, but rather the cost to the particular nation in terms of percentage of GDP – and this canbe very significant indeed.A major study of the economic impacts of natural disasters in Pacific island coutries was conducted as a part of the South PacificDisaster Reduction Project (SPDRP) by Te’o I.J. Fairbairn (UNDHA-SPO 1997a). The study concluded that natural disastershave a significant impact on key economic elements such as GDP, employment and trade, and macroeconomic aspects, includinggovernment finances, monetary policy, inflation and the level of international reserves. The conclusions underlined the importanceof adopting appropriate policy and institutional capabilities in order to minimize the extent of physical damage and economiclosses, in addition to the continuing role that donors have played in providing assistance for relief and rehabilitation purposes.Fairbairn observed that “with their limited economic diversification, combined with a high agriculture-GDP ratio prevalentamong many of the small Pacific island countries, [they are] particularly exposed to disaster devastation and considerable economiclosses. In the short to medium term, the destruction of standing crops, physical infrastructure and housing could besevere, with the consequences that GDP could become sharply depressed for some time, with likely consequence of provokingmacroeconomic instability. In the longer term, the study noted that damage to productive assets could lead to a loss of outputwith reduced economic growth and declining standards of living. The reallocation of financial resources after a disaster foremergency and rehabilitation purposes as well as reductions in capital investments can impede the realization of major nationaldevelopment objectives. However it was equally noted that “the extent of the destruction and economic losses that result, bothimmediately and over time, depends on a variety of factors including the degree of dependence on agricultural production, thelevel of structural diversification achieved, resource endowment and the level of disaster preparedness”.In small countries generally, and in small development states specifically, primary attention needs to be given to a range of mitigationstrategies that can reduce the exposure or risk of damage to productive assets and associated economic losses. The promotionof appropriate macroeconomic policies can also be vital in cushioning the destabilizing impact of natural disasters.These can include firm adherence to fiscal and monetary policies at the time of severe demands on financial resources createdby emergency conditions or post-disaster requirements, the encouragement of property owners to adopt insurance as means ofspreading their risk, and the creation of a disaster reserve fund to facilitate a quick recovery of vital economic activities or infrastructurefacilities following a disaster. At a more basic level of reducing risks long before they threaten, practices that maintaina continued commitment to strong macroeconomic fundamentals, including adequate external reserves, can serve as buffersagainst disaster-related crises.35

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEnvironmental context“Around the world, a growing share of thedevastation triggered by ‘natural’ disastersstems from ecologically destructive practicesand from putting ourselves in harm’sway. Many ecosystems have been frayed tothe point where they are no longer resilientand able to withstand natural disturbances,setting the stage for ‘unnatural disasters’– those made more frequent or moresevere due to human actions. By degradingforests, engineering rivers, filling in wetlands,and destabilizing the climate, weare unravelling the strands of a complexecological safety net.”J. Abramovitz, 2001.The third system with which disaster reduction is closely linked is theenvironmental system, yet another pillar of sustainable development. Disastersdo not only affect the built environment but also the natural environment.Furthermore, environmental degradation increases the intensityof natural hazards and is often the factor that transforms the hazard, orclimatic extreme such as a heavy downpour, into a disaster. For example,river and lake floods are aggravated or even caused by deforestationwhich causes erosion and clogs rivers. Poverty and hazard vulnerability isintegrally linked to this situation. The poor are compelled to exploit environmentalresources for survival, therefore increasing both risk and exposureto disasters, in particular those triggered by floods, drought andlandslides.The natural environment provides solutions to increase protection againstdisaster impacts. Therefore, successful disaster reduction should enhanceenvironmental quality, which includes protection of natural resources andopen space, management of water run-off, and reduction of pollution.Successful environmental policies should highlight the effectiveness ofdisaster reduction measures. This should entail an acceptance of somedegree of natural disturbance to avoid the greater consequences ofNature’s solutions to reduce disaster impacts“The time has come to tap nature’s engineering techniques – using the services provided by healthy and resilientecosystems. Dunes, barrier islands, mangrove forests, and coastal wetlands are natural shock absorbers that protectagainst coastal storms. Wetlands, floodplains, and forests are sponges that absorb floodwaters. Nature providesthese valuable services for free, and we should take advantage of them rather than undermining them.”Source: Abramovitz, 2001.“Open space, greenways, and riverside parks serve as habitat for wildlife protect streams from pollutants, helpmaintain water temperatures, and keep people and development from the highest-risk floodplains. Trees can drasticallyreduce storm water management costs. American Forests studied Garland, Texas, and calculated that thecity’s canopy reduced storm water runoff by 19 million cubic feet during a major storm. Annually, the trees saveGarland $2.8 million in infrastructure costs and $2.5 in air quality costs and residential energy bills.”Source: Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, 2001.Around the village of Guarita in Honduras, local people practiced traditional Quezungal farming methods consistingof planting crops under trees, maintaining ground vegetation and terracing, in order to root the soil and reduceerosion. During hurricane Mitch, only 10 per cent of the crop was lost, leaving reserves that could be shared withmore severely affected neighbouring areas.The Viet Nam Red Cross Society conducted an environmental preservation project in Thai Binh province to addressdifferent aspects of risk relating to typhoon occurrence that threatens the people living on the coast. Two thousandhectares of mangrove plantation were created along the coastline serving to reduce wind and wave velocity andaction, thereby protecting landscape, human life and local development assets. Resource opportunities for improvinglivelihoods were provided by a healthier natural environment. The limited damage provoked by the worsttyphoon in a decade provided the best possible indication of the effectiveness of the plantation in reducing risks andits ability to enhance the resiliency of local communities.Source: IFRC, 2002.36

Living with risk - focus on disaster risk reduction1Linking environment and disaster reduction activities• Assessment of environmental problems linked to hazards based on reliable sources of existing information,mapping of environmentally sensitive areas, description of the characteristics of the environmentand development trends in these areas, assessment of impacts and the need for additional data.• Examination of environmental benefits to be drawn from disaster reduction activities throughoutsectors.• Monitoring to provide information for decision-making purposes, e.g. removal of disaster-proneland from development (land-use plans enable local governments to gather and analyse informationabout the suitability of land for development, so that the limitations of hazard-prone areas are understoodby policy makers, potential investors and community residents).• Environmental tools for disaster reduction purposes: regulatory (zoning, subdivision regulations,building codes, special ordinances), incentives (tax incentives, transfers of development rights, easements,land purchases, voluntary agreements, donations, leases, covenants, charitable deductions),programmes (conservation/restoration of ecosystems, wildlife, wetlands), hazard control and mitigation,water/watershed, coastal-zone management.extreme events, and an appraisal of alternativesolutions to an exclusively engineeringapproach.There is growing recognition that by followingprinciples of wise environmental management,increased hazard protection as well as economicbenefits can be provided by the natural environment.This can be accomplished by buildingnational and local capacities, exchangingexperience and information regionally andengaging programme and investment partnersinternationally.The wealth of information and knowledgefrom both environmental and disaster managementstudies should be mutually beneficial.Both areas are inherently multi-disciplinaryand dynamic in their approach and analysis ofthe socio-environmental nexus. Institutionally,both have been, and largely continue to be,operated by the public sector and NGOs. Similartools are continuously being refined in bothfields, namely vulnerability indexing, inventorymechanisms, educational programmes for publicawareness and impact assessments.Encompassing long-term comprehensive goalsto manage growth, development and land useimplies incorporating an effective environmentalcomponent into disaster reduction strategies.Adapted, sustainable and integrated managementof natural resources, including reforestationschemes, proper land use and judicioussettlements should increase the resilienceof communities to disasters by reversing currenttrends of environmental degradation anddealing with hazard management in a comprehensiveway. Secondary benefits expected fromthe introduction of environmental projects indisaster reduction programmes include socialacceptance, political feasibility and economicrationale.Disaster reduction and environmental managementshould become national priorities. Entitiesresponsible for disaster reduction shouldhave clear environmental mandates. Coordinatedand inter-agency programmes are neededto promote a holistic problem-solving strategy,justifying the protection and restoration ofnatural functions of ecosystems, and assessingprogramme subsidies to create the right incentivesfor sustainability. Environmental accountingsystems that produce information suitedfor decision-making should reflect disasterreduction considerations. Additional studiesare needed to improve systems of ecologicaleconomic accounting. Translating environmentalresources and services into conventionaleconomic figures is still very much a challenge.As disaster reduction and environment have alot in common, the disaster reduction communityshould look closely at experiencegained in promoting environmental policies.The environmental community has been promotingits agenda for 30 years. Today, the roleof environmental strategies to achieve sustainabledevelopment is now no longer questionedand disaster reduction policy must follow asimilar path.37

1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesUntil recently, the relationship between environmentaldegradation and mismanagement,hazard incidence and vulnerability was a nonissuein most regions and countries except forlip-service. Neither the subject nor the designatedauthorities for disaster management werethought to be relevant for ecologists and environmentalists.There was little discussion, andeven less organizational contact, linking theperceived interests of environmental managementand the dynamics associated with riskreduction. In fact, the primary actors frequentlyconsidered one another to be antagonists,struggling to represent forces either empoweringthe interests of the people or expanding theuncompromising power and authority of theState, often played out over competing uses ofland and natural resources. It should also berecalled that the existence of environmentaldivisions in bilateral and multilateral agenciesas well as of environmental ministries was notthe norm during the 1980s.Long-term environmental changes and disastersAt the beginning of the 21st century, there is, particularly inPacific island developing states, growing concern about thelong-term consequences of climate change, the El Niño phenomenonand the potential for rising sea levels. In recognizingthe heavy dependence of small island developing states on thenatural environment and that they are exposed to almost alltypes of natural, technological and human-related hazards,there is a strong rationale for considering all these hazards in ageneric sense as ultimately being environmental hazards.Environmental impact is precisely the premise for disasterreduction in five generic environments:• Built environment – property, buildings, infrastructure• Natural environment – geography, physiology• Human environment – human life, socio-economic factorsintegral with the surface of the earth• Terrestrial environment• Marine environmentThis changed dramatically in the closing yearsof the 1990s in Latin America and theCaribbean. El Niño and Hurricanes Georgesand Mitch focused attention on the importanceof the full range of the hydrological cycle toboth development and disaster concerns. Themagnitude of the resulting fires, drought,flooding and landslides associated with thesedisasters inevitably stimulated discussion aboutthe relationships that exist between environmentalmismanagement and the occurrence ofhazards. One of the most important initiativeswas the CCAD publication, Strategy for theReduction of Environmental Vulnerability in CentralAmerica when Faced with Natural Disasters:Environmental Management and the Evaluationof Vulnerability, (May 1999). Produced with thecollaboration of the Economic Commission forLatin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),UNDP, UNEP and the World Bank, thisdocument provided an overview of the disasterand vulnerability problems in the region andproposed many wide-ranging projects forfinancing as part of the international process torehabilitate the Central American region. Thecontent of the proposals went quite beyondenvironmental problems, touching on almostevery foreseeable topic of interest to risk analystsand managers.Concluding remarksDespite the progress achieved, much more isrequired to implement institutional changesfavouring the evolution of a disaster reductionculture. The processes conditioning the emergenceof disaster reduction need to be conduciveto risk and vulnerability understanding,awareness and management, leading to longtermsafe development planning based onanticipation rather than cure.Disaster reduction strategies drawing uponsustainable development concepts should beproactive, and, on a continuous basis. Theyshould promote political commitment, financialrationale, environmental sensibility andcultural awareness. Such a shift in mentalityshould, in particular, meet the mitigationrequirements imposed by the slow-onset disastersthat global environmental changes willbring about.38

Chapter2Risk awareness and assessment2.1 Understanding the nature of risk2.2 Emerging trends in disaster impact, hazardsand vulnerability patterns2.3. Risk assessment39

Photo: J. Jenkins/PAHO

Understanding the nature of hazardsRisk awareness and assessment2Understanding the nature of natural hazards involves a consideration of almost every physical phenomenon on theplanet. The slow movements in the earth’s mantle – the convection cells that drive the movement of continents andthe manufacture of ocean floors – are the starting point and also the sticking point. They lift mountains and shapelandscapes. They also build volcanoes and trigger potentially catastrophic earthquakes. Like those other invisiblemovements that take place on a vast scale through the atmospheric medium – the carbon cycle and the water cycleand the nitrogen cycle – volcanoes and earthquakes, along with technological advancements, provide the bedrock ofstrong nations, rich industries and great cities. They do, of course, have the potential to destroy them. This is alsowhat happens with technological hazards and environmental degradation.While most natural hazards may be inevitable,disasters are not. By seeking to understand andto anticipate future hazards by study of the pastand monitoring of present situations, a communityor public authority is poised to minimizethe risk of a disaster. It is a measure ofpeople’s wisdom and a society’s values if acommunity is able to learn from the experiencesof others, rather than to suffer its own.There is a wealth of knowledge about thenature and consequences of different hazards,expected frequency, magnitude and potentialgeographical impacts, but many fewer examplesof lessons learned from them.Hazards are increasingly dynamic and withhighly varying potential impacts. Due tochanging environments, many countries andregional organisations call for a greater knowledgeof hazard characteristics. Such knowledgerequires additional, more focussed research onhazards and a greater understanding of theirnature, effects and history.A wide range of geophysical, meteorological,hydrological, environmental, technological,biological and even socio-political hazards,alone or in complex interaction, can threatenliving and sustainable development. Hazardshave often been divided into natural, humaninducedtechnological and increasingly negativeeffects of environmental degradation isbeing added to this list.While natural hazards can be divided into threebroad categories -hydrometeorological, geologicaland biological- the variety, geographical coverageand types of impacts are huge. Forest fires,for example, are recognised as a natural hazardbut are often referred to as environmental, alongwith pest infestation and desertification. Inorder to distinguish between different hazardtypes, many institutions have developed hazardcatalogues. A table has been prepared by ISDRto summarise the current thinking (see next page).The strong compound relation between differenttypes of natural hazards may give theimpression that attempts to catalogue them arefatuous. At what stage does a landslide, recognisedas a geological hazard, becomes a mudflow,which is often classified as a hydrologicalhazard? In the same vein, primary hazardsoften give rise to a myriad of related potentialcollateral or secondary hazards. In many cases,these cause greater threat to a community thando the primary hazards. Tropical cyclones cantrigger other hazards, in particular stormsurges, flash foods and landslides. Often themost serious impact of a tropical cyclone comesfrom the associated coastal and river floods.Similarly, damages related to earthquakes areoften caused by landslides, fires, tsunamis, andfloods.All communities – urban or rural – are vulnerableto most hazards. However, different regionswill be more prone to certain types of hazardsthan others. Floods and windstorms are the hazardsthat most frequently lead to disasters inAsia, the Pacific, Europe and North America,while it is droughts and epidemics that arereported in African countries. In contrast, Pacificand Caribbean islands are most vulnerable tothe effects of tropical cyclones. El Niño events,floods, volcanic eruptions and earthquakes affectin greater degree the Andean and Meso-Americancountries. Even within a specific region,such as the Pacific, the frequency and intensity ofspecific hazards varies from one country toanother. Hydrometeorological hazards are mostcommon and floods alone account for two-thirdsof people affected by natural hazards.In the same way, different levels of income groupsare more or less vulnerable to certain types of haz-43

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesHazard classificationHAZARDpotentially damaging physical event, phenomenon and/or human activity,which may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social andeconomic disruption or environmental degradation.NATURAL HAZARDSNatural processes or phenomena occurring in the biospherethat may constitute a damaging event.Natural hazards can be classified by origin in: geological, hydrometeorological or biological.ORIGINGeological hazardsNatural earth processes or phenomena inthe biosphere, which include geological,neotectonic, geophysical, geomorphological,geotechnical and hydrogeologicalnature.Hydrometeorological hazardsNatural processes or phenomena ofatmospheric, hydrological or oceanographicnature.Biological hazardsProcesses of organic origin or those conveyedby biological vectors, includingexposure to pathogenic micro-organisms,toxins and bioactive substancesPHENOMENA / EXAMPLES• Earthquakes, tsunamis;• Volcanic activity and emissions;• Mass movements i.e.: landslides, rockslides,rockfall, liquefaction, submarineslides;• Subsidence, surface collapse, geologicalfault activity.• Floods, debris and mud flows;• Tropical cyclones, storm surges, thunder/hailstorms,rain and wind storms,blizzards and other severe storms;• Drought, desertification, wildlandfires, heat waves, sand or dust storms;• Permafrost, snow avalanches.Outbreaks of epidemic diseases, plant oranimal contagion, and extensive infestations.TECHNOLOGICAL HAZARDSDanger originating from technological or industrial accidents, dangerous procedures, infrastructurefailures or certain human activities, which may cause the loss of life or injury,property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation. Sometimesreferred to as anthropogenic hazards. Some examples: industrial pollution, nuclear activitiesand radioactivity, toxic wastes, dam failures; transport, industrial or technological accidents(explosions, fires, spills)ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATIONProcesses induced by human behaviour and activities (sometimes combined with naturalhazards), that damage the natural resource base or adversely alter natural processes orecosystems. Potential effects are varied and may contribute to an increase in vulnerabilityand the frequency and intensity of natural hazards.Some examples: land degradation, deforestation, desertification, wildland fires, loss of biodiversity,land, water and air pollution, climate change, sea level rise, ozone depletion.44NOTES:1. Hazards can be single, sequential or combined in their origins and effects.2. Some hazards may have natural or human-induced origin, i.e. wildland fires and desertification, in such a case they may beclassified as hydrometerological hazard or refered to environmental degradation.

Risk awareness and assessment2Map- Distribution of natural disasters, by country and type of phenomena (1975-2001)Number of People Killed (Income Class/Disaster Type)(1975-2000) World SummaryGraphic elaborated by ADRC from OFDA/CRED international disaster database45

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesards. While droughts affect primarily the lowersocial classes, the impact of earthquakes and floodsare more evenly spread out between society.Understanding the nature ofvulnerability and capacityRisk is rooted in conditions of physical, social, economic andenvironmental vulnerability that need to be assessed and managedon a continuing basis. The primary objective is to minimizeexposure to hazards through the development and relianceon individual and societal capabilities and institutional capacitiesthat can withstand potential loss or damageOver the past thirty years there has been a significantand important development in the understandingabout what makes people, social, economicand environmental assets susceptible tohazards. The concept of vulnerability may havebeen referred to first by engineers, in consideringconstruction values and building designs relatedto levels of resistance to physical forces exerted byearthquakes, wind and water.During the 1980s and 1990s, there was a growinginterest in the linkages between disasters andVulnerabilityA set of conditions and processes resulting from physical, social,economical and environmental factors, which increase the susceptibilityof a community to the impact of hazards.Coping capacityThe manner in which people and organisations use existingresources to achieve various beneficial ends during unusual,abnormal, and adverse conditions of a disaster event or process.development. Originally focussed on consideringprimarily the impact of disaster on development, itwas then expanded also to address the impact ofdevelopment on the toll of disaster related damage.This expressed a new range of socio-economic andenvironmental concerns built around the notion ofvulnerability.In parallel with this expanded interest on the relationshipbetween disasters and development duringthe last decades, the role of community participationas well as people’s general coping capacities was alsorecognized as key elements in explaining disasterrisk. The creative link between the negative conditionswith which people live, and the often overlookedpositive attributes which they also possess,underline the importance of socio-economic dimensionsof risk. However, it remains a challenge toencourage the identification of locally availablestrengths and capacities to reduce risk to hazards.The importance of exposing capacities hidden innon-disaster times becomes a critical task for disasterrisk reduction. Capacity apply to all levels ofsociety and social organizations, and a broad rangeof physical, social, economic and ecological considerations.Vulnerability is a reflection of the state of the individualand collective physical, social, economic andenvironmental conditions at hand that are shapedcontinually by attitudinal, behavioural, cultural,socio-economic and political influences at the individuals,families, communities, and countries.Governed by human activity, vulnerability cannot beisolated from ongoing development efforts, and ittherefore plays a critical role in the social, economicand ecological spheres of sustainable development.EconomicInteraction ofvulnerabilityfactorsPhysicalSocialEcological46

The figure below illustrates the four broad areas inwhich different aspects of vulnerability can be grouped.They are depicted by intersecting circles to show that allspheres interact with one another.Physical factors: This concept is conventionally assetoriented,and comes from the schools of land use planning,engineering and architecture. Physical aspects ofvulnerability, although continually broadening in scope,still mainly refer to the location considerations and susceptibilitiesof the built environment. It may bedescribed as exposure to hazards – “living in harmsways” or “being in the wrong place at the wrong time.”Physical vulnerability may be determined by aspectssuch as density levels, remoteness of a settlement, its siting,design and materials used for critical infrastructureand for housing.Social factors: Social vulnerability is linked to the levelof well being of individuals, communities and society. Itincludes aspects related to levels of literacy and education,the existence of peace and security, access to basichuman rights, systems of good governance, social equity,positive traditional values, knowledge structures, customsand ideological beliefs, and overall collective organizationalsystems.Some groups are more vulnerable than others, mainlythose less privileged in class and caste structures,ethnic minorities, the very young and very old, andother disadvantaged and marginalized segments ofthe population. Gender issues, particularly the role ofwomen, are also important. In many societies, womenhave a primary responsibility for domestic life, essentialshelter and basic needs. Therefore, women aremore likely to become more burdened, or more vulnerablein times of crisis.Public health, concerning physical, mental and psychologicalwell being, is a critical aspect of social vulnerability.The disabled, of whom there are hundreds of millionsworld-wide, are particularly susceptible, as theirevacuation and continued care is severely hamperedduring disasters. Predisposition to infection, exaggeratedexposure to communicable diseases, lack of defensivemechanisms, insufficient basic infrastructure, especiallywater supply and sanitation, as well as inadequate healthcare facilities and supplies, are all expressions ofincreased vulnerability.Levels of literacy and training, traditional knowledgesystems, and access to information on disaster risk andmeasures, as well cultural aspects, such as indigenousbeliefs, traditions and ways of coping also shape levels ofRisk awareness and assessmentsusceptibility. Deeply rooted beliefs that are destiny orientedor pose a fatalistic vision of disasters, can reflect areligious or ideologically inherited sense of vulnerability,and these people may present a great challenge in movingtowards the acceptance of a culture of preventionand protection.Social vulnerability is also linked with other factors, likethe state of domination and power relations in the concernedsociety. A great social cohesion and regulationimproves the coping capacities, whereas social insecurityincreases vulnerability. In this sense, the decline oftraditional structures, civic groups or communities formerlyengaged in the collective well being, or in the protectionof the weakest people, can strengthen the disastrousconsequences of a hazard.Organizational and governance structures play animportant role in the level of social vulnerability.Economic factors: Levels of vulnerability are highlydependent upon the economic status of individuals, communitiesand nations. The poor are in general far morevulnerable than economically better off sectors of society.This relates both to the proportional possibility of higherlosses when a disaster strikes, and to the capacity torecover from disasters. The links between the eradicationof poverty, impact consequences on recovery conditionsfrom natural disasters, and the state of the environmentalresource base upon which both depend are crucial.Economic vulnerability also includes levels of individual,community and national economic reserves, levelsof debt and the degree of access to credit and loans aswell as insurance. An economy lacking in diversity isgenerally more vulnerable. Similarly, inadequate accessto critical and basic socio-economic infrastructure,including communication networks, utilities and supplies,transportation, water, sewage and health care facilitiesincrease people’s exposure to risk.Ecological factors: The discussion of environmentalaspects of vulnerability covers a very broad range of issuesin the inter-acting social, economic and ecological aspectsof sustainable development as it relates to disaster riskreduction. The key aspects of environmental vulnerabilitycan be summarized by the following five distinctions: (seepage 60 diagram on “Environmental degradation”)• The extent of natural resource depletion.• The state of resource degradation.• Loss of resilience of the ecological systems.• Loss of biodiversity.• Exposure to toxic and hazardous pollutants.247

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives2.2 - Emerging trends in disaster impact, hazards and vulnerability patternsMore than 90 per cent of natural disaster related deaths are to be found in developing countries.Disaster impact statistics show the global trend – there are now more disasters but fewer peopledie in proportion, even though more population is affected and economic losses are increasing,as discussed in the next section.Closely linked and influenced by changing perception, hazards and vulnerability is constantlyshaped by dynamic and complex socio-economic and ecological processes. They are compoundedby stresses felt within individual societies.The current aspects of physical exposure of human beings and economic assets have been partlyshaped by historical patterns of settlements. Beneficial climatic and soil conditions that havespurred economic activities are in many cases also associated to hazard-prone landscapes. Bothvolcanic slopes and flood plains areas have historically attracted human activities. Where settlementpatterns have contributed to configure risk scenarios, new forces, such as populationgrowth and increased rural/urban migration, act as dynamic pressures contributing to changingpatterns in increasing people’s exposure to hazards.The processes through which people and goods become more exposed to hazards are also socioeconomicconditioned. In particular, poverty levels and the impact of development processes,especially those associated with an increasingly globalised society, are reflecting, to some degree,current trends in socio-economic vulnerability to disasters. The pace of modern life has alsointroduced new forms of vulnerabilities related to technological developments. In addition todiscouraging poverty levels, the emergence of virulent biological threats has revealed evengreater vulnerability.Systemic ecological and localized environmental degradation is becoming highly influential aswell, lowering the natural resilience to disaster impact, delaying recovery time and generallyweakening the resource base on which all human activity is ultimately dependent.At the ecosystem level, phenomena like El Niño/La Niña, climate change and the potential forrising sea levels, are affecting the patterns and intensity of hydrometeorological hazards. Environmentaldegradation influences the effects of natural hazards, by exacerbating their impactsand limiting the natural absorptive capacity and resilience of the areas affected.Biological hazards in the forms of plant or animal contagion, extensive infestations, human diseaseepidemics and pandemics, continue to factor into the disasters-development scenario innew and unpredictable ways. They exert considerable socio-economic impacts on food securityand human mortality, health and economic productivity, among other things.Disaster triggered by technological hazards often resulting from major accidents associated withindustrialisation and forms of technological innovation, have significant socio-economic andenvironmental impact. Although technological hazards have been part of society for hundreds ofyears, the trends are showing an increasing impact. Technological advancements, specifically inthe energy, transport and industrial sectors, are developing innovations with associated risks thatare not always understood or heeded. The adverse effects of some technological disasters, bothon society and on the environment, can considerably outlast the impacts associated with naturaldisasters.48

Trends in disaster impactWhile no country in the world is entirely safe,lack of capacity to limit the impact of hazardsremains a major burden for developing countries,where more than 90 per cent of naturaldisaster related deaths are to be found.Twenty-four of the 49 least developed countries(LDCs) still face high levels of disasterrisk. At least six of them have been hit bybetween two and eight major disasters per yearin the last 15 years, with long-term consequencesfor human development (UNDP,2001). These figures do not include the consequencesof the many smaller and unrecordeddisasters that cause significant loss at the localcommunity level.The re-insurance giant Munich Re, a memberof the ISDR Inter-agency Task Force, in itsannual publication Topics for 2000, looked atthe trend of economic losses and insurancecosts over a 50 year period linked to what itcalls “great natural catastrophes”.There were 20 of these, costing the world US$38 billion (at 1998 values) between 1950 and1959. However, between 1990 and 1999, therewere 82 such major disasters and the economiclosses had risen to a total of US$ 535 billion.That is, disasters had multiplied fourfold buteconomic losses were 14 times higher. And ineach decade between, both the number of greatdisasters and the economic loss involved hadrisen steadily. However, losses in 2000 and2001 were down.These are absolute figures of economic loss,most of them to be found in developed andindustrialized countries. But seen as losses bypercentage of GDP, it is developing countriesthat lose most in relative terms, as shown in thegraphic based on figures provided byMunichRe. For example, the economic lossesof the United States from the 1997-98 El Niñoevent were estimated to US$ 1.96 billion or0.03 per cent of GDP. The economic losses inEcuador were US$ 2.9 billion, but this represented14.6 per cent of GDP (ECLAC 2000).The International Federation of Red Cross andRed Crescent Societies, another ISDR TaskForce member, confirms the worsening trendof human suffering and economic loss duringRisk awareness and assessmentthe last decade. The total number of peopleeach year affected by natural disaster – that is,who at least for a time either lost their homes,their crops, their animals, their livelihoods, ortheir health, because of the disaster – almostdoubled between 1990 and 1999, by an averageof 188 million people per year (CRED2002). This is six times more than the averageof 31 million people affected annually by conflict(OCHA, 2002).Comparing the last three decades, the trendshows an increase in the number of naturalhazard events and of affected populations.Even though the number of disasters has morethan tripled since the 1970s, the reported deathtoll has decreased to less than half (see grahpicpage 12). This is among other factors due toimproved early warning systems and increasedpreparedness. This statistic varies enormouslydepending on region and figures used. Oneneeds to bear in mind that large disasters arerare events that defeat any statistical analysis inThe ecological footprintDemographic pressure means more forest loss and moreland degradation. This means more flooding, drought, orboth. Every human requires an area of land and shallow seafor food, water, shelter, transport, energy, commerce andwaste. This is called an ecological footprint. In rich nationssuch as the US, this ecological footprint is almost 10 hectaresper person. But even in the poorest places in the US thisfootprint is at least one hectare.Every day, another 200,000 newborns will require up to200,000 hectares of what might have been a benign and necessarywilderness. More people also means more fossil fuelconsumption, which means more carbon dioxide emission,which means climate change. And such a world, climate scientistshave warned repeatedly, is a world with a greater frequencyof extreme events.The combination of climate change and population growthwill exact a price. The latest UN calculation is that threedecades from now, around 70 per cent of the world’s landwill be affected in some way by human activity and half thepeople in the world will be short of water. Many of the otherhalf will be at risk from increased flooding. By that time,there could be eight billion people on the planet.Adapted from the environmentalist E O Wilson, ScientificAmerican, February 2002492

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesGreat natural catastrophes 1950–2001Source:Munich Re,2001the short term. Perhaps more significant in thelife of many are those daily disasters, generallyunderreported and not reflected at all in globalfigures on losses, but accumulating to probablylarge tolls of both economic and health losses.There is a considerable geographic variation inthe occurrence and impact of natural hazards.Asia is disproportionately affected withapproximately 43 per cent of all natural disastersin the last decade. During the same period,Asia accounted for almost 70 per cent of alllives lost due to natural hazards. During thetwo El Niño years of 1991-92 and 1997-98,floods in China alone affected over 200 millionTotal Number of Reported Disasters, (1991-2000)people in each year. Nevertheless, in relativeterms and counted per capita, Africa is themost heavily affected country, in particularwhen drought, epidemics and famine areincluded.The single most terrible year in human lossduring the last decade was 1991, when acyclone devastated Bangladesh killing 139,000people, bringing the global total of deaths forthat year to 200,000. Cyclones are cyclicalevents and they continue to hit the Bangladeshcoasts but no such catastrophe has happenedagain. This is at least in part because themachinery of warning and preparedness –watchful officials, an aware public and astronger sense of community responsibility –came into play.The worst global economic loss during lastdecade occurred in 1995, due to the GreatHanshin-Awaji earthquake in Kobe, Japan. Ahighly developed, prepared and economicallystrong nation faced serious set backs economicallyby loosing important facilities of its primaryport. Even seven years after that disaster,the amount of shipping trade in Kobe hasdropped by 15 per cent. But now Kobe isrebuilt and modernised.Source: Munich Re, 200150

Trends in hazardsUntil recently, the intensity and frequency ofnatural hazards, as events, whether geologicalor hydrometeorological in nature, only variedon very long time-scales due to natural variationin global temperatures and variation in theintensity of seismic activity.Today, in particular hydrometeorological hazardsare increasing due to human activities.The findings of the Intergovernmental PanelRisk awareness and assessmenton Climate Change (IPCC) provide a newoutlook about the changing patterns related tohazards themselves. Certainly, the scale of volcanicor seismic activity is not altered byhuman-induced sources, but it appears thatour changing climate is affecting both the frequencyand intensity of hydrometeorologicalhazards and related mass movements.Although it is very difficult to show scientificevidence of these changes, projections for thefuture invite concern.2Great natural catastrophes 1950–2001Source: MunichRe, 2001The figure below shows that there is currently no major change in the frequency and intensity ofreported earthquakes. Nevertheless, the economic losses caused by earthquakes are increasing.Earthquakes Located by the NEIC, Magnitude 5 and greater51

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesVolcanic HazardsAbout 50 to 60 volcanoes erupt every yearworldwide. Large eruptions endanger lives,human settlements and livelihoods of thealmost 500 million people estimated to livenear active volcanoes in 2000. That numberwill increase in the future as today more than60 large cities are located near potentially activevolcanoes, threatened by volcanic eruption.Volcanoes with high activity are located predominantlyin developing countries, particularlyin Latin America, the Caribbean, partsof Asia and in the southwest Pacific. In thesecountries, despite the improvements in manynational civil defense agencies’ capacities tomanage volcanic emergencies, eruptions arebecoming increasingly risky because of risingpopulation density and intense interweavingof infrastructure in the areas surrounding volcanoes.As the physical characteristics and chemicalproperties of a specific volcano become betterknown, it can be more easily monitored.However, the prediction of an impendingeruption can still remain a major challenge forvolcanologists. Therefore, predicting futurevolcanic eruptions and related hazards mustalso be matched with a series of other forms ofmitigation, including the following:• Volcanic risk analysis.• Early warning and short-term forecast oferuptions.• Timely and effectively organized evacuationof people from hazardous areas.• Development and application of land-useand contingency plans to minimize futurevolcanic disasters.• Sustained information and educationalprograms for the population.Major volcanic eruptions do not occur spontaneouslyand are preceded by a variety ofphysical, geological and chemical changes,which accompany the rise of magma towardthe surface. The monitoring and measure-ment of these changes with well establishedscientific techniques provide the best opportunityto develop a warning system. Recentvolcanic disasters show that the cost of monitoringvolcanic activity and pre-disaster planningis very small when compared to thepotential losses.For early warning to be effective, sustainedpublic education and information is necessary.This includes understanding results of volcanologicalstudies and analysis, the possibledangers and the local plans to address themprior to the occurrence of emergency conditions.It can be done through the use ofbrochures, lectures, or courses although thebest prepared communities also conduct regulardisaster warning and prevention exercises.In 1990, the International Association of Volcanologyand Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior(IAVCEI) launched a program to support theIDNDR and to promote the reduction ofrisks related to volcanoes. The initiativeselected 16 volcanoes for monitoring andresearch with the aim of directing attention toa small number of active volcanoes, and toencourage the establishment of a range ofresearch and public-awareness activitiesaimed at enhancing an understanding of thevolcanoes and the hazards they pose.That commitment demonstrated a concentratedeffort within the scientific communityto publicize the realistic aspects of disasterreduction by working in close association withcommunities at risk from volcanic hazards.Such collaborative scientific activities continueto show benefits as quite a lot of work continueswith those same volcanoes. As a resultof improvements in monitoring made duringthe IDNDR, better data has been developed,especially as those volcanoes continue to berestless. Ongoing work that would not haveoccurred were it not for this earlier concentratedattention includes, ongoing German-Indonesian cooperation at Merapi Volcano,on the Indonesian island of Java.52

Risk awareness and assessment2Nyiragongo Volcano, Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo, January 2002“Goma is overshadowed by two large and active volcanoes- Nyiragongo and Nyamalagira. Part of the former is alarge “hanging” crater of lava- said to be the largest active lava lake in the world. Any weaknesses in the sidescould result in catastrophic consequences.”Nyiragongo is considered by the scientific community as one of the most notable and dangerous volcanoesin Africa. Nyiragongo and neighbouring Nyamuragira are responsible for nearly two-fifths ofAfrica’s historical eruptions. However, according to a UN/DHA mission report, despite the 500,000people living close to Nyiragongo, no serious studies has been engaged and no initiatives has been establishedto reduce volcanic risks.Nyiragongo showed activity in 1977, 1982, 1994 and February 2001. Extremely fluid, fast moving lavaflows drained the summit lava lake in 1977 probably killing about 50-100 people, although other estimatesrun as high as 2,000 fatalities. Following a crater eruption of Nyamuragira in January 2000, theone local volcanologist signaled the possibility of a later eruption of Nyiragongo, as there are subterraneangeological connections between the two.In May 2001, the small Goma observatory requested assistance for seismographs, thermometers andfunds to conduct field surveys. At the beginning of 2001 and again in October 2001, Nyiragongoshowed signs of activity, and an earthquake was felt in Goma while black smoke was sighted above thevolcano. The same phenomena were repeated on 4 January 2002, in addition to several other signs suggestingan imminent eruption – signs noted prior to previous eruptions.The local volcanologist sent additional messages to the international community on 8 January 2002, raisingthe alarm of an imminent eruption and requesting assistance. Nyiragongo began erupting on 17 Januaryand continued until 23 January. One lava flow headed for the town of Goma, where it literally splitthe town in half. Another lava flow headed toward Gisenyi in Rwanda.According to an expert report, “the eruption forced the rapid exodus of 300,000 to 400,000 persons,most into neighboring Rwanda, with dramatic humanitarian consequences… Forty-seven victims werereported as directly due to the eruption, to whom one must add about 60 people killed during the explosionof the petrol gas station in Goma center on January 21.” At least 16,000 homes were destroyed, leaving100,000 people homeless, and 24,000 children were left without schools. Goma and Gisenyi citiesalso suffered from strong seismic activity that accompanied and followed the eruption.Adapted from: Final report of the French-British scientific team, 2002Climate related hazardsSocieties are increasingly dependant on mediumto long term variations in the climate, such as ElNiño/La Niña (see box “El Niño outlooks”),which affect precipitation and temperatures overtime-scales of two to three years. These regionalclimatic shifts, the specific character of which isstill very much unknown, develop their own variationin hazard trends, in particular hydro-climatichazards associated with climate variability.The prevalence of droughts and floods as leadinghazards shows that many countries are particularlyvulnerable in dealing with current natural variabilityand extremes, let alone climate change.The projected changes in climate will adverselyaffect many regions, in particular tropicaland sub-tropical regions of the planet. Whendealing with the complex issue of climatechange there are some observations that cannow be accepted as fact. It is now establishedthat temperatures are increasing globally,although these increases are not evenly distributedaround the planet. As the atmospherebecomes warmer throughout the world it canabsorb more water vapour, leading to a generalincrease in humidity. As a result there is theprobability that tropical storms and cycloneswill be accompanied by extreme precipitationincreases.53

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEl Niño outlooksClimatic factors that affect the occurrenceof natural disasters are the irregularlyrecurrent variables, such as the El Niñoand La Niña phenomena. Atmosphereoceancirculation models project that as theearth's climate warms over the next 100years, it is likely that a more El Niño-likecondition may persist, leading to anincrease in the incidence of floods anddroughts in many parts of the world. Boththe 1981-82 and 1997-98 events, thestrongest ever recorded, had disastrousimpacts on Pacific rim countries, and theeffects were felt worldwide.According to insurers SwissRe, the total economic impact of the 1997-98 event, amounted to US$ 98 billion.This highlights the need for better monitoring of the phenomena, better forecasts of the relatedextreme events, and more importantly, stronger institutions to deal with such information and increaselocal community's preparedness and resilience.The WMO, in collaboration with the International Research Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI) ofColumbia University in the U.S.A., has undertaken to coordinate the preparation of “El Niño outlooks”,whenever the threat of an event manifests itself, as a contribution to the UN Interagency Task Force onDisaster Reduction. These outlooks draw on contributions from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology,China Meteorological Administration, European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts, IRI,Japan Meteorological Agency, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research in New Zealand,Met Office United Kingdom, and the Climate Variability and Predictability (CLIVAR) Project of theWorld Climate Research Programme.Unfortunately, these factors have a compoundeffect on the occurrence and impact of disasters.On the one hand, they affect the intensityand frequency of extreme hydrometeorologicalevents, and on the other hand, they increase thevulnerability of societies. As we know, changein precipitation patterns, soil moisture and vegetationcover, are linked to the occurrence offloods, droughts, but also landslides and debrisflow events. Climate change is also resulting inslight sea level rise and may cause more devastatingstorms and hurricanes in coastal areas.The only natural hazards that are not directlyinfluenced by climate change are, possibly, volcaniceruptions and earthquakes.The Inter-Agency Task Force on DisasterReduction (IATF/DR) of the ISDR has aworking group dealing with climate and disasters(WG1) and another with wildland fires(WG4). In the area of drought preparednessand mitigation, there are a number of coordinatedand collaborative initiatives that are foreseento be undertaken within the framework ofthe ISDR Task Force involving all its workinggroups.54

Risk awareness and assessment2ISDR working group 1: Climate and disasters (WG1)WG1 of the Inter-agency Task Forceon Disaster Reduction is led by theWMO and consists of members representingUN agencies, regional and scientificorganizations and the privatesector. It is examining how climateinformation of a scientific nature canbest be conveyed to different usergroups. Such information can be applicableto various space and time scales,and it is important that linkagesbetween global, regional and nationalcentres are working effectively in orderto ensure that users, who may beobtaining information from varioussources, are receiving a consistent message on a particular development and that they will know what todo with the information.The group defined a matrix on information transfer for a more coordinated and systematic approachbetween those involved in the interpretation of scientific assessments and the wide range of user communities.Under the auspices of the group, El Niño outlooks are now being prepared. (see box)In view of the direct impact of meteorological and hydro-meteorological hazards on the increase in frequencyand intensity of disasters, WG1 together with the working group on risk, vulnerability and impactassessment (WG3) expressed the need to improve disaster impact databases and link them to climatedatabases.The group has prepared a background paper and proposal on the need for concerted drought informationand policies, for all the groups of the ISDR Task Force to engage in. The information on drought in thisreview draws from that paperDrought distinctionAbsence of a precise and universally accepteddefinition of drought adds to the confusion asto whether it exists, and if it does the degree ofits severity. Thus, drought is often forgottenonce it ends, and everybody seems to be caughtunawares again by the next one. Most of thedrought definitions have therefore been application(impact) specific. Other drought definitionshave been regional specific. The discussionsof drought here are focused on threetypes of drought – meteorological, agricultural,and hydrological. Meteorological drought isprincipally defined by the deficiency of precipitationfrom expected or normal levels over anextended period of time. Hydrological droughtis best defined by deficiencies in surface andsubsurface water supplies, leading to a lack ofwater for meeting normal and specific waterdemands. Agricultural drought may be charac-terized by deficiency in the water availabilityfor specific agricultural operations such as deficiencyof in soil moisture, which is one of themost critical factors in defining crop productionpotential.During the coming decade and century, it isexpected that drought vulnerability willincrease, mainly due to development pressures,population increases, and environmentaldegradation that could itself lead to climatechange. Several efforts have therefore beenmade at international, regional and nationallevels to address drought challenges. Theinternational and regional efforts include theprogrammes and activities of the organizationssuch as WMO, FAO, WFP, IFAD, ADPC,ACMAD and the Drought Monitoring Centresin Africa, US/NOAA, IRI of ColumbiaUniversity and USGS, that have establishedprogrammes to deal with drought monitoring,55

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesprediction, early warning and disaster preparedness.They are also covered by thework of the UN sustainable developmentconventions, the UNFCCC, UNCCD andCBD.Drought, unlike sudden-onset disasters, hassome unique characteristics that may requiredifferent approaches to effectively addresshow to reduce their impacts:• Drought does not directly destroy foodin storage, shelter or infrastructure.• Its effects are cumulative.• It is often very difficult to detect itsonset until some major impacts such aslack of water or food become discernible.• Impacts can be spread over a largergeographical area than the damages thatresult from most of the other naturaldisasters, and hence quantification ofimpacts and provision of disaster reliefis far more difficult.“Amartya Sen, the Nobel prize winning economist of CambridgeUniversity, famously pointed out that ‘in the terriblehistory of famines in the world, no substantial famine hasever occurred in an independent and democratic countrywith a relatively free press’. The Human Rights Watchtook this to heart, and asserts that ‘the best way to preventfamine today is to secure the right to free expression – sothat misguided government policies can be brought to publicattention and corrected before food shortages become acute’”Source: The Economist, 18 August 2001Further, there are several social and economicparameters that affect the severity of droughtincluding food prices, wars, various interventionmethods, human activity, vegetation,water supplies and demands, making itextremely difficult to quantify its severity andalso provide universal definition and indicatorsof drought. Drought risk is a product ofa region’s exposure to the natural hazards andits vulnerability to extended periods of watershortage. To reduce serious consequences,affected nations must improve understandingsof hazards and the factors that influencevulnerability, and establish comprehensiveand integrated early warning systems.Case: ZimbabweDrought is the most common hazard in Zimbabwe,a country whose economy is dependent onagriculture. The incidence of drought is oftenlinked to the occurrence of El Niño episodes andhas worsened since the 1980s. Floods frequentlyoccurring in the southern and northernprovinces of the country compound droughtconditions in other parts of the country. In 1996,there were localized floods resulting from abnormallyheavy downpours. However, in 2000,flooding associated with Cyclone Eline causedconsiderable infrastructure and environmentaldamage in the country. The livelihoods of morethan 250,000 people were affected in rural areas,with 100 fatalities and more than US$ 7.5 millionin losses recorded.Drought has been a recurrent feature in mostparts of Southern Africa, with five major periodsof drought since 1980: 1982-83, 1987-88, 1991-92, 1994-95 and 1997-98. Three of these eventswere regional in scale, with the 1991-92 droughtconsidered the “worst in living memory”, placingmore than 20 million people at serious risk.Case: Central AsiaThe persistent multi year drought in Central andSouthwest Asia is an example of climatic variabilitythat has affected up to 60 million people inparts of Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistanand Turkmenistan, since November 2001.Chronic political instability in many parts of theregion and the recent military action inAfghanistan have further complicated the situation.A recent study by the InternationalResearch Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI)concludes that Central and Southwest Asia representthe largest region of persistent droughtover the last three years in the world. In Iranalone, 37 million people are affected. Waterreserves in the country were down by 45 per centin 2001, 800,000 heads of livestock were lost in2000, and 2.6 million hectares of irrigated landand 4 million hectares of rain-fed agriculturewere affected. Damage to agriculture and livestockhas been estimated by the UN at US$ 2.5billion in 2001 and US$ 1.7 billions in 2000.Afghanistan and Pakistan are affected on a similarscale.56

Risk awareness and assessment2Reducing drought impactsThe need to improve drought preparedness through the development of policies and plans has becomewell accepted: South Africa (early 1990’s), Sub-Saharan Africa (UNDP/UNSO, 2000), West Asian andNorth Africa countries, Mediterranean region (CIHEAM, 2001), Morocco. Some of these were developedwith UNCCD, (total number of Ratification of the Convention in January 2002: 178 countries). InAustralia, the 1992 National Drought Policy is widely recognised as a successful policy and often replicated.It has three main objectives:• Encourage primary producers and others sections of rural Australia to adopt self-reliant approachesto managing for climatic variability.• Maintain and protect Australia’s agriculture and environment resource base during periods ofextreme climate stress.• Ensure early recovery of agriculture and rural industries, consistent with long term sustainablegoals.Climate change, sea level riseand coastal systemsCoastal zones are characterized by much diversityof ecosystems and a variety of socio-economicactivities. An estimated 46 million peopleper year, living in coastal areas, are at risk offlooding from storm surges, and sea-level rise.Climate change will exacerbate these trendswith significant impact upon the ecosystemsand populations. A growing number of peoplewill, continue to be located in coastal areas.Many traditional communities and subsistencelevel populations also rely on the resourcewealth of coastal areas and continue to bedrawn to these higher risk coastal regions. Forexample, indigenous coastal and island communitiesin the Torres Strait of Australia and inNew Zealand’s Pacific Island Territories areespecially vulnerable. Although adaptationoptions do exist, such measures are not easilyimplemented on low-lying land. Also, climatechange and sea-level rise issues are not as yetwell incorporated into current models andframeworks for coastal zone management.There is a direct link between tropical sea temperature inthe oceans and the frequency of tropical cyclones, hurricanesor typhoons. More heat in the atmosphere meansmore evaporation which means more rainfall and moreflooding in some places, more frequent drought in others,more violent windstorms or heavier snows elsewhere.Photo: PAHO57

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesTable : Examples of impacts resulting from projected changes in extreme climate eventsReport of Working Group 2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001)Projected changes during the 21 st centuryin extreme climate phenomenaandtheir likelihood aRepresentative examples of projected impacts b all high confidenceof ocurrence in some areas cSimple extremesHigher maximum temperatures: morehot days and heat wavesd over nearly allland areas (very likelyª).Higher (increasing) minimum temperatures:fewer cold days, frost days, andcold wavesd over nearly all land areas(very likelyª).More intense precipitation events (verylikelyª over many areas).• Increased incidence of death and serious illness in olderage groups and urban poor.• Increased heat stress in livestock and wildlife.• Shift in tourist destinations.• Increased electric cooling demand and reduced energysupply reliability.• Decreased cold-related human morbidity and mortality.• Decreased risk of damage to a number of crops andincreased risk to others.• Extended range and activity of some pest and diseasevectors.• Reduced heating energy demand.• Increased flood, landslide, avalanche, mudslide anddebris flow. damage.• Increased soil erosion.• Increased flood runoff could increase recharge of somefloodplain aquifers.• Increased pressure on government and private floodinsurance systems and disaster relief.Complex extremesIncreased summer drying over mostmid-latitude continental interiors andassociated risk of drought (likelyª).Increase in tropical cyclone peak windintensities, mean and peak precipitationintensities (likelyª over some areas e ).Intensified droughts and floods associatedwith El Niño events in many differentregions (likelyª).Increased Asian monsoon precipitationvariability (likelyª).Increased intensity of mid-latitudestorms (little agreement between currentmodels b ).• Decreased crop yields.• Increased damage to building foundations caused byground shrinkage.• Decrease water resource quantity and quality.• Increased risk of forest fire.• Increased risks to human life, risk of infestious diseaseand epidemics.• Increased coastal erosion and damage to coastal buildingsand infrastructure.• Increased damage to coastal ecosystems such as coralreefs and mangroves.• Decreased agricultural and rangeland productivity indrought and flood-prone regions.• Decreased hydro-power potential in drought-proneregions.• Increased flood and drought magnitude and damages intemperte and tropical Asia.• Increased risks to human life and health.• Increased property and infrastructure losses.58a Likelihood refers to judgmental estimates of confidence used byTAR EGI: very likely (90-99% chance); likely (66-90% chance).Unless otherwise stated, information on climate phenomena is takenfrom the Summary for Policymakers, TAR WGI.b These impacts can be lessened by appropriate response measures.c High confidence refers to probabilities between 67 and 95%as described in Footnote 6.d Information from TAR EGI, Technical Summary, Section F.5.e Information from TAR EGI, Technical Summary, Section F.5.

Risk awareness and assessment2Wildland fire as an environmental hazardThroughout the world and in many different types of vegetation, fire is part of agriculture and pastorallivelihoods. Natural wildfires are established elements in traditional land-use systems and have beneficialeffects in natural ecosystem processes and in bio-geo-chemical cycles. However, the excessive use or incidenceof fire due to rapid demographic and land-use changes leads to the destruction of property andreduction of natural productivity by reducing the carrying capacities, biodiversity and vegetation cover ofthe landscape. Climate variability such as the periodic occurrence of extreme droughts or the protractedeffects associated with the El Niño/La Niña phenomenon add to the severity of fire impacts. Projecteddemographic and climate change scenarios suggest that these situations will become more critical duringcoming decades.ISDR working group 4: wildland fires (WG4)The overall objective of WG4 of the Inter-agency Task Force on Disaster Reduction is to propose meansand to facilitate the creation of mechanisms that can share information and undertake tasks to reduce thenegative impacts of fire on the environment and humanity. It brings together both technical members ofthe fire community and authorities concerned with policy and national practices in fire management torealise their common interests of fire risk management and disaster reduction at a global scale.WG4 is chaired and coordinated by the Global Fire Monitoring Centre (GFMC) at the Max PlanckInstitute for Chemistry, in Freiburg, Germany. WG4 attends to the existing programmes being implementedby its members to ensure complementary work plans. Its priorities are to:• Establish, and determine operational procedures for a global network of regional and national focalpoints for the early warning of wildland fire, fire monitoring and impact assessment, with the intentionto enhance existing global fire monitoring capabilities and facilitate the functioning of a globalfire management working programme or network.• Propose internationally agreed criteria, common procedures, and guidelines for the collection of firedata and related damage assessments in order to generate knowledge required by the various usercommunities at global, regional, national and local levels.• Strengthen the existing regional, national and local capabilities in fire management and policy developmentthrough the dissemination of information and increased networking opportunities to meetthe information needs of such international initiatives as the Convention on Biological Diversity, theConvention to Combat Desertification, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, theUnited Nations Forum on Forests, the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment and the ongoinginternational criteria and indicators processes of the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, as well asthe overall scope of work of the UN agencies and programmes concerned.• Transfer knowledge to local communities to advance their participation and utilization of appropriatetools that contribute to wildfire prevention, fire disaster preparedness and fire disaster mitigation.Environmental degradationAs human activity continues to alter the biosphere,changes result in the environment inspecific places and at ecosystem levels. Environmentaldegradation compounds the actualimpact of disasters, limits an area’s ability toabsorb the impact, and lowers the overall generalnatural resilience to hazard impact and disasterrecovery. In addition, environmentaldegradation that occurs and is significantenough to alter the natural patterns in anecosystem, also affects the regular temporaland spatial occurrence of natural phenomenon.Climate change is currently the most obviousexample.The figure illustrates the inter-linking nature ofenvironmental degradation, natural disastersand vulnerability. It should be noted that environmentaldegradation is described in terms ofdiminished resources. Toxification and otherimbalanced forms of altering the natural environmentalso add to environmental degradation.59

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATIONDegradation of resource base• Increased impacts of natural disasters• Less ability to absorb impacts• Decreased resilienceAlteration of natural processes• Global environmental change• Changes in hazard patternsVULNERABILITYLoss of traditionalcoping practicesLess acces tolivelihoodsRapidurbanizationEFFECTSDesertificationDeforestationSea level riseCoastal areas degradationRegression of glaciersBiodiversity lossSiltationDroughtExtremeweathereventesWind stormsFloodsWild firesHAZARDSDISASTER RISKThe interconnectedness between environmentaldegradation and progressive impact of naturaldisasters can be illustrated by the case ofThe catastrophic floods in the Yangtze River Basin,China, in 1998, brought to national attention the factthat land use changes and environmental degradation inwatersheds had greatly exacerbated flooding fromextremely high levels of rainfall in the Yangtze Basin,and rapid snowmelt from Tibet and the Himalayas.Prior to this event, the pressure for rapid developmenttended to overshadow environmental concerns. Sinceenvironmental degradation has now been firmly acceptedas one of the root causes of increased impact fromnatural disasters, it is essential to articulate and establishboth the conceptual and operational links betweenenvironmental management and disaster risk reduction.In 1999, concluding that flooding was exacerbated byenvironmental degradation, the government formulateda new policy framework to promote ecological watershedmanagement. As a result, a massive plan to redirectland-use management in river basins, targeted atthe Yangtze River Basin and the Yellow River Basinwas initiated.the Yangtze River Basin, in China, where concernsrelated to environmental vulnerabilityhave been incorporated in watershed management(also see chapter 1 and 5.1).Viet Nam offers another example of the complexlinks between deforestation andfloods/landslides. Viet Nam’s forest coverdropped from 43 per cent to 28 per cent in 50years. This is due to a combination of manyyears of war, with the use of deforestation as atool of war, legal and illegal trade in timber asViet Nam’s economy became more open tointernational investment and trade, and, it isalso quite likely, climate change. Reduced forestcover will make the people of Viet Nammore vulnerable to floods and landslides.The chart below, shows how primary and secondaryeffects of environmental degradationresult in increased impacts of natural disasters– in this case in relation to watershed managementand floods.60

Risk awareness and assessment2Primary Causal Agent Deforestation (commercial and subsistence) Increased agricultural practices Inappropriate agricultural practices Increased settlements and infrastructuredevelopmentSecondary Effects Decreased vegetative cover Decreased soil and land stability Increased soil erosion Decreased soil productivity Increased run off and siltation,blockingTertiary Effects Flooding Flash floodsMud and land slidesLand degradation and flash floodsAccording to UNEP data, two thirds of Africais dry land over 70 per cent of which is classifiedas degraded. About 90 per cent of pastureland and 85 per cent of crop lands in the countriesclosest to the Sahara have been affectedand there is some evidence that the desert isadvancing towards the south and east. Deforestationis an important catalyst of land exhaustionand soil erosion. In Africa, more than 90per cent of all wood is used for cooking andother energy needs and the demand for fuelwood has grown considerably since the oilprice rise in 1974. Since kerosene is expensiveto buy, there is an urban shadow of strippedland around most settlements. In effect, economicand social pressures – made worse bydrought – have caused the breakdown of thetraditional system of land use which was adaptedto this fragile environment.Flood risk, especially flash floods, is also exacerbatedby increasing land degradation. InSouthern Africa, escalating land degradation isstrongly associated with overgrazing, whichaccounts for more than half the soil degradationin the region.Technological hazardsTechnological hazards are related to quicklyoccurring, high-impact events such as hazardousspills and nuclear accidents, and aretherefore more linked with exposure, thanlong-term environmental degradation. In thecase of hazardous materials – chemical andDeclining agricultural yields in the SADC region are alsoattributed to water erosion. In Zambia, soil erosion by water isthe most serious form of physical soil degradation, with approximately100,000 hectares at various stages degradation. Similarly,it is estimated that approximately 30 per cent of croplands incommunal farming areas of Zimbabwe have been abandoneddue to depleted soil fertility. In South Africa, as much as 6.1million hectares of cultivated soil are affected by water erosion,with up to 300 million tons of soil lost annually due to physicaldegradation processes (FAO/AGL, 2001). Land degradationprocesses have been particularly prominent in Zambia as aresult of deforestation, dense human population, overgrazing,poor crop cover and poor soil management techniques. This isreflected in marked deforestation, reaching 2644 km2 annuallyfrom 1990-1995. While land degradation increases the severityof flood and drought impacts in the region, it is an unsurprisingoutcome, both of widespread rural poverty as well as macroeconomicforces.61

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativestoxic waste leakage – exposure is the criticalfactor. That was the case in Bhopal, India, in1984, where material leaked to form a deadlycloud that killed and injured a huge number ofpeople – most of whom came from poor familiesallowed to settle around the chemical plant.The fatal consequences of this chemical releasewere directly related to modernization effortsintroduced as a complex and poorly managedindustrial production system into a societyunable to cope with it.A very important aspect of exposure to technologicalhazards is the fact that they are notexclusively confined to urban-industrial societies.Virtually every modern product andprocess is disseminated to most countries andsocial settings. Of 25 nations with operatingnuclear power stations, at least 14 are in developingcountries. Great oil spills and releases ofnuclear radiation are associated with the dominantenergy and transportation technologies.Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Minimata andBophal, are some well known examples oftechnological disasters.Biohazards and vulnerabilityHIV/AIDS can be considered a biologicalhazard. However, due to its enormous real andpotential impact on the human community, italso constitutes a major vulnerability factor tothe impact of other natural hazards. In particular,HIV/AIDS exacerbates vulnerability todrought conditions. Household size andincome diversification, which count as keystrategies to cope with droughts, are severelyaffected by HIV/AIDS, both by reducing theThe situation is very critical for Southern Africa, facing catastrophicconsequences of HIV/AIDS infection. With manycountries recording adult HIV infection rates of 25-30 percent, the 1990s have seen the deaths of thousands of skilledyoung people occupying middle-management positions in theprivate and public sectors. Precious opportunities to developsustainable local and technical capacities in disaster reductionhave been undermined by continuing HIV-related deaths.With its far-reaching effects that span all professions, socialsectors and communities in Southern Africa, HIV/AIDS willcontinue to constitute a major aspect of both household andnational vulnerability for the foreseeable future.labour force and diverting vital economicresources towards medication and treatments.Moreover, infected people living in cities, usuallyreturn to their home villages to die, reinforcingthe already higher vulnerability in ruralenvironments in most African countries.Trends in physical vulnerabilityNinety per cent of the global populationgrowth is taking place in least developed countries(LDCs). In these countries, exposure tohazards is already high through dense concentrationsof population in largely unsafe humansettlements. Vulnerability levels are also exacerbatedby socio-economic and environmentalconditions. In 1980, sub-Saharan Africa had apopulation of 385 million. This figure isexpected to at least double by 2005. Populationgrowth is outstripping food production thatrepresents 40 per cent of GDP in someinstances. But even this figure is precariousgiven less reliable rainfall patterns.The long term trends of demographic growthfor LDCs are creating environmental, as wellas political, refugees. As many as 10 millionpeople have emigrated during recent years butthere may eventually be even greater redistributionsof the African population in response tothe deteriorating food situation. Some of thisredistribution will likely concentrate evengreater numbers in hazardous areas.Due to the urban concentration of population,the greatest potential for disaster exists in thehundred most populous cities. Over threequartersof these are exposed to at least one naturalhazard. No less than seventy of these citiescan expect, on average, to experience a strongearthquake at least once every fifty years. Thegreatest concern is for the fifty fastest growingcities, all of which are located in developingcountries. Cities were often founded on accessiblelocations with inherent risks such ascoastlines, to facilitate transport or floodplainsbecause of their fertility and ample space forgrowth. Urbanization and increasing competitionfor land, results in the creation of unregulatedconstruction which spills over into highrisk areas, such as along hill sides, into lowlying areas, next to industries, or on floodplains.62

Risk awareness and assessment215 largest cities in world in 2000and forecasts for 2010 (populationin millions)Urban population as a percentageof total population annual growthrate as a percentage200026.4 Tokyo18.1 Mexico City18.1 Bombay17.8 Sao Paulo16.6 New York13.4 Lagos13.1 Los Angeles12.9 Calcutta12.9 Shanghai12.6 Buenos Aires12.3 Dhaka11.8 Karachi11.7 Delhi11.0 Jakarta11.0 Osaka201026.4 Tokyo23.6 Bombay20.2 Lagos19.7 Sao Paulo18.7 Mexico City18.4 Dhaka17.2 New York16.6 Karachi15.6 Calcutta15.3 Jakarta15.1 Delhi13.9 Los Angeles13.79 Metro Manila13.7 Buenos Aires13.7 Shanghai1970 1995 2015 1970-1995 1995-2015Least developed 12.7 22.9 34.9 5.1 4.6All developing 24.7 37.4 49.3 3.8 2.9Industrialized 67.1 73.7 78.7 1.1 0.6HDI: Human Development Indicator (UNDP)Low HDI 18.2 27.4 38.6 4.1 3.7Medium HDI 23.0 37.7 52.7 3.9 2.8High HDI 52.8 70.9 78.5 3.3 1.7Extract from The State of the World's Cities, UN-HABITAT, 2001.Cities now hold disproportionate amounts ofmaterial wealth in terms of both residential andcommercial buildings and infrastructure. Thisinfrastructure is critical to the functioning ofthe city. The impact of disasters on cities candevastate national economies and industrialmarkets at an international level. This is especiallyimportant true for nation states, oremerging economies, where one or perhapstwo primary urban areas will account for thevast majority of economic and social activity.The dynamic growth of coastal areas evident inthe Andean sub-region is also seen elsewhere.Nearly 3 billion people live in coastal zones,and 13 of the 15 largest cities are also locatedon the sea.In some of the Andean countries, the current trend is adynamic growth of the coastal areas, where an urbanaxis, articulated along the Pan-American highway, integratesthe main port cities including Lima, Guayaquil,Puerto Cabello and La Guaira. Rapid urbanization inthese areas contributes to increased levels of risk. Thirty-fiveper cent of the Peruvian population now liesbetween Lima and Callao.The triangle formed by Quito, Guayaquil and Cuencascontains more than 70 per cent of the Ecuadorian populationin only 15 per cent of the national territory. Thetriangle formed by La Paz, Cochabamba and SantaCruz accounts for 80 per cent of the total GDP, andabout 70 per cent of the Bolivian population.63

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesIn South Africa, it is expected that around 50 per centof the population will live within 50 km of the coast inthe near future. While this affords economic and otheropportunities, it also exposes millions of people toextreme weather events triggered by the Indian,Atlantic and Southern Oceans. Moreover, coastaldevelopment for tourism is being actively promoted inmany countries, which are prone to tropical cyclonesand tsunamis.Not only is the exposure of people exacerbated bythe occupation of hazard-prone areas, the concentrationof industrial infrastructure and criticalfacilities are also affected. Communication networksand educational and health infrastructureare becoming more vulnerable to the potentialimpact of natural hazards.Behind the rapid urbanization process, rural displacementaccounts for the rapid growth of informal,illegal settlements in the most dangerousplaces near cities like Mexico City, Rio de Janeiroand Manila, amongst others. Disaster risk concernsgo hand in hand with other equally pressingurban issues, such as decaying infrastructure, poorhousing and homelessness, hazardous industries,inadequate services, unaffordable and poor transportlinks, and unemployment.Trade corridors are formed as a result of tradeagreements. In Latin America we find the CentralAmerican highway, the Quito-Guayaquil corridor,the Pan-American Highway in the Andeanregion, the Buenos Aires-Mendoza-Santiago-Valparaisocorridor, and Brazilian coastal corridorswith maritime connections to Asian and Europeandestinations. The development of trade corridorshas political, economic, social and environmentalimplications. Their resilience to the impact of naturalhazards is particularly relevant to enhance thesustainable development of cities and regions.An example of high vulnerability to natural hazards, inthe context of trade corridors, is provided by therecurrent impacts experienced along the Pan-AmericanHighway. For instance, during Hurricane Mitch,in 1998, the Central American intra-regional marketwas interrupted for more than fifteen days due to thedamages in many parts of the Central AmericanHighway. In 1997-98, in Peru and Ecuador, theimpact from the El Niño event disrupted the circulationof the Pan-American Highway in hundreds ofsections.Trends in socio-economic vulnerabilityThe relation of disaster risk and developmentoffers a good starting point to identify macrotrends in socio-economic vulnerability. Tosome degree, socio-economic and environmentalvulnerability is shaped by developmentprocesses and vice versa. Understanding howpatterns of social change and development setthe scene for future disasters become crucial toimproving disaster risk assessment and analysis,and therefore essential for disaster riskreduction as a whole.Development and vulnerabilityThe analysis of disaster impact shows that anestimated 97 per cent of natural disaster relateddeaths each year occur in developing countries(World Bank, 2001) Although smaller inabsolute figures, the percentage of economicloss in relation to the GNP in developingcountries far exceeds those in developed countries.This fact becomes even more relevant forSIDS. Between 1985 and 1999, the world’swealthiest countries sustained 57.3 per cent ofthe measured economic losses to disasters,representing 2.5 per cent of their combinedGDP. During the same years, the world’spoorest countries endured 24.4 per cent of theeconomic toll of disasters, representing 13.4per cent of their combined GDP.Some of the vulnerability factors or processesare closely associated with certain types ofdevelopment models and initiatives. The linksbetween disaster and development areexplored in detail in the World VulnerabilityReport, currently being developed by UNDP.Increasing or permanent levels of povertyremain as a relevant issue for the analysis ofvulnerability trends.In Southern Africa, poverty levels remainhigh, especially among the rural poor, with63.7 per cent, 36 per cent and 37 per cent ofZambians, Zimbabweans and Mozambicansrespectively, living on less than US$ 1 per day.Their GDP falls far short of per capita GDPin developing countries. Moreover, GDPs forZambia and Mozambique are around half ofthose for sub-Saharan Africa. In addition,high levels of foreign debt have discouragedinvestment and growth, with Zambia shoul-64

dering external debts that constitute 181 percent of its GNP. Under these conditions, it isunrealistic to expect significant investments athousehold or national level to mitigate theimpact of natural or other threats.Globalisation as a dynamic forceGlobalisation has a number of distinctivecharacteristics that have had a profound influenceon the structure of international socioeconomicrelations. The impact of globalisationon patterns of vulnerability is critical toidentify new trends in disaster risk. The economicdimensions of globalisation include thedominance of a global market, as one of itsmain features. The combined impacts of economicadjustment measures to encouragegreater efficiencies and global competitivenesshave been reflected in significant job lossesand unemployment. In South Africa alone,between 1996-2000 more than 500,000 formalsector jobs were lost. Between 1997-2000more than 140,000 miners became unemployedand 50,000 primarily female workerslost their jobs in textile industries. This is anincreasingly relevant area which will requirefurther analysis and focus.Traditional knowledge at riskRisk awareness and assessmentThe pace of technological change and the culturalimplications of globalisation pose a realthreat to the wealth of local knowledge, andrelated skills and resources, preserved amongindigenous people and in many rural communities.In the past, people from Pacific islands used various techniquesto cope with the impact of natural hazards, such asspecial forms of food preservation, harvesting wild foods,planting disaster-resistant crops, using hazard-resistant formsof traditional house design and construction, and relying onestablished social networks for extended community support.Many of these traditions have become neglected as morepeople gravitate towards modern lifestyles, often becomingincreasingly disassociated from a sensitive consideration ofnatural conditions in the process. It has also been observedthat crops which formerly provided food security in manycountries at times of disaster are now rarely planted.Economic vulnerability is increasing as locallivelihoods are transformed from relying ontraditional forms of production to using moreintensive or modern methods of agricultureand land use systems.2Traditional versus "modern" ways to cope. Is it necessary to choose?The traditional pattern of agricultural land use in the Sahel was well adapted to uncertain rainfall conditions. Generallyspeaking, the northern zone, with a mean annual rainfall of 100-350 mm was used for livestock, while the southern Sahel,with a rainfall of 350-800mm, was used for rain fed crops. This system permitted a degree of flexible inter-dependence.Herders followed the rains by seasonal migration, while the cultivators grew a variety of drought-resistant subsistencecrops, including sorghum and millet, to reduce the risk of failure. Fallow periods were used to rest the land for perhaps asmuch as five years in order to maintain the fertility of the soil. In the absence of a cash economy, a barter system operatedbetween herders and sedentary farmers.During recent decades this system has collapsed for a variety of reasons. Population growth has exerted pressure on theland, resulting in soil erosion. In turn, the range-lands have been over-grazed with rapid degradation of the resource base.The need of national governments for export earnings and foreign exchange has produced a trend towards cash crops,which have competed for land with basic grains and reduced the fallowing system. Subsistence crops have been discouragedto the extent that produce prices have consistently declined in real value for over twenty years. At the same time, thebuild-up of food reserves has been seriously neglected under pressure from international banks wanting loan re-payments.In addition, a lack of government investment to improve the productivity of rain-fed agriculture and a failure to organizecredit facilities for poor farmers have also tended to undermine the stability of the rural base.National governments have progressively campaigned against a nomadic lifestyle. In many instances, foreign aid has been earmarkedfor sedentary agriculture rather than herders. Increasingly, strict game preservation laws have been introduced whichrestrict the possibility of hunting for meat during drought. Traditional forms of employment, such as in caravan trading, havedeclined as a result of the enforcement of international boundaries and customs duties, together with competition from lorries.Source: K. Smith, 199765

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives2.3. Risk assessmentRisk AssessmentA process to determine thenature and extent of risk byanalysing potential hazardsand evaluating existing conditionsof vulnerability thatcould pose a potential threator harm to people, property,livelihoods and the environmenton which they depend.Risk assessments include detailed quantitative and qualitative information andunderstanding of risk , its physical, social, economic, and environmental factorsand consequences. It is a necessary first step for any other disaster reduction measure.Its relevance for planning and development of disaster risk reduction strategieswas explicitly addressed during the IDNDR (1989), which stated that:“In the year 2000, all countries, as part of their plan to achieve sustainable development,should have in place:a) Comprehensive national assessments of risks from natural hazards, with these assessmentstaken into account in development plans.”This was reiterated as the first principle, in the Yokohama Strategy and Plan ofAction (1994): “Risk assessment is a required step for the adoption of adequate and successfuldisaster reduction policies and measures.”Risk assessment encompasses the systematic use of available information to determinethe likelihood of certain events occurring and the magnitude of their possibleconsequences. As a process, it is generally agreed upon that it includes the followingactivities:• Identifying the nature, location, intensity and probability of a threat.• Determining the existence and degree of vulnerabilities and exposure to thethreat.• Identifying the capacities and resources available.• Determining acceptable levels of risk.The analytical phases involved in risk assessment include some of the basic tasks forrisk management. The following diagram shows the basic stages undertaken in a riskassessment process.Stages of risk assessmentRISKANALYSISIDENTIFICATION OF RISK FACTORSHAZARDDeterminesgeographicallocation, intensityand probabilityEstimates level of riskEvaluates risksVULNERABILITY/CAPACITIESDeterminessusceptibilities& capacitiesSocio-economic cost/benefit analysisEstablishment of prioritiesEstablishment of acceptable levels of riskElaboration of scenarios and measuresRISKASSESSMENT66

The identification of hazards usually constitutesthe departing point for the risk assessmentprocess.Both hazard and vulnerability/capacity assessmentsutilise formal procedures that includecollection of primary data, monitoring, dataprocessing, mapping, and social surveys techniques,among others. In the case of hazardassessment, where usually high technologicaldevelopments for monitoring and storing dataof geological and atmospheric processes areinvolved, the assessment activities are mostlyrestricted to a scientific community. On theother hand, vulnerability and capacity assessmentsmake use of more conventional methodologiesand techniques, by which the communityat risk may also play an active role, such asin community-based mapping.Beyond these particularities, hazard and vulnerability/capacityassessment follow a set ofmore or less formal procedures that are generallycaptured under the concept of risk analysis.Seen as this, risk analysis constitutes a corestage of the whole risk assessment process bymeans of providing relatively objective andtechnical information from which levels of riskcan be estimated.The information produced by technical riskanalysis allows for the establishment of impartialgovernment policy, resources needed fordisaster preparedness, and insurance schemes.But from the estimated levels of risk to theRisk awareness and assessmentdetermination of acceptable levels of risk, a differentrange of value judgements are usuallytaken into account. Socio-economic cost/benefitanalyses usually lead to the establishment ofpriorities that in turn help to draw levels ofacceptable risk. These levels will depend largelyon government, community priorities, interestsand capacities. It is at this stage, particularly,when the more subjective trade-offs ofquantitative and qualitative approaches to riskassessment need to be sorted out.The distinction between risk assessment andrisk perception has important implications fordisaster risk reduction. In some cases, as invulnerability/capacity assessment exercises,risk perception may be formally included in theassessment process, by incorporating people’sown ideas and perceptions on the risks they areexposed to. Nevertheless, the wide and increasinguse of computer assisted techniques andmethodologies – such as those involved inGeographic Information Systems (GIS) – maywiden the breach between the information producedby technical risk assessments and theunderstaning of risk by people.Therefore, acceptable levels of risk may varyaccording to the relative contribution of views onobjective risk versus perceived risk, at the variousindividual, community and institutionalscales. The table below depicts the main differencesbetween risk assessment and risk perception.2Phase of analysisRisk identificationRisk estimationRisk evaluationRisk assessment processesEvent monitoringStatistical inferenceMagnitude/frequencyEconomic costsCost/benefit analysisCommunity policyRisk perception processesIndividual intuitionPersonal awarenessPersonal experienceIntangible lossesPersonality factorsIndividual actionAdapted from: K. Smith. Environmental hazards, 199767

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesHazard assessmentThe objective of a hazard assessment is to identifythe probability of occurrence of a specifiedhazard, in a specified future time period, aswell as its intensity and area of impact. Forexample, the assessment of flood hazard isextremely important in the design and settingof engineering facilities and in zoning for landuse planning. Construction of buildings andresidences is often restricted in high flood hazardareas. Flood assessment should be developedfor the design and setting of sewagetreatment as well as land and buildings havingindustrial materials of a toxic or dangerousnature, due to the potential spread of contaminants.Certain hazards have well-established techniquesavailable for their assessment. This isthe case for floods, earthquakes and volcanichazards. Many of the analytical techniquesuseful for hazard assessment can be appliedusing medium powered computers and widelyavailable software packages.On seismic hazards, the dynamic ground shakingand ground movement are the two mostimportant effects considered in the analysis.Dynamic ground shaking is a critical considerationfor buildings and construction. Theobjective of a statistical earthquake hazardassessment is to assess the probability that aparticular level of ground motion at a site isreached or exceeded during a specified timeinterval. An alternative approach is to considerWMO and the IDNDR Scientific and Technical Committeepromoted a project to further develop the concept of comprehensive,multi-hazard or joint assessment of natural hazards.It was recognised that society is usually at risk from severaldifferent hazards, many of which are not water-related or naturalin origin. More importantly, it was also recognised thatjoint assessment of risk from these various hazards is in itsinfancy. Recognising these points, the project focused on themost destructive and most widespread natural disasters, namelythose of meteorological, hydrological, seismic, and volcanicorigin. An example of the development and application ofsuch approach in land-use planning was provided by Switzerlandwhere the composite exposure to risks from floods, landslidesand avalanches were considered. The project noted thatan increased understanding of the hazard assessment methodologiesof each discipline is required, as these methodologiesvaried from discipline to discipline.68the evaluation of the ground motion producedby the maximum conceivable earthquake in themost unfavourable distance to a specific site.Earthquake hazard assessment in areas of lowseismic activity is much more subject to largeerrors than in areas with high earthquake activity.This is especially the case if the time span ofthe available data is considerably smaller thanthe mean return interval of large events, forwhich the hazard has to be calculated.In most cases, one is able to characterise theoverall activity of a volcano and its potentialdanger from field observations by mapping thevarious historical and prehistoric volcanicdeposits. These deposits can, in turn, be interpretedin terms of eruptive phenomena, usuallyby analogy with visually observed eruptions.Other hazards have less well-defined assessmentmethodologies. In the future, efforts must continue toincrease our understanding and develop methodologiesfor the assessment of hazards such as heatwaves and dust storms; in particular, with regardto the factors which influence their development,movement and decay.Multi-hazard assessments are difficult toachieve due in part to the different approachestaken by the various disciplines in assessing thespecific potential hazards. But multi-hazardassessments are essential, for example, in thecase of a tropical storm event. The event cannotbe looked at in isolation and should considerthe different components that actuallyrepresent the risks occurring either separatelyor all together. These components are flood,landslide, storm surge, tornado and wind. Varioushazards will be measured according to differentscales, which make comparisons difficult.An earthquake will be quantified based onthe amount of energy released (Richter scale)or the amount of damage potentially caused(Modified Mercalli scale), while a heat wave ismeasured using maximum temperatures and awind storm using wind velocity.Even without sophisticated assessment tools, itis possible for local communities to collect hazardinformation. Such steps are suggested inUNEP’s Technical Report N°12, HazardIdentification and Evaluation in a Local Community,consisting of basic checklists to identify,and basic approaches to map major hazards ina locality. Various tables invite more detailed

consideration about the nature of impacts andthe severity of various consequences of differenthazards on affected populations.Hazard mapping, awarenessand public policyA key dimension of hazard assessment is thepresentation of the results and the understandingof the added value by policy makers. Mapscan be prepared manually using standard cartographictechniques or with a GIS. Differenttypes of hazards will require different mappingtechniques. The importance lies in the easyunderstanding and use of the information generated.For example, maps are the standart format forpresenting flood hazards. The flood-hazardareas are usually divided according to severity(deep or shallow), type (quiet water or highvelocity) or frequency. In the case of volcanichazards, the zoning of each direct and indirecthazards can be drawn according to the intensity,the extent of the hazard, the frequency ofoccurrence or in combination. Composite phenomenaand hazard maps are recognised as animportant tool for joint hazard assessments.These combined hazard assessments need tobe presented using a simple classification, suchas high, medium and low risk, or no danger.One of the constraining factors in hazardmapping is not so much the lack of infrastructurebut the lack of proper training capabilities.There are many government employeesthat do not have computer access . Hazardmaps are also not as widely used as they couldRisk awareness and assessmentSeveral initiatives on hazard mapping were developedduring the 1990s, as part of IDNDR. One example isthe “Eastern Asia Natural Hazards Mapping Project”(EANHMP), started in Japan in 1994. The objectivesof the project were to enhance awareness on naturalhazards, in particular geological hazards among plannersand policy makers of national and regional development,as well as general public in a given region,promote scientific studies on geological hazards, andtransfer technology on hazard mapping to developingcountries through collaborative activities. The EasternAsia Geological Hazards Map is one of the productsalready available.Source: Geological Survey of Japan, AIST, 2002be, were more planners and decision-makersaware of their potential. For example, inBangladesh, while many different entities arecarrying out various projects in risk and hazardmapping and land-use planning, thereexists no common focal point for easy access tothis information. Moreover, communication isdeficient : maps are not shared, and data iscollected several times, or mismanaged.Vulnerability and capacity assessmentVulnerability and capacity assessments are anindispensable complement to hazard assessmentexercises. Despite the considerable effortsand achievements reflected in improved qualityand coverage of scientific data on differenthazards, the mapping and assessing of social,economic and environmental vulnerabilities ofthe population are not equally developed. Some2High risk cholera areas due to polluted surface water (2001)In South Africa, various institutions are engaged in hazard mapping. While projects are sometimesconducted in isolation and the data is not widely used, there are other examples where the resultinginformation is beneficial to additional institutions beyond the one which collected it. Most hazardmaps are becoming available online and they often function as clickable image maps containing additionalinformation about particular areas. The Agriculture Research Council, the National DisasterManagement Centre, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, and the Department of Healthare all using satellite data to compile hazard maps, which then become part of their much larger geographicalinformation systems. Use of US/NOAA satellite data further enables the generation oflocally relevant geo-referenced maps. The National Botanical Institute also embarked on the mappingof degradation patterns for the whole of South Africa. These maps provide valuable information onthe state of South Africa’s ground cover.Source: NDMC (http://sandmc.pwv.gov.za/ndmc/cholera/Maps/Nmmp.jpg)69

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCommunity risks in Australiaaspects of vulnerability/capacity, especiallythose related to the social nature of these concepts,pose a different range of challenges torisk assessment.Often there is a huge gap in the understandingand application of vulnerability/capacityassessments between the institutions undertakingthese tasks, and the local authoritiesand communities involved in the exercise.A great deal of work has been focused on theassessment of the physical aspects of vulnerability.This has been done mainly in relationto more conventional hazardous phenomenon,such as windstorms, earthquakes andfloods. A high percentage of the vulnerabilitymapping developments at an earlier stageis reflecting this trend. This was accentuatedby the wide utilisation of GIS techniques forthe spatial integration of different variables inthe 1980s. The spatial overlapping of hazardzones with infrastructure such as airports,main highways, health facilities and powerlines, amongst others, is one of the commonOne of the advantages of GIS techniques is the possibility tocarry out multi-hazard analysis. Community Risk in Cairns isthe first of a series of multi-hazard case studies by the AustralianGeological Survey Organization (AGSO). It considersearthquakes, landslides, floods and cyclones.A report detailing the hazard history of Cairns, the riskassessment methodology and results has been prepared byseveral researchers and AGSO, in collaboration with CairnsCity Council and ERSIS Australia.The AGSO Cities Project undertakes research towards themitigation of the risks posed by a range of geo-hazards toAustralian urban communities. Extensive use of GIS hasbeen made to drive analysis and assessment. Risk-GIS, as ithas been christened in the Cities Project, is a fusion of the decisionsupport capabilities of GIS and the philosophy of riskmanagement. An interactive online mapping system for GeoscienceAustralia’s Community Risk in Cairns project isavailable online as well as an advanced mapping system forexperienced GIS users.Source: http://www.agso.gov.au/pdf/UC0001.pdfexercises, highly focused on in the examinationof the physical aspects of vulnerability.The Organization of American States (OAS)has been one of the pioneers in Latin Americain using GIS tools for physical vulnerabilityassessment, focused on infrastructure andcritical facilities. A pilot project launchedearly in the 1980s on GIS Applications forNatural Hazards Management in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, implementedmore than 200 applications in 20 countries ofthe region, integrating hazards, naturalresources, population and infrastructuredata. The fact that it was discovered that allof the main airports in Guatemala are locatedwithin high intensity seismic areas, or that670 kilometers of paved routes in Ecuadorwere located within a 30 kilometre radius ofactive volcanos, have been instructive, to saythe least.Several initiatives towards comprehensiverisk assessments are currently going on in thePacific islands states. In the Cook Islands, forexample, risk assessments related to tropicalcyclones and associated flooding have beenundertaken. These include both the technicalaspects of hazard mapping, vulnerabilityassessments of building stock, infrastructure,lifelines and critical facilities, and the socialaspects of potential economic losses andimpacts on communities. The risk assessmentinformation provided input for communityearly warning systems for tropicalcyclones, ERWIN, as well as primary informationfor reports and technical supportmaterials such as: Cook Islands BuildingCode; Disaster Management Work Plan;National Disaster Management Plan;Cyclone Response Procedures; TsunamiResponse Procedures.Another good example for this region is providedby Fiji, where in recent years, severalcomprehensive risk assessment projects havebeen undertaken. These have always involvedthe relevant government departments andinfrastructure agencies, and include representationfrom NGOs and the private sector.The participation of international agenciesand/or consultants which has ensured that70

Risk awareness and assessment2Bern – risk maps/hazard mapsSince 1998, the canton of Bern, in Switzerland, hashad at its disposal a planning tool which indicatespotential risk areas. The maps are designed usingcomputer modelling and GIS. The maps are notexpensive and allow a complete overview of the cantonbased on a uniform set of criteria. The riskareas cover approximately 44 per cent of the territory,mostly in non-residential areas. However, about8 per cent inhabitants are in potential risk zones.• Exposed areas. These are areas, which couldpotentially be affected by mud flow, avalanches,stone falls and landslides.• Vulnerable assets. These include habitats, railroads,and all roads serving residential areas.• Potential impact zones. The overlap betweenthe exposed areas and the vulnerable assets.• Protection forest. In this particular case, theseare forests that play an important protectiverole for residential areas and communicationnetworks.One particular hazard is not modelled: risk relatedto floods, which cause severe social and economicimpacts. The type of impact related to floodsdepends heavily on flows that are too low to be currentlymodelled satisfactorily.Legend: (Original in French)Potential hazards• Sector exposed to mud flows and otherflash floods• Sector exposed to avalanches• Sector exposed to stone falls• Sector exposed to deep landslides• Sector exposed to average to deep landslidesVulnerable assets• Residential area• Main roads• Access roads• RailroadsForest• Forest with an important protectionfunction• Forest with a protection function• Other forests• Exposed zones represented in a simplifiedmannerSource: Office des forêts du Canton de Berne,Switzerland, 199971

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives72up-to-date methodologies and technologieswere employed. These risk assessments havealso used a multidisciplinary and multi-institutionalapproach in a proactive manner.Examples of these risk assessments areincluded in the box below.Risk assessments undertaken in Fiji have been based ondetailed hazard and vulnerability assessments, integratingthe scientific geological and meteorological (whereapplicable) information with information on the builtenvironment (building stock, infrastructure, critical facilitiesand lifelines) and the natural environment. Moderninternational methodologies have been employed, includingground surveys, remote sensing and GIS mapping.The results and outputs have had major implications inmany practical applications for disaster management,such as in helping to formulate building codes, trainingof emergency services personnel (for example: SuvaEarthquake Risk Scenario Pilot Project, SERMP, forthe City of Suva). They have also had regional significancein that these initiatives are being used as the basisof similar studies in other Pacific Island Countries.Examples of these risk assessments are:• Suva Earthquake Risk Management Scenario PilotProject (SERMP) Undertaken for the City of Suva(1995-1998) and involved an earthquake and tsunamiexercise "SUVEQ 97" (based on SERMP andthe devastating 1953 Suva earthquake and associatedtsunami), and was included in the activities of theUN IDNDR RADIUS programme (CERA,1997a, b).• Taveuni Volcano: Comprehensive study of the potentialfor an eruption which involved international scientists(consultants) with senior Government officialsand infrastructure agencies (Cronin, 1999a, b;Cronin and Kaloumaira, 2000; Cronin and Neall,2000).• Flood Mitigation: Comprehensive studies in knownflood ravaged areas on the Island of Viti Levu (western,northern and south eastern regions) (Yeo, 2000,2001).Methodological challengesWhile hazard mapping and physical aspects ofvulnerability analysis have been substantiallyfacilitated and improved due to the use of GIStechniques, the inclusion of social, economicand environmental variables into GIS’s conceptualmodels, remains as a major methodologicalchallenge. The need to assign a quan-tifiable value to the variables analysed into thespatial models used by GIS is not always possiblefor some social/economic dimensions ofvulnerability – for instance, how to quantify theideological and cultural aspects of vulnerability.Moreover, the diverse scales – individual,family, community, regional – at which differentdimensions of socio-economic vulnerabilityoperate, makes the spatial representationthrough these techniques, very difficult.The quality and detail of the informationrequired by the analysis facilitated by GIS is, inmany cases, inexistent, especially in LDCs andother developing countries. In general, thequality and availability of statistical data setslimit the information for GIS analysis to lowresolution outputs. The use of GIS for vulnerability/capacityanalysis is still at an embryonicstage, in comparison with its wide use in hazardmapping. Several research initiatives areaiming to bring solutions to the currentmethodological constraints, especially thequantification of social aspects of vulnerability.Still, the socio-economic vulnerability assessmentsrely on more conventional ways, whichindeed provide other opportunities and advantages,such as the active involvement of thecommunity at risk in exercises as communitybased mapping and assessments.Generally speaking, the physical aspects of vulnerabilityassessment are tailored from exposureto hazards criteria, providing answers tothe questions of what is vulnerable and whereis it vulnerable. The attempts to assess socioeconomicaspects of vulnerability intend toanswer the questions who is vulnerable, andhow have they become vulnerable. Attributesof groups and individuals, such as socio-economicclass, ethnicity, caste membership, gender,age, physical disability, and religion areamongst the characteristics that have beenlinked to differential vulnerability to hazards.The development of models and conceptualframeworks provided a basis for vulnerabilityanalysis in relation to specific hazards. Pressureand Release, and Access models, presented in themid 1990s (see diagram), provided a goodbasis for the analysis and further identificationof specific vulnerable conditions. These modelslinked dynamic processes at different scales,and different access to resources profiles, withvulnerability conditions.

Risk awareness and assessment2THE PROGRESSION OF VULNERABILITYROOT CAUSESDYNAMICPRESSURESUNSAFECONDITIONSDISASTERHAZARDSLimitedaccess to•Power•Structures•ResourcesIdeologies•Politicalsystems•EconomicsystemsLack of•Local institutions•Training•Appropriate skills•Local investments•Local markets•Press freedom•Ethical standards inpublic lifeMacro-forces•Rapid populationgrowth•Rapid urbanization•Debt repaymentschedules•Deforestation•Decline in soilproductivityFragile physicalenvironment•Dangerouslocations•Unprotectedbuildingsand infrastructureFragile localeconomy•Livelihoods at risk•low income levelsVulnerable society•Special groupsat risk•Lack of localinstitutionsPublic actions•Lack of disasterpreparedness•Prevalence ofendemicdiseasesRisk=Hazard xVulnerabilityEarthquakesHigh winds(cyclone/hurricanes/typhoon)FloodingVolcanic eruptionsLandslidesDroughtsVirus and pestsTechnologicalAdapted from: Blaikie et al., 1994The validation of proposed models andframeworks for vulnerability analysis havebeen, in most cases, the information gained byoccurrence of the disaster itself. The analysisof the damages experienced in disasters constitutesa major source of information for vulnerability/capacityidentification. The damagerevealed in disasters provides the empiricalevidence of where and for whom potentialrisks becomes a palpable reality.As opposed to inductive analysis used in GIStechniques – where the level of risk is inducedby integrating layers of information, historicalanalysis of disaster data provide the informationto deduce levels of risk based on pastexperiences. In addition, historical disasterdatabases are essential to identify the dynamicaspects involved in vulnerability, providingthe criteria to assign relative weights to differentdimensions of vulnerability in risk assessmentexercises. In this context, the refinement,maintenance and systematic feeding ofdisaster data sets are vital for risk assessmentas a whole. The insurance industry’s approachto disaster risk is based on this kind of data.Some of these issues are being addressed bythe ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force WorkingGroup 3, on Risk, Vulnerability and ImpactAssessment.Droughts have been proved to be a particularlydifficult task for risk assessment, as discussedearlier in this chapter (see also chapter5.6, Early Warning Systems). Risk assessmenttools developed for food security issues provideconceptual inputs as well as primarydata, related to vulnerability to droughts. Inthat regard, the WFP and FAO work withother UN agencies, national governments,and NGO partners to integrate vulnerabilityanalysis and mapping techniques. Nevertheless,a food security approach is based in aslightly different understanding of risk, wherefood insecurity is the outcome, and drought isone of the vulnerability factors. The GlobalRisk Vulnerability Index, being produced aspart of the World Vulnerability Report ofUNDP, is engaged in exploring ways to integratedrought data in a comprehensive riskindex.The Risk Assessment Tools for Diagnosis of UrbanAreas against Seismic Disasters, RADIUS, providesa good example of comprehensive hazard-specifictools that contribute to define73

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesISDR working group on risk, vulnerability and impact assessment (WG3)Mobilised in 2001 and convened by the office of UNDP’s Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery(BCPR) in Geneva, WG3 of teh Inter-agency Task Force on Disaster Reduction consists of overtwenty members representing UN agencies, academic institutions, international NGOs and relatedregional and national bodies world-wide. The role of WG3 has primarily been a forum for dialogueand platform for advocacy, with collaborative activities now underway. Meeting twice annually, WG3acts as a networking system for members and external participants allowing sharing of informationregarding various conceptual models and related methodologies coming out of leading edge work, aswell as on the challenges and lessons learned from practical applications in the field.Playing an advocacy role in keeping with the relevant priorities of ISDR-IATF, WG3 focuses onunderstanding the needs for effective risk management, particularly from the local and national levels,on small and medium scale disasters and on the socio-economic and environmental risks andassociated impact of disasters. Further, WG3 advocates the importance of considering the practicalapplicability of data, concepts, models and mechanisms for reducing risk as well as the need for continuallinking of disaster risk management to development planning and vice versa.Currently the WG3 is undertaking collective work in key technically-focused areas, including: a)information exchange and documentation; b) indicator, models and data sets for vulnerability indexing;c) tools and best practices for risk, vulnerability at the local and urban level; d) improving disasterimpact analysis; and e) an aggregated analysis linking climate and disaster databases.More information is available under the http://www.unisdr.org/wgroup3.htm.urban risk scenarios. The IDNDR secretariatlaunched the RADIUS initiative in 1996. Itaimed to promote world-wide activities forreduction of urban seismic risk (see boxbelow).In the Americas, vulnerability assessment andtechniques (VAT) workshops are being heldunder the auspices of OAS. They provide anopportunity to explore methodological challengesand applicability of risk assessments.The technical information and comments generatedby this and similar activities support thehemispheric policy work carried out by theWorking Group on Vulnerability Assessmentsand Indexing (VAI) of the Inter-AmericanCommittee for Natural Disaster Reduction,also a member of the ISDR Inter-Agency TaskForce.Participatory vulnerability and capacityassessment methodologiesThe relationship between vulnerability andcapacity has been increasingly expressed in riskassessment methodologies in terms of Vulnerabilityand Capacities Assessment (VCA). Workhas been done to develop, test and validate tools,methodologies and other instruments for factoringin issues related to social inequity, includinggender analysis, into risk management at thelocal level. These aspects include participatorydiagnosis, training methods, and a number ofanalytical frameworks such as the Capabilitiesand Vulnerabilities Analysis (CVA) whichexamines peoples strengths and abilities, as wellas their susceptibilities, and the Socio-Economicand Gender Analysis (SEAGA), which lookat disadvantaged social groups, incorporating74

Risk awareness and assessment2The RADIUS Initiative has achieved four main objectives:• It developed earthquake damage scenarios and actions plans for nine case study citiesaround the world.• It produced practical tools for estimation and management of urban seismic risk.• It raised public awareness of seismic risk among members of society.• It promoted information exchange for seismic risk mitigation at city level.The seismic damage scenarios developed for the nine cities describe human loss, damage tobuildings and infrastructure, and their effect on urban activities. The following cities participated:Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Antofagasta, Chile; Bandung, Indonesia; Guayaquil,Ecuador; Izmir, Turkey; Skopje, Macedonia; Tashkent, Uzbekistan; Tijuana Mexico; andZigong, China. The action plans propose new priorities for urban planning and forimprovement of existing urban structures and emergency activities. The experiences ofthese nine cities were incorporated into a practical manual for damage estimation and guidelinesfor RADIUS-type projects, applicable to cities anywhere. With the tools, cities canconduct similar projects to estimate earthquake damage, and to prepare a risk managementplan on their own. In addition, a comparative study was conducted to develop greaterunderstanding of various aspectscontributing to seismic risk, identifysolutions and share risk managementpractices. Over 70 citiesworldwide participated in this studyon “Understanding Seismic Riskaround the World.” More than 30cities joined RADIUS as associatecities.Their reports and the developedtools are available on the RADIUSweb sitehttp://www.geohaz.org/radius, thatfunctioned as an interactive mediumto exchange experiences andinformation with RADIUS participantsand concerned people worldwide.A recent evaluation of RADIUS found that significant progress has been made in the managementof the earthquake risk in RADIUS cities. There has been an important increase ofpublic awareness about the need to reduce urban risk, and new risk management programmeshave begun since the project’s completion. According to the analysis, the citiesbelieve that RADIUS contributed significantly to the progress achieved in each city. In severalRADIUS cities, new risk management organizations have been created, or existingones have been restructured, to promote, monitor, and report the implementation of the recommendationsproduced by the project.Source:ISDR, Kenji Okazaki, UNCRD75

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesthem into the development process as effectivechange agents, rather than only as beneficiaries.IFRC has been very proactive in promoting avulnerability/capacity approach.VCA is as a key tool used by IFRC for riskanalysis. More than 40 exercises have been undertakenby National Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties. Among these is that which was done in Palestinein 2000, which was deemed a success, and enjoyedmaximum participation from a wide cross-section ofactors. Based on the realisation that this tool is not solelyfor disaster preparedness; and was more geared at overallcapacity building, an interdisciplinary approach(involving health, organizational development, and relatedprogrammes within the Red Cross/Red Crescent, andother partners) has been adopted. This has formed thebasis for exercises, which will be implemented in 2002 infive North African countries, Mongolia, and other areasin East Asia. The lessons from this new approach will beused in carrying out other exercises in 2003. In order tofurther develop the mastery of this tool, a Training ofTrainers workshop has been developed by IFRC. IFRCpublished a guide, Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment,in 1999 and recently, in collaboration with UNICEF, areport called A Participatory Action Research Study of Vulnerabilitiesand Capacities of the Palestine Society in DisasterPreparedness.The work carried out by Ecociudad, a PeruvianNGO, provides another example of vulnerability/capacitymapping, where communities havehad active participation (see Box next page).This local NGO working with environmentalmanagement issues related to disaster riskreduction, has supported community basedrisk-mapping in Caquetá, a quarter of Lima,Peru, and one of the more threatening landscapesfound in the neighborhood of Lima,Peru (www.unchs.org/rdmu/).In 2001, Emergency Management Australia(EMA), under the Government’s Attorney-General’s Department, in conjunction with anumber of related international and nationalagencies, released the findings of a study on theassessment of personal and communityresilience and vulnerability. The need for suchan undertaking followed a series of events inVictoria, Australia, the most significant beingthe January 1997 wild land fires in the Shire ofYarra Ranges on the outskirts of Melbourne,and the June 1998 floods in the Shire of EastGippland. The study outlines exceptionallycomprehensive and operationally-orientedguidelines on the concepts and processes ofvulnerability and resilience for practical applicationin community risk assessment. The76Contextual aspectsHighly vulnerablesocial groupsIdentifying basicsocial needs/valuesIncreasing capacities/reducingvulnerabilityPractical assessmentmethodsAnalysis of current and predicted demographics. Recent hazard events;economic conditions; political structures and issues; geophysical location;environmental condition; access/distribution of information and traditionalknowledge; community involvement; organizations and managementcapacity; linkages with other regional/national bodies; critical infrastructuresand systemsInfants/Children; frail elderly; economically disadvantaged; intellectually,psychologically and physically disabled; single parent families; new immigrantsand visitors; socially/physically isolated; seriously ill; poorly sheltered.Sustaining life; physical and mental well-being; safety and security;home/shelter; food and water; sanitary facilities; social links; information;sustain livelihoods; maintain social values/ethics.Positive economic and social trends; access to productive livelihoods;sound family and social structures; good governance; established networksregionally/nationally; participatory community structures andmanagement; suitable physical and service infrastructures; local plansand arrangements; reserve financial and material resources; shared communityvalues/goals; environmental resilience.Constructive frameworks; data sources include: local experts, focusgroups; census data; surveys questionnaires; outreach programmes; historicalrecords; maps; environmental profiles.

Risk awareness and assessment2Ecociudad - participatory risk-assessment in PeruLima is situated along the boundary of two tectonic plates, making it highly prone to earthquakes. Anever-present risk of fires, landslides and flash flooding result in death and destruction every year. Theseinner-urban risks have been increasing both in their frequency and severity as a result of uncontrolledurban growth from the rapid increase in migration. The experience of Ecociudad highlighted a numberof high-risk concerns in the local community:• Houses located on the banks of a river are exposed to the threat of collapse in the event of a flood orlandslide.• Human settlements are situated in numerous areas prone to landslides and subject to periodic earthtremors.• Informal markets and more established commercial centres are densely crowded and highlyvulnerable to fire.Community meetings were then convened to map the threats, vulnerabilities and capacities based on participationof the inhabitants and their local knowledge. This process has led to the establishment of volunteerbrigades specialized in emergency rescue, and the settlements located along the river are currentlybeing relocated by a neighborhood committee working in collaboration with local and central governmentauthorities.chart below reflects how these guidelines aredirected towards ascertaining a high resolutionin community risk assessment.Objective information ascertained from riskanalysis has been improved, especially in theidentification and monitoring activitiesinvolved in hazard assessment. However, somephases in risk assessment remain weak. In par-ticular, incorporating people’s risk perceptions,and the socio-economic and environmentalcontexts where they live, is essential in theidentification of risk scenarios. New trends inhazards and vulnerability also challenge theprocedures and conventional methodologies,and call for a truly integrated, comprehensiveand very dynamic risk assessment.Preparing risk maps - community tools that build awareness and invite participation.The winners of the ISDR risk map contest for childrenand communities in 2001 was the Shree BalBikash Secondary School in Kathmandu District,Nepal. Children from Piura, Peru, won the secondprize. Many interesting examples were received.These efforts show how risk assessments preparedby people working together can become powerfuleducational tools to raise the level of public awarenessabout disaster risks that they all share.77

2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallenges78Future challenges and prioritiesThe notions of hazard, vulnerability and capacity formthe basis for an effective strategy of risk reduction andthe operational basis for a culture of prevention.The following challenges and priorities are criticalareas of concern for the whole disaster reductionenterprise. These are:• Risk assessments for decision making.• Terminology, data and methodology.• Higher visibility and priority to reduce vulnerabilityand strengthen capacities.• Addressing new trends in hazard and vulnerability.Risk assessments for decision makingAn overall challenge is to review and document howrisk assessments have contributed to modify risk andhow they are being utilised in the decision makingprocess.Terminology, data and methodologiesData is the primary input for identifying trends inhazards, vulnerability, as well as feeding the riskassessments and disaster impact analysis. For manycountries, data relevant for risk analysis are unavailable,or their quality and accuracy do not reflect acomprehensive picture of the situation at hand. Thereis a need to work towards the standardisation and systemisationof all issues related to the accuracy/technicalsoundness, political neutrality, methodologies andprocesses related to the collection, analysis, storage,maintenance and dissemination of data.In terms of methodologies, there are many differentconceptual models attempting to examine the samethings. Still, one of the major issues, is how hazards,vulnerability and risk assessments can actually beused, in practice, to reduce risk. Mechanisms of integrationare needed so that issues and proposed remedialinitiatives are not fragmentary when presented todecision-makers.Higher visibility and higher priority to reducevulnerabilities and strengthen capacitiesReducing vulnerability to risk still falls mainly underthe responsibility of the public authorities. Dataregarding disaster impact, especially concerning smalland medium scale disasters and of the social and environmentalconsiderations, is still lacking. Politicalauthorities usually see economic considerations ashighly influential in their decision making. Withoutthe quantitative measurement on a realistic and allencompassing picture of risk, it is difficult for politicaldecision-makers to acknowledge and factor in theseconsiderations into their legislative mechanisms andinto development planning efforts. Following this, fiscalcommitments need be specified in national budgets.The acknowledgement of capacity, as a key factor in thedisaster risk formula, needs to be followed by the furtherenhancement of a conceptual framework to assessthis factor. The incorporation of vulnerability andcapacity into tools such as risk indexes, along with cleartargets or benchmarks and indicators, will engage thework towards highlighting disaster risk efforts. TheGlobal Risk Vulnerability Index under development byUNDP, as well as the framework to monitor progresson risk reduction, being developed by ISDR, are goodexamples of current efforts towards that objective.Addressing new trends in hazards andvulnerabilityAt this point, recognition and in depth analysis of thechanging nature of hazards and vulnerabilities is needed.The influence of ecological imbalances such as climatechange is affecting the frequency and intensity ofhazardous natural phenomenon. Additionally, environmentaldegradation is exacerbating the impact of naturalhazards. Risk assessments need to reflect thedynamic and complex scenarios to properly feed intodisaster risk reduction strategies. Multi-hazards andcomprehensive vulnerability/capacity assessments thattake into account the changing patterns in disaster riskare departing points for raising risk awareness at allscales. Conventional ways to identify, monitor, evaluate,cope and recover from risks are currently challengedwith emergent new trends in hazards and vulnerability.The emergent trends in hazards and vulnerabilitydescribed in this chapter accounts for a major and newsource of uncertainties to the overall assessmentprocess of disaster risk. These changes affect not onlythe formal procedures of risk assessment in place, butthe prevailing patterns of risk perception too. Particularknowledge or experience capitalised by communitiesand people, by means of long exposure to classicalsources of hazards, have now been challenged by complexand new forms of danger. The repercussions ofenvironmental degradation on current vulnerabilityand hazard patterns and the increasing exposure totechnological hazards, as well as new forms ofunprecedented hazards, raise a different range of concerns.An integrated and effective process of riskassessment needs to engage these challenges to trulyprovide the foundation for disaster risk reduction in the21st century.

Chapter3Policy and public commitment:the foundation of disaster risk reduction3.1 Institutional frameworks: Policy, legislationand organizational development for nationaland local decision-making3.2 Regional cooperation, interaction andexperience3.3 Community action79

Community scale model to identify hazards and vulnerabilities fromCanton Daule, Ecuador, Red Cross, Guayas

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction33.1. Institutional frameworks: Policy, legislation and organizationaldevelopment for national and local decision-makingDisaster risk management needs to be motivated and based within governmental responsibilities,but its success cannot be accomplished without the benefits of widespread decision-making andthe participation of many others. Leading policy direction is crucial and legal foundations assurea continuing legitimacy, but it is the professional and human resources delivered on the groundthat are a measure of success. For this to happen, there must be a systematic approach to relatelocal decision-making processes with larger administrative and resource capabilities such as thosedevised in provincial or state and national disaster plans and risk reduction strategies.The various roles which policy determination, legal processes and the resulting evolution oforganizations play in creating a sustained, public administration environment sensitive to theidentification and management of risk are reviewed in this section. As both conditions and needsvary with geography, as well as with a wide range of professional interests involved, some of theselected 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 processesinvolved and organizational lessons cited may hold a much wider appeal and relevance to emerginginitiatives 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 practicesIntroduction to emerging institutionalframeworks for disaster reductionThe IDNDR programme not only provided aninstitutional framework for countries, but alsointroduced basic concepts of disaster reduction toadministrators and professionals. It started thetask of shifting policy emphasis from post-disasterrelief and rebuilding to a more proactiveapproach of disaster preparedness and mitigation.This began a new era in disaster and riskreduction concepts, with an important roleassigned to national planning and legislation.Many countries prepared national action plansfor disaster risk management and presentedthem to the World Conference on DisasterReduction held in Yokohama, Japan, in 1994.Subsequently countries have been able toreport on their activities at regional or sectoralmeetings and at the concluding IDNDR ProgrammeForum in 1999.For a long time, the state was considered thecentre of all authority as well as action in deal-ing with disasters. Communities were consideredgenerally unaware of the hazards theyfaced. As a result, disaster management wasmost often understood as providing relief tovictims, aiding recovery following an event,and rebuilding damaged infrastructure. Aspeople tended not to think so much about disasterreduction strategies beforehand or how toreduce risk to disasters, politicians and officialauthorities have tended to rely heavily uponemergency assistance whenever the need arose.These outlooks also have been perpetuated bythe extent of international funds and localemergency allocations that easily become availableafter a disaster rather than before.Historically there have been many fewerresources devoted to routine hazard identificationand assessment activities or to support sustainedrisk management strategies in areas ofknown and recurrent natural disaster risks.This may result from an institutional lack ofappreciation for public safety and the economicvalues of prevention in contrast to the cost ofreplacing lost assets. Alternately, it may reflect81

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesthe persistent difficulty in demonstrating costefficienciesinvolved in saving lives and publicproperty from disasters before they occur.Nonetheless, it remains that the relativeeconomies of disaster reduction are most commonlyaired in public discussions followingdisasters.While disaster management and response coordinationcan benefit from centralized commandthere is a need to decentralize disasterrisk reduction. Along with the decentralizationof power and devolution of governingauthority, disaster risk reduction at the localcommunity level needs to be encouraged, andsupported. The decentralization of responsibilityfor disaster risk reduction has to becoordinated by municipalities, townships,wards or local communities. Mutual understandingand rules and regulations should beexplicit, transparent and uniform. Thisrequires a new structural arrangement inwhich national authorities of countries, UNagencies, bilateral development agencies andfinancial institutions implement projects inrisk reduction not only with national governmentsbut also with local authorities, the pri-vate sector, academic institutions, community-basedorganizations and NGOs.However, there are currently few local institutionsready to fill the vacuum to assist communitiesin owning and internalising the processof risk reduction, in terms of concept, knowledge,and implementation. Almost all countriesor local communities have a designatedauthority responsible for responding to crisissituations when they happen; many fewer havea recognized office or agency charged withmonitoring potential risks to the society andmotivating concerted public and private actionto minimize their potential consequences.Such a change in the emphasis of governmentalfunctions requires that a consensus be developedon the respective roles of government agencies,commercial interests, communities and individualsthemselves. Governments have vital roles toplay in disaster risk management that must varyaccording to each of their respective needs andconditions, but there is now widespread recognitionthat they must focus their limited resourcesand serve as co-ordinating bodies if they are tobecome more effective.The following functions are important means by which governments can integrate disaster risk awarenessinto official responsibilities. They also can be used to involve more people and additional interests in managingthose risks:• Generate and disseminate basic public information widely about the most likely hazards to affect acountry or specific community, along with measures on how to reduce the risk• Develop integrated professional and institutional abilities for the anticipation, assessment, management,and response aspects of disaster risks within the ongoing social, economic and environmentaldimensions of the society.• Support opportunities that enable scientific, technical and academic institutions to contribute tonational disaster risk management policies and practice, and convey the utilisation and application ofresearch findings.• Encourage the combined participation of government agencies, technical specialists and local residentsin the conduct of risk assessments.• Develop and ensure the public understanding, acceptance and use of standards and codes designedfor the protection of private and public assets and critical infrastructure.• Promote and encourage public participation in the design and implementation of risk and vulnerabilitystrategies at local and national levels.82

Policy frameworks in practiceAsiaDisaster risk management is a concept that isinterpreted differently in various Asian countries.There is a wide variation among the primaryministries or national agencies designatedto assume disaster management responsibilitiesin different countries. This reflects either thepredominant types of hazards which threatenindividual countries, or else stems from an historicaloutlook of what has commonly constituteddisaster management responsibilities.Until a recent change taking place in 2002, foralmost 50 years the central national authorityfor disaster management in India had beenlocated within the Ministry of Agriculture,reflecting that country’s historical concernswith flood, drought or famine. As elsewhere,until recently, most government institutionstended to concentrate on the emergency servicesassociated with post-disaster rescue, relief,reconstruction and rehabilitation, as well asmaintaining public law and order during timesof crisis.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionreference to disaster risk reduction in theirnational development plans. Over the lastdecade, UNDP has supported capacity buildingprojects for disaster risk management inover ten Asian countries.Two additional examples can be cited fromcountries in Asia, which together account foralmost a third of the world’s population: Indiaand China. These countries share many of thesame types of hazards spread over vast landareas and have adopted approaches for centuriesthat have taken risk into account in avariety of technical endeavours. While bothcountries are populated by people with manydifferent cultural outlooks, each of them hasdifferent structures of government. Tellingly,they have each demonstrated renewed commitmentsin recent years to reorient their nationalstrategies of disaster management to takegreater account of the benefits to be derivedfrom disaster risk reduction.3Concepts of risk management have begun totake hold in some Asian countries at nationallevels. Thailand is poised to revamp its disastermanagement system and plans to set up a newdepartment of disaster management in theMinistry of Interior from October 2002. BothLaos and Cambodia have established or reconfiguredtheir respective national disaster managementoffices with encouragement and supportfrom UNDP and other internationalorganizations. The Philippines is consideringnew legislation to widen the scope of its existingOffice of Civil Defence and the NationalDisaster Coordinating Council.Viet Nam has undertaken a major sustainedeffort to formulate a 20 year strategic plan fordisaster risk management. This effort has beensteered largely by in-country expertise and wasreviewed in an international consultation heldin March 2002. Following the establishment ofits Disaster Management Bureau in the renamedMinistry of Disaster Management and Relief in1992, the government of Bangladesh is proceedingto develop and progressively implementa comprehensive disaster managementprogram during 2000-2002. Increasingly,more Asian countries are also including someCase: IndiaAs the Indian sub-continent is highly vulnerableto natural and related disasters, with lossesmounting every year, government authoritiesin India have recognized the pressing importanceof developing more effective disastermanagement policies. At the operational level,there have been equal concerns to strengthenrelated organizational arrangements that canlessen the widespread impacts of disasters suchas by updating state codes, manuals and disasterplans on the basis of experience gained andtaking account of technological developments.Initiatives have been taken to conduct comprehensiverevisions of disaster policies givinggreater attention to reducing risk factors in thestate of Maharashtra following the devastation83

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesIn proceeding beyond its original mandate confinedonly to the preparation of plans for naturaldisasters, the HPC-DMP recommended thatthe human dimension of disasters also needed tobe included in adopting a more holisticapproach to disaster management planning. Asa result, additional considerations will beextended to include forecasting and warningsystems, public awareness, proactive measuresto reduce risk in development programmes,development of human resources, informationtechnology, networking and coordinating organizationalrelationships, and updating buildingcodes and practices.A National Centre for Disaster Management hasbeen engaged to undertake human resourcedevelopment studies, to develop a database andto provide documentation in the area of naturaldisaster mitigation and preparedness. Theseinstitutional developments and expanded outlooksgo well beyond the more immediatelyobvious concerns first associated with the needfor updated emergency control rooms andimproved response mechanisms that will also beconsidered in the comprehensive review.Source: VulnerabilityAtlas, India84of the Latur earthquake in 1997 and in thestate of Uttar Pradesh in 1999. The creation ofthe new state of Uttaranchal has provided theopportunity to reconsider the most appropriateforms of disaster management structures for itsmountainous topography. The rapid and severerepercussions of the more recent destructionresulting from the 1999 cyclone in the state ofOrissa, and then the Bhuj earthquake in 2001 inthe state of Gujarat have spurred a similarlyintensified commitment to alter the long-standingrelief commissioner system and to revisenational policies of risk reduction. A High PoweredCommittee on Disaster Management Plans(HPC-DMP) has been constituted with theapproval of the Prime Minister to:• Review existing arrangements for preparednessand mitigation of natural andhuman induced disasters including industrial,nuclear, biological and chemical disasters.• Recommend measures for strengtheningorganizational structures.• Recommend a comprehensive model fordisaster management at national, state anddistrict levels.The HPC-DMP has demonstrated a highlevelgovernment commitment in forming aNational Committee on Disaster Management constitutedunder the chairmanship of the primeminister and comprising the heads of all thenational and provincial political parties. Thecommittee, which also includes technical specialists,respected academicians and key civilservants, has been tasked to suggest short,medium and long-term steps for strengtheningrelief and rehabilitation capabilities and to identifymeasures that can reduce natural calamitiesin the future.The work program is striving to involve anexpanded range of professional interests rangingfrom the responsibilities of local government,revenue allocation and insurance, through thepractice of engineering, public works, educationand public administration. More than 30 differenthazards have been identified by the HPC-DMP, and nodal ministries have been engagedto work on national plans for the potential disasterrisks related to water and climate, geology,industrial and nuclear activities, transportationaccidents and biological threats. Even thoughthe HPC-DMP’s mandate is to produce plans,it has embarked on an inclusive planning

process that emphasizes the participation of allrelevant organizations and sectors. This systematicapproach devolves disaster managementplanning activities from strictly a national concernto one involving state, district and localofficials.A decision was taken by the Indian governmentin early 2002 to alter almost 50 years of practiceby relocating all matters regarding disaster andrisk management to the Ministry of HomeAffairs. This reflects a departure from the previousassociation of natural disasters with the predominantconcerns of food supplies and agricultureand signals a promising opportunity toengage many additional functional responsibilitiesand authoritative aspects of government. Asthe influential Ministry of Home Affairs isdirectly responsible for the coordination andmanagement of the operational aspects of government,and its influence proceeds fromnational direction of the civil service all the waydown to local levels of implementation of governmentpolicies, this is an important step tointegrate disaster risk management issues morefully into many more national planning processes.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductiongovernments. An additional advisory group of28 senior experts in relevant fields has beenformed to provide guidance to the nationalcommittee especially on applying science andtechnology in realizing disaster reduction initiatives.The office of CNCIDR and its secretariatare located in the Ministry of Civil Affairs.By embracing the importance of disaster reductionactivities, China has proceeded to integratethe subject into overall national economic andsocial development planning. The core elementof this process is the progressive implementationof the National Disaster Reduction Plan of the People’sRepublic of China (NDRP) running from1998 to 2010. The NDRP was launched by theChinese government in April 1998, and significantly,it was formulated on the basis of the overallnational development policies reflected in the“Ninth Five Year Plan for National Economicand Social Development”, and the “2010Prospective Target Outline” for national accomplishments.The formulation of the planreceived important support and technical assistancefrom UNDP, further demonstrating theessential links between disaster risk reductionand national development interests.3Case: ChinaChina presents another approach yet also displayssimilar emphasis. During the course of theIDNDR, the Chinese government recognizedthat working for disaster reduction wouldrequire a long-term commitment and it hasworked with dedication and political commitmentat the highest levels of responsibility to fulfilthose objectives by actively responding to thedirection of UN/ISDR.The Chinese government established the ChineseNational Committee for International DisasterReduction (CNCIDR) in October 2000 consistingof 30 official agencies, including the StateCouncil, ministries, national committees andbureaus, the military services and additionalsocial groups. CNCIDR is an inter-ministerialcoordinating institution led by a State Councillorresponsible for designing a national disasterreduction framework, developing guiding policies,coordinating relevant departments in theconduct of specific programs, and supervisingdisaster reduction works undertaken by localIt is very important for China to form an overall legislativesystem that relates to disaster reduction, and theexperience of other countries would be invaluable. To dothis will require financial and technical support fromUNDP and other channels.China response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001The NDRP was based on several fundamentalpolicies that demonstrate both the breadth andthe depth of interests that have been marshalledto develop and implement a national strategy fordisaster reduction. The primary orientation ofthe strategy of disaster reduction is to serve theadvancement of national economic and socialdevelopment. In this respect, a principle hasbeen formulated to assign the top priority to disasterreduction activities, while also recognizingthat there will still be the requirement to combinethese with disaster response and emergencyrelief efforts at the time of crisis. A focus is to beplaced on key elements of disaster reductionwork, while keeping a view throughout on thelong-term strategic objectives of disaster reduction.85

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives86The roles of science, technology and educationare considered to be of particular importance inbuilding disaster reduction into a national concept.To succeed, it will be essential to encouragethe involvement of all elements from the nationaland local governments and the fullest possibleparticipation from all the professions and trades,working together. It will also remain importantfor China to be closely involved with internationaldevelopments in disaster reduction andtherefore must strive to strengthen its ownefforts of international exchanges and multinationalcooperation in the field.Objectives outlined by the NDRP includeefforts to:• Develop a set of projects which are ofimportance to advancing the social andeconomic development in China.• Increase the application of scientific andtechnical experience and the benefits ofnew achievements in disaster reductionwork.• Enhance public awareness and knowledgeabout disaster reduction.• Establish comprehensive organizationalabilities and operational structures for realizingspecific activities in disaster riskreduction.• Reduce the impact of natural disasters onnational economy and social development,as measured by an obvious reduction in thedirect economic losses caused by naturaldisasters.The NDRP has also outlined specific tasks,measures and key activities that should be pursuednationwide. In this respect, one of the mostimportant works for CNCIDR is to implementthe plan first at provincial levels, and then also atlocal levels of responsibility. Several provinceshave issued mid-term plans on disaster reductionin their specific areas, as can be seen in theProvinces of Guangdong, Jiangxi, Yunnan, andShanxi. In others, such as in Heilongjiang, thenational government is working closely with theprovincial authorities to initiate a local programstrategy.In order to further the implementation of theNDRP, the CNCIDR is organizing a numberof meetings at senior levels to share experiencesamong the provinces and to discuss the guidelineson forming local disaster reduction planswith officials drawn from different sectors.China’s response to the ISDR secretariat questionnairein 2001 also cited that one of the mostimportant issues to be addressed was to improvecapacity building, especially in terms of earlywarning systems, the development of resilientinfrastructure and the application of technologiesto form a safer society.In many Asian countries, however, a lack of uniformityin policy approaches remains regardingthe various aspects of disaster management allocatedamong different ministries. This also posesadditional hindrances for improving regional orsub-regional cooperation. It is unlikely that theHome Ministry of Nepal, the national focalpoint, could have developed the degree of interactionand understanding desired with its comparablenational disaster focal point in India, previouslylocated in the Ministry of Agriculture.The prominent involvement of the waterauthorities, and the additional policy concerns ofthe Ministry of Disaster Management andRelief in Bangladesh further complicate thepotential for effective relationships in such matters.This would be useful since the cause andprogress of floods can easily affect all threecountries. Furthermore, all three countries haveadditional ministries and related technical agenciesconcerned with water resources as well asenvironmental affairs. This represents a seriousand growing impediment as one accepts thatmany natural hazards and disaster conditionsaffect more than one country, or involve theskills and technical abilities of many professions.These conditions underlines the challengesposed when decisions taken in one location caneasily impact the scale of consequences in neighbouringcountries, or even among differentsocio-economic segments of the population inthe countries. More informed and consideredefforts are required to bring these various professionalspecialists and civil authorities together,other than just through occasional internationalmeetings, if a coherent disaster risk managementstrategy with local public relevance is to be realizedin practice.In recent years, many countries in Asia haveupdated existing acts and regulations related todisaster management. The following tabledemonstrates the current state of administrativeand legal arrangements for disaster risk managementthroughout the region.

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3CountryBangladeshBhutanCambodiaChinaHong KongIndiaIndonesiaFocal point for disastermanagementMinistry of Disaster Managementand Relief, DisasterManagement BureauMinistry of Home AffairsNational Committee forDisaster ManagementChina National Committeefor International DisasterReductionNational Committee on DisasterManagement, Ministryof Home AffairsNational Natural DisasterManagement CoordinatingBoard (BAKORNAS PB),Ministry of Peoples' Welfareand Poverty AlleviationState and provincial disasterNational Action Plan National action plans Forest fire and haze disasterreduction plansNational Disaster ManagementPlanOperation Sheba: relief andrehabilitation plan for districtsStanding Orders on Disasterof Chittagong, Cox's Bazar,Noakhali, Feni, Laxmipur,Rangamati, Khagrachhari,Bandarban.Flood Action PlanNo plan exists. Disaster managementissues are contained to a limitedextent in the National EnvironmentalStrategy of 1989 and inBhutan Building Rules of 1983.No plan exists except the five yearstrategy plan for the development ofthe National Committee for DisasterManagement.The National Natural DisasterReduction Plan of the People'sRepublic of ChinaLaws of People's Republic of Chinaon Protecting against and MitigatingEarthquake DisasterHong Kong Contingency Plan forNatural DisastersHigh Powered Committee DisasterManagement PlansAction plan for reconstructionin earthquake affected Maharashtra.National Contingency Action PlanDrought Contingency Plan 2000Anti-disaster plan for the stateof Tamil Nadu.Cyclone contingency plan ofaction for the state of AndhraPradesh.Action plan for reconstructionin earthquake-affected state ofGujarat.Contingency plan for floodsand cyclones in Chennai.District disaster managementaction plan for Nainital.Village Contingency Plan,2002 (OXFAM Trust,Hyderabad).in Mount Merapi disastermanagement.Tsunami disaster inBanuwangi.87

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCountryFocal point for disastermanagementNational action plansState and provincial disasterreduction plansIranMinistry of the InteriorUN System DisasterResponse Plan (involves severalministries and the RedCross & Red Crescent).JapanCabinet OfficeDisaster Countermeasure Basic Act,(basic plan for disaster reduction)Operational plans for disasterreduction, local plans for disasterreduction.KazakhstanEmergency Agency of theRepublic of KazakhstanNational PlanKorea, DPRMinistry of GovernmentAdministration and HomeAffairsKorea, Rep ofKorean National DisasterPrevention and CountermeasuresHeadquartersNatural Disaster CountermeasureActFifth Basic Disaster PreventionPlanKyrgyzstanLao PDRNational Disaster ManagementOffice, Ministry ofLabour and Social WelfareDisaster Risk Management PlanMalaysiaCentral Disaster Managementand Relief Committee,Inter-Ministerial CommitteeNational Haze Action PlanFlood Action PlanMaldivesMinistry of Planning andEnvironment and NationalCouncil for Protection andPreservation of theEnvironmentNational Action PlanMongoliaState Permanent EmergencyCommissionCivil defence lawLaw on environmental protectionLaw on waterLaw on airLaw on hydro-meteorological andenvironmental monitoringMyanmarCentral Committee for DisasterPrevention and Relief,Ministry of Home and ReligiousAffairsNepalMinistry of Home AffairsNational Action Plan for DisasterManagementEmergency preparedness anddisaster response plan for thehealth sector88

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3CountryFocal point for disastermanagementNational action plansState and provincial disasterreduction plansPakistanDisaster Preparedness andRelief Cell in CabinetNational Disaster PlanKarachi Emergency Relief PlanModel district plan - disasterrelief cellPunjab provincial flood actionplanEarthquake plan for townsand cities in the seismicregionsSind provincial disaster planDisaster preparedness planKasur TehsilPhilippinesNational Disaster CoordinatingCouncil, Office of CivilDefence, Ministry ofDefenceNational Calamities and DisasterPreparedness PlansContingency plan for TaalRegional disaster preparednessplan for Tacloban CityContingency plan for MayonvolcanoSingaporeMinistry of Home Affairs,Singapore Civil DefenceForce and Singapore PoliceForceCivil Defence ActEmergency or Contingency PlanFire Safety ActCivil Defence Shelter ActSri LankaNational Disaster ManagementCentre, Ministry ofSocial Services and HousingDevelopmentNational Disaster ManagementPlanCoastal environmental managementplan for the westcoast of Sri LankaMajor disaster contingencyplanTajikistanMinistery or EmergencySituations and Civil DefenceJoint plan with Russian Federationuntil 2005ThailandNational Civil Defence Committee,Ministry of InteriorNational Civil Defence PlanTurkmenistanUzbekistanDisaster Management PlanVietnamDepartment of Dyke Managementand Flood Control(DDMFC) of the Ministryof Agriculture and RuralDevelopment. Secretariats ofthe Central Committee forFlood and Storm Controlresponsible for emergencyresponses to disastrousevents.Strategy and Action Plan for MitigatingWater Disasters in Vietnam89

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives90The AmericasA major shift is now taking place in manycountries in the Americas, from the north tothe south. As mentioned in Chapter 1, thecombination of extremely severe social, economicand environmental consequences associatedwith several disasters in the final years ofthe 1990s provided stark and unavoidable lessonsto leaders in the region.Both official and public outlooks about disastersin Latin America and the Caribbean countriesprior to 1990 concentrated almost exclusivelyon developing humanitarian responseand improving preparedness capacities, linkedto civil defense or military institutions.The 1990s would see some important institutionalchanges in emphasis and priorities, startingalready in 1985 in Mexico and Colombiaafter a major earthquake and volcanic eruptionrespectively. Disaster reduction issues,expressed through terms of prevention andmitigation and given a higher status in politicaland technical discourse, although this was nottransferred into significant changes or realaction during much of the decade. Most officialdisaster organizations created preventionoffices in name, but their roles were limitedessentially to strengthening efforts in disasterpreparedness, conducting basic hazard mappingor promoting early warning systems atnational scales. Few human or financialresources were committed and existing legaland institutional arrangements impeded anymajor changes. This is now slowly changingsupported by a regional process, as discussedin section 3.2.Case: Central American countriesLinking risk reduction with development policiesand environmental concerns is common inseveral Central American countries, especiallywhere the severe effects of hurricane Mitchdecimated earlier investments made in nationaldevelopment.In 1996, Guatemala reformed its disaster legislationand created the National Coordinator forDisaster Reduction (CONRED) comprising asupervisory council of representatives fromdifferent development departments, disasterresponse agencies, and civil society. Whileserving neither as a single organization nor asystem, CONRED was given an expandedrange of responsibilities in the field of riskreduction, and has provided a focal point forexpanded attention to risk issues. By workingtogether with the Ministry of Planning, aNational Risk Reduction System is being establishedand efforts are underway to incorporatemulti-sector risk reduction strategies into thecountry’s National Poverty Reduction Plan.These activities complement the longstandingDisaster Response Division and an EmergencyOperations Centre.In recent years, aided by UNDP, Nicaraguahas developed an expanded approach for aNational Program for Risk Reduction and hasdesigned a new disaster risk management strategy.First, studies were commissioned toanalyse the Nicaraguan legal framework fordisaster management and the implicationsregarding government, municipalities, the privatesector and citizens. Early in 2000, theNicaraguan National Legislative Assemblypassed a new law creating the National Systemfor Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Attentionand officially established the National RiskReduction Plan as a central operational instrument.As seen elsewhere, the institutional conceptwas built upon a broad and comprehensiveapproach to risk reduction issues, but onethat is intended to be implemented on a decentralizedbasis. The strategy and the legislationare considered by some commentators to be themost advanced examples for disaster reductionin the region at the present time. Both Swissbilateral development assistance and WorldBank support have been enlisted to strengthenthe provision of technical abilities and to augmenthuman resources. While the implementationof the process can benefit by drawing onthe combined experiences of the Civil DefenceOrganization and the Nicaraguan Institute forTerritorial Studies, the key to future success willbe the extent to which productive relationshipscan be forged with other key governmentdepartments and development agencies.Case: CanadaIn part spurred on by the social and economicconsequences of a particularly severe ice stormin 2000, the Canadian Prime Minister

announced the creation of the Office of CriticalInfrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness(OCIPEP) in February 2001. Theoffice was established to enhance the protectionof Canada’s critical infrastructure from disruptionor destruction, and to act as the governmentof Canada’s primary agency for ensuringnational civil emergency preparedness. Criticalinfrastructure (which includes energy and utilities,communications, services, transportation,safety and government) constitutes the backboneof the nation’s economy, and is essential tothe health, security, safety and economic wellbeingof all Canadians and to the effectivefunctioning of government.The Minister of National Defence is responsiblefor this organisation, which encompasses allthe responsibilities of the previously namedEmergency Preparedness Canada (EPC). With anecessarily broader mandate than the EPC,OCIPEP takes an all-hazards approach, recognizingthat different hazardous events canhave similar impacts. The office providesnational leadership to help ensure the protectionof infrastructure, in both its physical andcyber dimensions, regardless of the source ofthe threat. This includes developing and promotingactivities which reduce vulnerabilitiesagainst various threats and thus mitigate theimpacts of disasters.OCIPEP seeks to enhance the capacity ofindividuals, communities, businesses and governmentsin Canada to effectively manage risksto their physical and cyber environments.Although OCIPEP is a new organization, itsresponsibilities relating to civil emergency preparednessand planning have a long history.Through the former EPC, a great deal of experiencein preparedness, response and recoveryactivities have been gained, resulting in Canada’sincreasingly comprehensive ability to copewith emergency situations. Mitigation, whilean important part of disaster management, haslargely been an implicit requirement. Therehave always been efforts across the nation tomitigate disasters, including land use zoningguidelines and structural protective featuressuch as the Red River Floodway in Manitoba.These mitigating actions have a commonthread: they reduce the probability of a calamityor limit the effect of a disaster should it happen.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionHowever, it had been recognised by variousgroups and individuals, that there existed aneed to address hazard mitigation in Canada ina more explicit and systematic way. A NationalMitigation Workshop was hosted by EPC andthe Insurance Bureau of Canada in 1998,attended by academic, private sector and governmentrepresentatives. It concluded that acomprehensive national mitigation initiativewould be a positive step towards the long termgoal of reducing vulnerabilities to, and lossesfrom, disasters. These ideals have been reinforcedby participants of the ongoing CanadianNatural Hazards Assessment Project (CNHAP)in which a community of scientists, scholarsand practitioners in the natural hazards anddisasters field came together early in 2000 tobegin a major new examination of the nationalunderstanding about the causes and consequencesof natural hazards and disasters.In light of a number of multidisciplinary discussionsregarding emergency managementand disaster reduction, the Government ofCanada announced in June 2001 thatOCIPEP will lead consultations on the developmentof a National Disaster Mitigation Strategy(NDMS). These consultations will includeall levels of government, private sector andnon-governmental stakeholders, in order tosolicit their input and participation in definingthe framework for this new national strategy.This important step is being taken in therecognition that new measures should bedeveloped “to save lives, reduce the impact ofdisasters and the resulting damages and coststo the Canadian public”.As a part of this process OCIPEP intends toissue a discussion paper to help stimulate discussionsregarding the NDMS, in the hopes ofobtaining views from various stakeholders onthe possible scope, policies and mechanisms forcoordinating and implementing a nationalstrategy. Meanwhile, the federal governmentcontinues to conduct interdepartmental discussionsabout federal mitigation activities,through an Interdepartmental MitigationCoordinating Committee. Participants includerepresentatives from all relevant federal departmentswho are reviewing preparedness andmitigation initiatives and conducting analysisto identify areas where additional attention isneeded.391

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives92Case: ColombiaA shift in political approachThe National Plan for the Prevention of Disasters,promulgated in Colombia in 1998, gavelittle attention to anticipatory measures or specificrisk reduction practices during non-crisissituations. More recently, however, the NationalCouncil for Social and Economic Policy hasincorporated disaster reduction measuresexplicitly into the individual sectoral plans ofthe National Development Plan. Accordingly,in 2001, the National Council for Social andEconomic Policy developed a strategy to initiatethe short-term and medium-term executionof the National Disaster Prevention and ManagementPlan.Following the eruption and mudslide of Nevado del Ruiz in1985, Colombia has been a pioneer in promoting a systematicapproach to integrated disaster management. The creation of aNational System for Prevention and Response to Natural Disastersin 1989 demonstrated a shift in institutional responsibilityfor natural disasters, from a strong focus on response to one ofmore preventive action.The 1999 earthquake in Armenia, in the coffee belt of Colombia,and the creation of FOREC for the reconstruction effort(Sasakawa Award 2000, see chapter 4.2), provided the opportunityto further enhance institutional and technical capabilities.The experience of FOREC has become a very relevant modeland success story useful as a reference for similar situations inother places.The strategy is an example of a comprehensiveinitiative to improve the National Planfor the Prevention of Disasters. It “outlinesthe work to be advanced for the followingthree years and establishes the first steps forthe consolidation of the National Plan in themedium-term. It identifies the objectives ofaction and the responsible individuals, expeditingthe National Plan’s work in mitigatingnatural disasters and their levels of risk inColombia. Additionally, this national effortseeks to meet the goals of the UN-ISDR andto comply with the initiatives of the Meetingof the Americas in the framework of theAndean Community.”The National Council for Social and EconomicPolicy has cited four accomplishmentsthat have to be met if its strategy is to beimplemented successfully:• Strengthen public awareness campaignson natural disasters.• Initiate regional and sectoral planning fordisaster prevention.• Institutionalize the national disaster preventionand management plan.• Communicate the national plan to thepublic and to the authorities.This updated and revitalized strategy wasapproved by the President of Colombia as wellas by the country’s National Planning Departmentand all the relevant ministries of interior,economic development, finance and publiccredit, agriculture and rural development, education,health, environment, energy, communications,transportation, labour and social security,culture and national defence. Most importantly,this strategy is linked to budgetary allocationswithin the respective institutions.One example of the strategy’s implementationin practice can be seen in the city of Manizaleswhere a local environmental action plan hasbeen established through widespread consultationwith the community. The plan is integratedinto the municipality’s development planand budget, and includes specific measures toreduce the risk of landslides and seeks to relocatethe population living on steep slopes.These programmes are also linked to the developmentof ecological parks some of which arelocated on slopes too dangerous for settlements,and others have been integrated into thecity’s watershed thereby protecting theirimportant economic functions.Case: BoliviaIn Bolivia too, a comprehensive national policyfor prevention and risk management has beenestablished recently. Consistent with the intentionsof the Andean Regional Programme for RiskPrevention and Reduction (PREANDINO), theMinister of Sustainable Development andPlanning has announced the government’scommitment to formulate policies and strategiesfor the incorporation of disaster preventionin the planning system through theNational Plan for Prevention and Risk Mitigation.It is anticipated that mechanisms will be

established with necessary legislation in orderto introduce elements of prevention with thevarious sectoral initiatives. In this regard, thework of prevention may be considered as complementaryto the objectives of sustainabledevelopment.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionThe government has recently been pressingahead with several national programmes aimedat incorporating prevention into the managementof development activities, such as the Programmefor Risk Prevention and Reductionfinanced by UNDP and the World Bank.Another programme financed by the GermanAgency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) isthe Local Risk Management Programme. Inhousing, the National Housing Subsidy Programme,financed by employer contributions,includes a Prevention and Risk Mitigation Sub-Programme. The Ministry of Agriculture, livestockand rural development is implementing aNational Food Security Monitoring and Early WarningSystem, which will be responsible for monitoringthe impact of natural disasters on agriculturalproduction. UNESCO, working jointly withthis ministry, is also progressing in its support fora programme linking developmental issues andthe risk issues associated with the El Niño phenomenon.Risk management has also been introduced in aguide to adapting municipal development plans,which is to be implemented in 30 pilot municipalities.These will ensure that municipal plansfor risk prevention and mitigation will be in linewith national and sectoral policies. Manuals arebeing prepared on how to draw up municipalplans for risk prevention and mitigation in relationto town and country planning, human settlementsand environmental management.3Institutional FrameworkHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and control mechanismsBoliviaA national policy for prevention andrisk management was established in1999. Official statements on preventionat national level are ad hoc andrelate mainly to prevention programmesduring rainy periods orassociated with health and agriculturalcampaigns. With reference tothe PREANDINO, the Ministerof Sustainable Development andplanning (MDSP) has announcedthe government's commitment toformulate policies and strategies thatincorporate prevention into theplanning system through the nationalplan for prevention and risk mitigation.Formal decisions: The MDSP hasbeen made legally responsible forthe development of prevention policies.Some ministries such as housinghave incorporated this policy insome of their normal activities.The government has recentlyadvanced several national programmesto incorporate preventioninto development practices, such asthe Programme for Risk Preventionand Reduction financed by UNDPand the World Bank. Another programme,financed by GTZ, is theLocal Risk Management Programme.In housing, the NationalHousing Subsidy Programme,financed with 2 per cent of employercontributions, includes the Preventionand Risk Mitigation Sub-Programme.The Ministry of Agriculture,Livestock and Rural Developmentis implementing the NationalFood Security Monitoring and EarlyWarning System, which is responsiblefor monitoring the impact of naturaldisasters on agricultural production.PREANDINO promotes thecoordination of all initiatives, forwhich it is supposed to establishframes of reference through thenational plan, by identifying policies,programmes and projects of nationalinterest and defining policies toframe national measures.UNESCO, jointly with the MDSP,is supporting a programme in connectionwith the El Niño phenomenon.There are plans in thehealth and agricultural sectorsbut they are focussedmainly on relief. In thehealth sector, there is a preparednessand responseplan and in agriculture, theministry has drawn up anagricultural emergencyplan. National and sectoralplans initiated within thecontext of PREANDINOare being prepared. Therehas not yet been anyprogress with land useplans.Proposals for prevention havenot yet been incorporated in thedevelopment plans because theyhave been formulated onlyrecently. Some sectoral measures,as in agriculture, includeproposals for reducing vulnerability.They have not, however,been integrated into plans fordevelopment. Guidelines arebeing prepared to incorporateprevention into local plans.93

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesInstitutional FrameworkHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and control mechanismsColombiaThere has been a national policy onprevention and risk management since1989, encompassed in PresidentialDirective No. 33 of 1990 and Educationand Health Ministry Orders No.13 of 1992 and No. 1 of 1993.Formal decisions: The National Planfor Disaster Prevention and Managementwas established in Decree 919 of1989 and Decree 93 of 1998. Thepresent government's national developmentplan includes a chapter onprevention and risk mitigation. Theprevention decision is a state decision.The policy is maintained even thoughnational governments change.Until very recently there was nocommitment at high political levelsto promote the preparation ofdepartmental and municipal disasterprevention and managementplans. Presently, in the context ofPREANDINO, there is considerablecommitment by theNational Planning Departmentand some deputy ministers. Thisis reflected in the National Economicand Social Policy Counciland in plans which will providefor a national effort to considerprevention in development plansand actions. In higher education,risk management issues are beingpromoted as an element of thebasic syllabus.There are specific plans,such as the plan for theEl Niño phenomenonand specific contingencyplans. Little attention isgiven to undertakingplanning exercises duringperiods of no apparentthreat. Plans are moretypically considered innew situations when aphenomenon is imminent.Prevention has not been incorporatedin the sectoral plans orin the National DevelopmentPlan. Within individual sectors,energy and health haveshown progress, in the lattercase, mainly at decentralizedlevels. Most departments andcapital cities included the subjectin the government plansduring changes of administrationin 2001. Many referencesare, however, strictly rhetoricaldeclarations. Presently withinthe PREANDINO, all theinstitutions are working onpreparations for a NationalEconomic and Social PolicyCouncil, with specific preventionproposals being consideredin each development area.EcuadorIn recent years, official statementshave been made showing the government'scommitment to furthering preventionand risk management policies,mainly at vice-presidential and somedecentralized levels, in connectionwith the problems of disasters. Withinthat framework, the national governmenthas decided to strengthen theprocess of incorporating prevention indevelopment through the participationof both national and sectoral workinggroups, no formal decision yet.There has been no official promotionof prevention programmes.However, there is support forhigh-level initiatives promoted byinternational organizations.Formally, there are noprevention plans. Nationaland sectoral risk preventionplans are underway..The President's PlanningOffice has integrated preventionissues into the nationalplanning system. Although theNational Plan was drawn upprior to these efforts, its incorporationis being promoted forinclusion in the plans of decentralizedjurisdictions. Thisincludes terms of reference forprovincial development plans,which already include risk preventionaspects in the strategicplanning process. However,plans are yet to be finalized.PeruThere have been no official statementson prevention during the past decade.Only prior to the 1997-98 El Niñoepisode were a few statements issuedabout actions taken to prevent damage.Currently, the subject has notbeen mentioned in official speeches,nor has it been mentioned in connectionwith the environment.Formal decisions: There are no formaldecisions on prevention. However, thelaunching of the PREANDINO pro-The Executive Committee for ElNiño Reconstruction launched anUrban Mitigation Study Programme.Although lacking inlegal endorsement, fifteen citieswere studied with UNDPsupport until February 2001.PREANDINO promotes theincorporation of prevention innational and sectoral developmentplanning.There are no preventionplans. PREANDINOcommittees are preparingdiagnostics for sectoralplans. There has been littleprogress with theNational PreventionPlan, due to politicalchanges.There have been some verylimited attempts to incorporateprevention issues within specificsectors. An institutionallimitation is the country's lackof national planning bodies,although other channels havebeen identified through the publicinvestment structures workingwith individual projects.There are local experiments inplanning and the development ofprojects, for example, in the94

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Institutional FrameworkHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and control mechanismsgramme has been approved and organizationsin four sectors have been invitedto participate. This decision is notbacked by legislation. Individual sectorsformally decided to establish sectoralcommittees. There has been a NationalCivil Defense System (INDECI) since1972 with responsibility for prevention,emergencies and rehabilitation. In 1997,the government decided to reactivate themulti-sectoral ENP Study Committee, abody that coordinates scientific institutions.This has been maintained and thedecision has proven to be a good one. In1998, the government transferredresponsibility for mitigation work onrivers from INDECI to the ministry ofagriculture.basin of the River Rimac whereLima and eight other districtmunicipalities have mitigationplans, emergency contingencyplans and risk studies with microzoningmaps. These municipalitiesregularly update their plansand keep the public informed inwhat is the most advanced experimentin local work. Lima andeight other district municipalitieshave mitigation plans, emergencycontingency plans and risk studieswith microzoning maps.VenezuelaFollowing the devastating mudslides inVargas State in 1999, reference to preventionconcepts being incorporated aspart of development policy began toappear in national and municipal statements.The subject was also one of themain concerns of senior governmentspokesmen involved with reconstructionprogrammes. In general, official statementsare made when events occur, andin connection with emergency operationsif there are landslides.Formal decisions: Important steps arebeing taken to incorporate prevention indevelopment processes. This is most evidentin the health sector which has beenattentive to these mattersfor some time, and has set up a maintenanceprogramme for incorporatingchanges in school buildings. Immediatelyafter the Vargas events in 1999, the ministryof science and technology (MCT)formally institutionalized a disaster riskmanagement policy with tools for itsimplementation. Financing was providedto support risk management, preparednessand disaster relief strategies. The nationalgovernment joined PREANDINO tocoordinate and promote these activities atall levels, and is now working within thatframework to define strategies. Somemunicipal bodies, such as those of Chacao,Sucre, Baruta, Maracaibo, Valencia andAlcaldia Mayor have formally decided toproceed with the incorporation of preventionin development management, even ifin an isolated fashion.The MCT has set up the RiskManagement and DisasterReduction Programme whichtakes an integral approach tosupport the inclusion of riskmanagement into developmentplanning and sectoral and localactions, despite its emphasis onscientific development and theintroduction of technologiesinto all risk management anddisaster relief processes.PREANDINO implementeda programme in December2000 with objectives to coordinatethe handling of disasterrisks, to incorporate risk reductionissues into developmentpolicies and to support national,sectoral and local exchangesamong countries. There areother sectoral programmessuch as one to reduce vulnerabilityto socio-natural disastersin the education sector andanother in the ministry of theenvironment and naturalresources to prepare risk mapsfor land use planning.There are no preventionplans but national andsectoral plans are in theprocess of being completed.There are someterritorial initiatives butno prevention plans existfor municipalities.A start has been to incorporateprevention issues in the NationalDevelopment and Social SectorPlan as well as in a fewregional plans that are underpreparation. Initiatives in theutilities sector have partiallyincorporated prevention withincertain subsectors such ashydroelectric power generationand in thermal power generation.Only very few municipalitieshave seismic microzoningand geodynamic risk maps foruse in new techniques formunicipal planning.95

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSource: Disaster Mitigation for Sustainable Livelihoods Programme, University of Cape TownAfricaCase: South AfricaA methodical, if protracted, effort to develop acomprehensive national strategy for disasterrisk management has been pursued in SouthAfrica by reforming organizational structuresand creating new legislation concerning disasterrisk management. As so often happens, itwas after a severe crisis – flooding in the CapeFlats in 1994 – that the government resolvedto assess South Africa’s ability to deal with disasterrisk management. This initially involveda complete review of disaster managementstructures and policies. A year later, the cabinetrecommended that a formal structure for disastermanagement be established. An initialNational Disaster Management Committeewas formed in 1996 with the intended functionof coordinating and managing national disastermanagement policy. As that body never cameinto its own right, by mid-1997 the governmentapproved the formation of an alternateInter-Ministerial Committee for DisasterManagement (IMC).At this stage, a decision was taken to producea Green Paper on Disaster Managementfor all levels of government (national,provincial and local) as the first tangiblestep to establish a formal disaster managementpolicy for the country. It was tabled inFebruary 1998 with the aim to ensure that acomprehensive disaster management systemcould be realized and implemented bymeans of a national strategy that would bemore fully elaborated in a subsequent policyWhite Paper on Disaster Management. TheGreen Paper provided an important conceptualframework for disaster managementand risk reduction. A year later in January1999, the White Paper was able to build onthese views by emphasizing the risk and disasterreduction issues highlighted by theinternational and regional trends at the time.The White Paper was developed within theframework of the IDNDR, and importancealso was given to developing joint standardsand common practices among the other 13countries of the Southern African DevelopmentCommunity (SADC).96

Key policy proposals contained in the WhitePaper included:• Integration of risk reduction strategiesinto development initiatives.• Development of a strategy to reduce themost vulnerable communities.• Legal establishment of a National DisasterManagement Centre (authority).• Introduction of a new disaster managementfunding strategy.• Introduction and implementation of a newDisaster Management Act.• Establishment of a framework to enablecommunities to be informed, alert andself-reliant and be capable of supportingand cooperating with government in disasterreduction activities.• Establishment of a framework to coordinatetraining and community awarenessinitiatives.Meanwhile, in order to address South Africa’simmediate needs, an interim disaster managementauthority was composed with representativesfrom ten national departments. This waslater converted into a National Disaster ManagementCentre (NDMC). However, despite thefact that it has been operational since 1999, ithas yet to become a statutory institution. AnInter-Departmental Disaster Management Committee(IDMC) was also established in the sameyear to ensure better coordination among governmentdepartments at national level. This,however, was intended as an interim measureuntil such time when the planned statutorystructures contained in a Disaster ManagementBill could become functional under a newDisaster Management Act.Following the issuance of the White Paper, thefirst Disaster Management Bill was publishedfor public comment in 2000. However, the initialenthusiasm and momentum shown by thegovernment seemed to decline with numerouspostponements of the tabling of the bill. Afteranother severe crisis – this time, the devastatingfloods in parts of Southern Africa in 2000– political priorities changed as the importanceof disaster management policy and legislationresurfaced. The National Council of Provincescalled for a disaster management conference inMay 2000 to consider disaster managementand reduction on a regional basis. After thisconference, encouraged by funding from abilateral disaster assistance agency, the SouthPolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionAfrican legislative process regained momentumand the bill was finally tabled for debate,with approval anticipated during the latter partof 2002.During its lengthy review, the Disaster ManagementBill has moved away somewhat fromthe earlier policy emphasis envisioned in theGreen and White Papers and instead hasfocussed more attention on inter-governmentalstructures and related operational frameworks.The bill provides guidance with respect to thelegal establishment of the NDMC, the dutiesand powers of national, provincial and localinstruments of government and funding forpost-disaster recovery and rehabilitation. Therationale behind the robustness of the bill is toensure that clear and unambiguous guidelinescan be given through regulations once the legislationis promulgated. The bill also providesfor an Inter-governmental Committee on DisasterManagement to consist of cabinet membersinvolved in disaster management, members ofthe Executive Councils from the nineprovinces of the country and representatives oflocal government. A further structure proposedin the bill is the National Disaster ManagementFramework, which will outline coherent,transparent and inclusive policies on allaspects of disaster management includingtraining and capacity building.Expected to become law during 2002, the Billcalls for the establishment of disaster managementcentres at all levels of government, andalso establishes procedures for the collection anddissemination of risk assessment data and information.One of the explicit functions of the centreswill be the assessment of disaster risks, withthe requirement that each one also serve as arepository and conduit for information relatingto all aspects of disasters, impending disastersand disaster management. The overall thrust isone that can develop a national disaster managementframework that would reflect a balancedconsideration of the different kinds of disasters,and the varying severity or magnitudes thatoccur in southern Africa. Emphasis has alsobeen given to measures that could reduce thevulnerability of disaster-prone areas, communitiesand households. The anticipated DisasterManagement Act is expected to open up newavenues for greater commitment to be made byprovincial and local government authorities toundertake risk assessment activities.973

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives98The NDMC has been conceived to be responsiblenot only for pre-disaster activities, riskand vulnerability reduction but also for postdisasterrehabilitation and recovery actions. Apredominant part of the methodology underlyingthe NDMC is the management of actualdisaster situations through all aspects of thedisaster management cycle. Emphasis is alsoplaced on the important role of the NDMC inthe areas of training and community awareness.Consistent with regional trends, theNDMC and the IDMC are to be activelyinvolved in the SADC initiative to establish aregional disaster management coordinatingframework.Case: MozambiqueOne of the principal challenges for evolvinggovernment institutions in Mozambique hasbeen the recurrent need to respond to emergencyconditions. Since its independence in1975, considerable resources have been channelledinto disaster management, and institutionshave continually evolved to deal with newand challenging conditions. This hard-wonexperience has produced a seasoned cadre ofdisaster managers throughout the governmentand a well developed inter-ministerial structurefor the coordination of disaster management.It is much to the government’s credit that forsome time it has recognized the importance ofshifting its emphasis in disaster managementfrom immediate response and rehabilitationneeds to the long-term values of mitigation andrisk reduction. In the last few years, there hasbeen a dedicated effort supported by the highestlevels of government to bring together thisexperience and establish formal structures andprocedures that can build capacities forimproved disaster risk management in thefuture.From as early as 1981, the Government ofMozambique was attentive to the need toaddress the consequences of risk on the society.A Department for the Prevention and Controlof Natural Disasters (DPCCN) was establishedwith the objective of promoting earlywarning and mitigation activities. During aperiod of complex national emergency fromabout 1982 to 1994 DPCCN became a principalconduit for international aid to people displacedby conflict and the victims of repeatedfloods and droughts, with logistics becomingits predominant activity. With improved conditionsand changing needs in the country, aprocess was begun in 1996 supported by theWFP as DPCCN’s principal internationalpartner, to formulate a coherent National DisasterManagement Policy and to reorient disastermanagement towards risk reduction activities.During the closing years of the 1990s, thisinvolved sustained efforts to reinvent institutionsand revise policies created in the prolongedperiod of permanent emergency, as wellas to stimulate an evolution in attitudes, bothwithin government and in the population as awhole. As expressed in current national policies,the primary objective has been to breakthe vicious cycle of continually expendingscarce resources in emergency response andreconstruction, only then to become vulnerableand unprepared for the next catastrophic event.In 1999, with the approval of the Council ofMinisters, the Mozambican government creatednew institutions to give greater coherenceand a clear mandate for government structuresdealing with disasters. The Coordinating Counselfor Disaster Management (CCGC) was composedat the ministerial level as the principalgovernment body for coordinating disastermanagement in all its phases. A National Institutefor Disaster Management (INGC) was createdto serve as its permanent technical supportunit, with the director of INGC chairing anadditional multi-sectoral Technical Committee forDisaster Management (CTGC) to assure strongcoordination and collaboration in planning,mitigation, and response activities.A proposed National Law on Disaster Managementwill serve as a legal mandate for the implementationof policy, with the principal objectivestated in the first article, “to avoid the occurrenceor minimize the effects of disasters”. Inparticular, it gives the National Disaster ManagementPlan, as approved by the Council of Ministers,the force of law. While yet to be finalized,the national policy will entail a framework forthe coordination of government entities, the participationof civil society and collaboration withthe private sector in all aspects of disaster management.In addition, the law will establish sanctionsfor individuals or organizations violatingthe provisions of a declared state of emergency.

Under the mandate of the CTGC, a series ofstudies have been conducted to ensure thatnational policies are translated into concreteactions and that these norms are codified in thedisaster management legislation under consideration.As these proposed objectives requirethe evaluation of potential hazards as well astheir impacts on the local population, theorganizations that comprise the CTGC areexpected to carry out both historical analysis ofdisaster vulnerability and risk as well as to conductassessments of current conditions in anannual process of contingency planning. Thisexercise, led by the INGC, is intended toassure that authorities are actively addressingconcerns and recommendations throughoutthe planning cycle. At the national level, areport is produced which focuses particularlyon preparedness as well as prevention measuresin vulnerable areas.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3It has become equally evident that while theintention has been clear, institutions are noteasily reformed and individuals not so readilyretrained. Unfortunately, the vicious cycle alsoaffects international agencies, from UN organizationsto local NGOs. In October 1999, thegovernment of Mozambique released its contingencyplan for the up-coming rainy season,noting the high probability of floods in theSmall Island Developing States“In Tonga, local communities need the initialsupport and direction of government to beactive in disaster reduction. They are aware ofwhat is at risk, but cannot implement measureson a community basis because of a lack ofresources.”Tonga response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001.southern and central regions of the country. Atthat time it requested international assistance ofUS$ 2.7 million for immediate preparednessand mitigation activities. The response to thisappeal was poor with less than half of therequested funds pledged by the internationalcommunity. Yet only six months later, in thewake of terrible flooding, the internationalcommunity gave US$ 100 million in emergencyassistance and relief. Subsequently,international pledges for rehabilitation activitiesfollowing the floods exceeded US$ 450million.At the individual level there may also be reasonfor concern as there is some indication thatpopulations have become dependent on emergencyassistance and therefore have a strongincentive to maintain their vulnerability. Givensuch a disproportionate application of availableresources, it is not difficult to see why effectivereform may prove difficult to sustain.Source: Instituto Nacional de Gestão deCalamidades, Maputo, 199999

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPacificCase: The Pacific island countriesExamples of how certain Pacific small islanddeveloping states have sought to incorporatesome of these measures into their national platforms,policies and development strategies aresummarized in the following table. The exam-ples drawn from Fiji, Cook Islands and Vanuatufocus on the organizational frameworksand policy aspects those countries have pursuedwith respect to incorporating disasterrisk reduction into larger national interests.They should not be taken as being comprehensiveor exhaustive themselves or of theregion as a whole.Recommendations for sound disaster risk managementA good example of how disaster risk management functions can be structured within a national policy framework is cited below. Itis from Te’o I.J. Fairbairn, (UNDHA-SPO, 1997) as presented in the Pacific Regional Report prepared for the ISDR secretariat.The reasoning illustrates well the key issues at stake when trying to assimilate disaster reduction into accepted government policy.While the examples were conceived with specific reference to island state requirements, they also offer conceptual clarity for otherstates. Information in square brackets has been added by the authors of the present Global Review.“There must be a commitment to implementation of particular measures of risk reduction measures incorporated within the ongoingpractices of national economic planning and development.Certainly a major requirement, if not even the primary one, is to promote a clearer understanding among policy makers – and thegeneral public – of the often severe and potentially far-reaching economic consequences of natural disasters. It is crucial that policymakersin particular comprehend how such events seriously can undermine longer-term growth prospects and threaten the socialdimensions of individuals’ well-being. Failure to appreciate these consequences can exact eventual or irreparable political costs.A second crucial prerequisite is to ensure that disaster risk management issues are integrated within the overall national developmentplanning framework. Such an embodiment of risk awareness and evaluation can ensure that those issues are applied acrosssectoral, ministerial, and jurisdictional lines of interest or responsibility, are multi-disciplinary in nature, and are properly includedin the design of major development projects. Taken together, the interaction of multiple commitments can also contribute to riskreduction becoming a non-partisan issue, with its constituencies transcending any short-term political interests or the lifespan ofindividual governments.Other major requirements for enhancing a Pacific small island states’ commitment to disaster risk reduction capabilities includemechanisms to:• Strengthen the institutional and organizational frameworks at both national and community levels for managing and coordinatingdisaster-related issues.• [Strengthen national institutions by increasing their exposure to, and collaboration with, relevant regional and internationalentities.]• Adopt appropriate procedures for monitoring and evaluating disaster events, especially in relation to analysing their social[environmental] and economic consequences over time.• [Similarly adopt appropriate procedures for monitoring and evaluating the consequences of developmental choices on disasterimpacts].• Increase available information and facilitate database access about the social, [environmental] and economic aspects of naturaldisasters, as a potentially valuable tool for planning and management purposes.• Promote greater uniformity in the methodology and techniques used to assess both the direct and longer-termed economic[and environmental] costs of disasters to countries throughout the region.• Develop comprehensive and integrated land use and water management strategies capable of alleviating flooding, promotingwater conservation and environmentally sound land use practices.• Diversify agriculture through such practices as planting hardy crop varieties, early maturing crops, and encouraging the continuedcultivation of various traditional root crops.• Encourage the [identification and] use of traditional mitigation and coping practices as means for achieving greater communityself-reliance in dealing with disasters.• Facilitate the post-disaster recovery of the private commercial sector through measures that provide tax and related financialincentives.• Establish effective mechanisms for enlisting the joint support of external donors to strengthen national disaster reductioncapacities, in addition to assisting with post-disaster relief and rehabilitation needs.”

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Institutional frameworksHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and control mechanismsCook IslandsNDMO coordinates disastermanagement.National and Island DisasterManagement Plans call for theNational Disaster ManagementCouncil to be responsiblefor policy issues.Establishment of a US$30,000 disaster reserve withinthe Ministry of Finance.The Island Disaster Managementstipulates for local governmentto be responsible forlocal disaster managementactivities.Red Cross disaster preparednessprogramme and first-aidtraining goes hand in handwith broader preparednessplans.Introduction to disaster managementtraining course implementedin every island of the Cooks reachingat least 35 per cent of the populationof each island.Principles of disaster managementintegrated in the social science curriculumof the education system, soeach child would learn of theseprinciples in their school years.World Patent Coastal ProtectionUnits protecting the airport frombeing inundated and minimizestidal energy from surging intohotels on the beaches.Radios placed in emergency centresin the northern islands to receivenational broadcasts from Rarotonga,enabling communities in theNorthern Cook Islands to monitorweather and emergency warningsfor the first time.Foreshore Protection Committee.EMWIN early warning system fortropical cyclone is in operation.Rarotonga Tourism VulnerabilityPilot ProjectCook Islands BuildingCode: a report on promotingcodes, and theirapplication was completedin April 1999.A Building Control Unithas been set up for complianceand enforcementby the introduction ofcommerciallz experiencedconstruction personnel.Disaster ManagementWork Plan:National DisasterManagement Plan forCyclone ResponseProceduresTsunami ResponseProcedures.Development is being undertakenat the national andpolitical levels through anadvocacy strategy, with comprehensivesectoral and societalinvolvement:Ministry of Transport inthe prevention andresponse to oil pollutionGovernment EnvironmentServices Unit in climatechangeNatural Heritage Unitresponsible for communityconsultation and promotionof biodiversityNDMO in prevention,mitigation and preparednessactivities.Outer Island DevelopmentProjects (forestry on MangaiaIsland, water reticulationsystems, communication systems).Cook Islands governmenthas ratified at least 25 environmentalglobal conventions.FijiThe national coordination policyis documented in theNational Disaster ManagementPlan 1995 and the NaturalDisaster Management Act1998.From 1970 to 1989, emergencymeasures were handled by thenational government.In 1990, the government designatedthe Ministry ofRegional Development andMulti-Ethnic Affairs responsiSuva Earthquake Risk ManagementScenario Pilot Project(SERMP).Taveuni Volcano Risk Project:updates eruption information foruse in preparing risk maps and indeveloping guidelines for developmentplanning and emergency riskplanning.Volcano Hazard Risk Mitigation inFiji: mapping and understandingvolcano hazards on the islands ofKadavu, Koro and Rotuma toNational GovernmentDisaster ManagementActNational Disaster ManagementPlanDisaster ManagementWork PlanA National BuildingCode formulated in1990, but yet to be legislatedand implemented.Work is underway toaccomplish.A proactive approach to disasterreduction continues tobe the cornerstone of Fiji'snational effort.A major issue is the restructuringof the NDMO withinthe Ministry of RegionalDevelopment and Multi-Ethnic Affairs.101

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesInstitutional frameworksHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and controlmechanismsble for natural disasters and theMinistry of Home Affairs forhuman-caused disasters.NADMO at the Ministry ofRegional Development andMulti-ethnic Affairs, managesand coordinates all activities.Established a National TrainingAdvisory Committee.Fiji Meteorological Service,Mineral Resource Departmentand the Public Works Departmentare responsible for monitoringand detecting hazardsaffecting Fiji.develop risk maps, developmentplanning and volcano responseplans.Ba Flood Preparedness: providingflood information and preparingflood response plans, conductinglocal education andawareness activities.Cyclone Preparedness at CommunityLevel: Foundation for thePeoples of the South Pacific"Fiji's Awareness CommunityTheatre Cyclone PreparednessProgramme" uses video anddrama to better inform villagecommunities.Support plans forCycloneOperational SupportContingency Plan forTaveuni Volcano.The National Disaster ManagementCouncil establishedthe Disaster ManagementCommittee at National Divisionaland District levels (DIS-MAC)Construction of disaster resistantinfrastructure: mitigation measuresand strategies are consideredat national level (Ministry ofRegional Development andMulti-ethnic Affairs), and locallevels (District and DivisionalDevelopment Committees). Thisrisk management approach adoptedthroughout the country.PICCAP: Greenhouse GasInventories and Vulnerability andAdaptation Assessments. Climatechange is integrated into disasterreduction agenda.VanuatuNDMO coordinates disastermanagement. It is an informationresource for the country atall levels of government(national, provincial, municipalcouncils, village councils),NGOs, the private sector andcommunities.Provincial governments musthave disaster mitigation as apolicy as per the NationalManagement Act.Professional development programme.Community resilience programmes(CHARM)Community-based volcanic riskreduction.Involvement of the private sector(Telecom Vanuatu, Unelco -power and water facilities).Building cyclone preparedness.National Disaster ManagementAct No. 31 of2000.National Disaster ManagementPlan.Disaster ManagementWork Plan.National Building Code(not yet enacted).Support plan for AmbaeVolcano Operations.In conjunction with theSOPAC-DMU CHARMProgramme, Vanuatu isdeveloping a new structurefor its NDMO office.In 2002 the NDMO officewill be relocated from theDepartment of Police andlinked with the line ministriesof the Government.102

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Institutional frameworksHigh-level programmes forpromoting preventionPrevention plansPrevention in developmentplans and controlmechanismsFlood mitigation projects.NDMO have initiated a veryactive program on public educationthrough the Teachers Collegein Port Vila and several highschools.The National DisasterManagement Act providesmore power for NDMO toundertake its nationalresponsibilities and for thesix provincial councils tobecome more proactive indisaster management.Further important areas ofpublic policy are now inprogress, including thereview and revision of theNational Disaster EmergencyPlan, development ofsupport plans, institutionalsupport for the NDMOand training and educationprogrammes.CaribbeanCase: Dominican RepublicFollowing the destruction caused by hurricaneGeorges across the Caribbean in 1998,the IADB and the World Bank providedalmost US$ 100 million to the DominicanRepublic for reconstruction work. Reflectingon the magnitude of such losses and furthermotivated by the subsequent social and economicconsequences of hurricane Mitch feltthroughout the entire region, the IADB providednearly US$ 12 million in 2000 to theOffice of the Presidency in the DominicanRepublic for the development of disasterreduction sub-programmes.These funds were targeted to help modernizethe country’s strategic approach and institutionalframeworks for disaster risk management.The following year, three consultingconsortiums developed a national hazard andvulnerability information system, trainedtrainers in community-level risk and environmentalmanagement, and conducted trainingin modern risk management techniques forcivil servants. They also advised on the developmentof national public awareness campaignsand on the design of revised legal andinstitutional frameworks for risk management.Finance was provided to acquire materialsand equipment needed by risk and disastermanagement organizations, including scientificinstitutions.103

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesNational planning processes, withmulti-sectoral responsibilities and localparticipationAuthority and external resources normally flowfrom the apex of political power, while knowledgeof the situation, information, localresources, and leadership all rise from the localcommunity levels. Disaster planning will alwaysbe ineffective if confined to a process of centralplanning and command and control practices. Inorder to achieve effective local disaster plans it isessential that provincial, district and local levelofficials be given power and resources to manageeffective disaster protection activities. However,such systems require national disaster risk reductionplans that are fully compatible with locallevel provisions. In many countries where powerhas been devolved to local levels of administrativeresponsibility, there can be unhelpful discrepanciesbetween policies, laws and practices atthe various levels of government.Tools are required to create a “culture of prevention”against all forms of hazards withinlocal communities. This requires the knowledgeof practical and low-cost methods whichaddress likely hazards that can be conveyed toa wide variety of participants including localleaders, community groups, trades people,commercial and financial interests and localgovernment employees.In Portugal we should be prepared for disaster and thusdevelop adequate policies, such as:• Defining safety policies.• Informing and educating the public concerning risksand the development of a civil protection culture.• Improving risk mapping.• Promoting the study of seismic impact and otherrisks facing communities and their social economicpatterns.• Improving the scope of emergency planning.• Defining a national land-use policy.• Developing a strategy to strengthen building structures.• Providing the financial resources to facilitate compliancewith existing codes.• Protecting cultural assets.Portugal response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001.In Canada, provincial and municipal jurisdictionshave legislation, programmes and activitiesthat may not necessarily interface withnational level disaster reduction issues. However,the implementation of disaster reductionmeasures is likely to occur at the municipallevel, including legislation and enforcement.Canada response to ISDR secretariatquestionnaire, 2001.In Germany, the most important risk reductionissue to be addressed concerns the harmonizationof duties, responsibilities and legislationbetween the state government and the differentlocal bodies. The key national issues are:• Stronger commitment of the federal governmentto the coordination of civil protectionactivities.• Stronger integration of disaster mitigationin regional planning by legislation.• Stronger support for interdisciplinaryscientific research centres for disasterprevention.Germany response to ISDR secretariat questionnaire,2001.Case: New ZealandIn one exemplary case, taking a cue from thedevastation caused by the 1994 earthquake indistant Northridge, California in the UnitedStates, the Wellington City Council in NewZealand, began a series of local and internationalconsultations. By working closely withthe fire service, city authorities sought toreduce their exposure to urban risks.In reviewing their existing exposure to seismicrisk, a consensus view emerged that the prevailingdisaster management regime wasfocused almost exclusively on response andpreparedness measures. Telling observationswere made that indicated emergency managerswere ill-placed bureaucratically and weretherefore unable to contribute to importantdecisions regarding risk management programme.Their experience could seldom betaken into account when conducting vulnerabilityassessments, nor were they involved inthe formulation of land-use policies.104

Following recommendations, the city ofWellington and later the government of NewZealand embarked on the revision and implementationof a variety of legislative and policyreforms in disaster risk management. With themotivation to encompass an all-hazardsapproach to risk and to appeal to all segmentsof society, the following accomplishments havebeen achieved over the past several years:• Broadened responsibilities for localauthority emergency managers, withincreased roles in the training and developmentof community capacities for riskidentification, vulnerability reduction anddisaster resilience.• Decentralized Emergency ManagementGroups, with membership includingneighbouring local authorities, emergencyservices and utility companies in order toensure that while the national emergencymanagement strategy is focused at thelocal level, there is improved cooperationand coordination of human and technicalresources across the country.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionThe Auckland Group developed a set of guidelines withthe overarching goal to “minimize the risks to communitiesand the environment from the effects of a range ofhazards, including (but not limited to) natural and technologicalhazards.” The guidelines are intended toaddress the following issues:• Achieve consistency in the way that hazard informationis collected, organized and used to influencedecisions about managing risk among localgovernment councils in the Auckland region.• Ensure risk management issues are appropriatelyaddressed in land-use and strategic planning.• Maximize the effective use of hazard informationto manage risk and to promote better public understandingof the local hazardscape.• Encourage local authorities to reduce barriers tosound risk management and encourage effectiverisk communication practices.• Minimize local authority liability through the effectivecapture and storage of hazard information.The group has produced a technical publication to elaboratethese issues, Hazard Guideline 1: Hazard Identificationand Information Management for Local Authorities.3• A comprehensive risk management strategythat integrates disaster managementinto environmental and community managementpractices at national and locallevels.Elsewhere in New Zealand, the Auckland LocalAuthority Hazard Liaison Group, was establishedfour years ago by the Auckland RegionalCouncil to enhance communicationsbetween local authorities on hazard managementissues and to facilitate intra-council communication.It was composed mainly of plannersand policy analysts drawn from the city,district and regional councils specifically “torecognize the link between hazard mitigationand land-use planning and the related need todevelop tools to manage risk and improve communicationsamong those people working insustainable development and environmentalmanagement.”Case: SwitzerlandIn Switzerland, long-standing federal forestlaw recognised the importance of forests withrespect to reducing water runoff. Forests alsowere recognized as a means of protectionSource: The Australian Journal of Emergency Management,2001-02.against avalanches as early as the 19th century,when extreme events revealed the catastrophiceffects of large-scale timber cutting, especiallyin the pre-alpine and alpine regions. The hithertounhindered tree felling came to an abruptend. Simultaneously, many major river-trainingworks commenced, were renewed or completedas an emphasis was placed on protectivemeasures of river engineering.Natural hazards continued to play an importantrole in modifying Swiss policies into the20th century. The risk situation was aggravatedby development in hazardous areas. Thesocial and economic consequences of avalanches,floods and windstorms exerted an impacton policy considerations and Switzerland hasmoved to a more integrated approach to themanagement of risk.In 1997, the National Platform for NaturalHazards (PLANAT) was created by the SwissFederal Council. This extra-parliamentary commissionaims to make better use of existing syn-105

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesergies and therefore to avoid duplication ofefforts in natural disaster reduction. PLANATis made up of representatives of the FederalGovernment, the Cantons, research and professionalassociations, and the economic and insurancesectors. The terms of reference for the firstperiod of its activities from 1997-2000 were to:• Develop a national strategy for dealingsuccessfully with natural hazards.• Coordinate all parties involved in disasterreduction.• Create more awareness about natural hazardsand to replace the conventional protectionapproach with a global view of riskmanagement.Plans for the second period of activities from2001- 2003 give priority attention to:• Promotion of public relations.• Initiating and supporting projects whichdeal with integrated risk management.• Supporting third-party projects with similaraims.• Seeking better utilization of synergiesamong various sectors.Information, education and creation of generalawareness about risk reduction are not onlyhigh on the priority list of PLANAT but areincreasingly recognized as being important byvirtually all players in Swiss risk management.An interesting development in this field is thevirtual campus initiated by several Swiss universitiesand research institutes which cooperatein a Centre of Competence on NaturalDisaster Reduction. Students and researchersalready have access to courses in the field ofnatural hazards and risk management atwww.cenat.ch. This information is soon to beextended to benefit after people doing practicalwork with natural hazards. Moves are alsoSwiss strategy for integrated risk managementSwitzerland policy recognizes that absolute safety cannot be achieved by any means. However, great strideshave been made in the past few years in progressively proceeding from the earlier conventional hazard protectionto a more integrated management of risk. This latter approach is based on a balanced equilibrium ofpreventive, response and reconstruction measures. A residual risk, which is based on social, economic andecological criteria of well-being, must therefore be accepted. This ultimately leads to a sustainable managementof riskIn order to establish coherent procedures that can also take account of the country’s cultural, geographicaland linguistic diversity, Switzerland gives considerable importance to the “subsidiary principle”. This princpleis constituted as one on the inviolable rights of the lower hierarchies of official authority and public responsibility.It establishes that the upper hierarchical levels only exert a degree of political power and only take overthose administrative duties that the lower hierarchic levels are not able to cope with, or accept, themselves.Hazard and risk management in Switzerland follows this subsidiary principle also in the political sphere, asthere is a distribution of responsibility between federal, cantonal (state) and communal authorities. Thisextends to individual land- and property-owners as well as to various national, regional and localinstitutions, organisations and associations.The Swiss approach to hazard and risk management is furthermore founded on the three cornerstones of disaster“preventive”, “response” and “reconstruction” measures. While all three cornerstones are of comparableimportance, they are in a somewhat reverse subsidiary relationship to each other. Great emphasis is placedon prevention. Response must be efficient and smooth in the face of catastrophic events. Reconstruction hasto take place subsequently, to a degree, which is necessary, feasible and compatible with far-reaching considerationsabout the environment. The ultimate aim of the Swiss strategy is to achieve sustainable developmentin all sectors of natural disaster reduction.Beyond its own borders too, Switzerland maintains and promotes the exchange of know-how and experiencewith other countries in regard to disaster reduction, as also reflected elsewhere in this report. It equally supportssupranational efforts aimed at close collaboration with others involved in both sustainable developmentand the provision of humanitarian assistance when required.106

underway to upgrade the Swiss National AlarmCentre, recognizing that communications areessential means by which information can bepassed in times of relative calm as well as duringtimes of crisis.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionthings normally only start to move in the wakeof a disaster such as occurred during theunusually severe series of winter storms experiencedacross the country at the end of 1999.3Research is another priority for PLANAT, concerningall natural hazard sectors. One importantissue is related to a better understanding ofthe forces of natural hazard as well as the copingmechanisms of structural mitigation measures.Research will also continue with regard tomonitoring climate change and the evaluationof its connection with natural hazards.As financial resources are always limited, theymust be allocated in the most productive manner.Several relevant moves are underway inSwitzerland to ensure their most effective use.These include:• Giving precedence to non-structural preventivemeasures including water coursemaintenance over river-engineering measures.• Shifting resources from reconstruction topreventive measures.• Redistributing the allocation of financesamong the primary parties concerned inorder to increase inter-cantonal collaborationand thus reduce the ill-effects ofexaggerated diversity of activities as wellas to avoid duplication.• Improving the coordination and consistencyin the use of government subsidiesand similar incentives for local authoritiesand communities, for instance throughthe activities of the Federal Office forWater and Geology and the Federal ForestDirectorate.In any event, it is recognized that morefinances need to be allocated to build greaterawareness for disaster risk reduction amongthe public and policy makers, alike. This isreinforced by the evident experience that withoutperiodic publicity, the necessary funds for acontinuous reappraisal of natural hazardrequirements simply are not provided. It is abitter fact that both individuals and politicianshave a short memory, which explains whyRisk reduction plans, linked to specificresponsibilities, policies, and practicesCase: Costa RicaDuring 2000, the Ministry of Agriculture inCosta Rica took the unprecedented step of creatinga Risk Management Program in the AgriculturalPlanning Secretariat. Concern for agriculturallosses increased with the impacts of ElNiño between 1997 and 1998 and with therecurrence of flooding and drought. The decisionto create the programme was motivatedfurther by decisions taken at the Central AmericanPresidential Summit held in 1999 whendisaster and vulnerability reduction issuesdominated the agenda.This development reflects the larger impetusgiven to disaster and risk reduction by the CentralAmerican Integration System’s (SICA) specialisedagricultural sector organizations, theRegional Advisory Board for AgriculturalCooperation and the Central American Agricultureand Livestock Advisory Board.Case: IranIran has a high exposure to seismic hazards.Considering this risk throughout the country,as indicated in the figure below, it became evidentthat a long-term vision was required toreduce significantly the high level of risk forthe population. The development of a nationalpolicy of disaster risk reduction in Iran waslargely motivated by the participation of scientificand technical interests within the country.This demonstrates that the evolution of riskreduction frameworks need not originate strictlyfrom civil administration or political initiatives.Scientific interest has exerted a majorrole in driving policy relevance, in Iran and byso doing, was then able to implement a series ofactions in different segments of the society.107

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives108There were a number of problems that had tobe tackled if a comprehensive and sustainablenational framework to reduce seismic risk wasto be created. Following the 1990 Manjilearthquake, the International Institute of EarthquakeEngineering and Seismology (IIEES),located in Teheran, started working with othertechnical institutions to develop a multidisciplinarystrategic national research and mitigationplan for seismic risk reduction. The resultingIran Earthquake Risk Mitigation Program(IERMP) has been implemented by IIEES,the Building and Housing Research Centre, theGeophysics Institute of Teheran University and theGeological Survey of Iran. With the added supportof the Earthquake Committee of IranResearch Council and Iran’s National IDNDRCommittee, the programme members adoptedthe following objectives:• Increase the scientific knowledge requiredfor earthquake risk mitigation.• Reduce the risk of all structures and promotethe need to build safer structures.• Increase public awareness and promote acollective prevention culture.• Develop plans for post-earthquake activities.In the political context, the first needs were toDevelopment of PGA and spectral valueattenuation relationship for Iran.Source: IIES, 2001motivate a better understanding of the natureof seismic risks among the most senior policymakers,and then to translate that awarenessinto political commitment throughout all thelevels of government authority. This was pursuedby emphasizing that elements of a riskreduction strategy were integral to nationaldevelopment objectives. Resources had to bereoriented from responding to immediateneeds towards investing them in longer-termedand sustainable objectives. Importantly, policymakershad to be encouraged to adopt a patientacceptance of deferred benefits.In an operational and technical context,emphasis was given to strengthening, andwhere necessary, retrofitting structures withparticular attention given to lifeline facilitiesand the physical infrastructure. It was in thiscontext that a challenging incompatibility existedbetween a developmental perspective thatencouraged investment in seismic design, andthinking prevalent in the public and privatesector of incurring less expenditure on construction.With the calculated involvement of the engineeringprofession, backed up by its code ofprofessional training, opportunities were identifiedthat could translate a fuller use of technicalknowledge into everyday life. This includeda wider use of seismic design and constructiontechniques, and a more serious approachto the implementation and enforcement ofbuilding codes. Perhaps most importantly, thestrategy provided an institutional “champion”for the concept of risk reduction, exercizedthrough the practical conduct of the engineeringprofession.IERMP developed a plan based on the commonefforts among government officials, scientists,engineers, builders and the public, initiallyto define acceptable and achievable levels ofrisk. This led to two parallel requirements:making seismic safety a priority policy throughrevised legislation, and creating internal mechanismsto change existing engineering practices.A High Council on Risk Reduction wascreated in the Planning and ManagementMinistry of Iran to supervise the implementationof the new program. It concentrated onpreparing the proper frameworks, budgeting,coordinating, and taking necessary decisions toensure that the objectives were achieved.The following are some of the actions pursuedthrough the IERMP in policy areas:• Shifting attention from previous considerationsof only responding to earthquake

damage to introducing means that canreduce the risk of damage to vulnerablestructures and lifelines before it occurs.• Establishing a special government fund tostrengthen important public buildings,including schools and hospitals, publicinfrastructure and lifeline facilities.• Providing financial incentives for privateand commercial sector interests that areinterested in upgrading their existing vulnerablestructures.• Encouraging more industrialization in theconstruction field to ensure better qualitycontrol.The following are some of the actions pursuedthrough the IERMP in technical matters:• Translating scientific knowledge into ausable and achievable format, using practicalknowledge to promote risk reduction.• Developing guidelines for conductingvulnerability assessments.• Establishing detailed technical databasesto document the necessary requirementsto strengthen public buildings, and settingPolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionpriorities to do so, based on availableresources.• Determining the most appropriate andcost-effective means of strengthening differenttypes of masonry, concrete and steelbuildings.• Promoting the use and enforcement ofcodes, quality control and inspection forall types of construction.The following are some of the actions pursuedthrough the IERMP in public understanding:• Increasing public awareness and motivationusing an active earthquake informationsystem.• Motivating the participation of the publicin prevention and mitigation activities.• Promoting the use of easy do-it-yourselfconstruction techniques suited for simpledwellings in rural areas.The following table summarizes the increase inresources allocated to seismic risk reductionduring the course of the IERMP:3Resource allocation to seismic risk reduction, IranType of resource Before (1980-89) After (1990-2000)Seismic researchers Less than 40 More than 265Seismic graduate students Less than 20 355Seismic stations 15 45Strong motion stations 270 Approx. 1000Research laboratories 2 7Books and technical reports Less than 100 More than 460Budget Over 10 years, less Over 10 years, a totalthan 700 million Rials. of more than 128,000(US$402,000)million Rials.(US$73.5 millions)In 1989 alone, about 104million Rials.(US$59,727)In 2000 alone, morethan 37,000 million Rials(US$23.3 millions)Investment for laboratories US$ 3.1 millions US$ 11,5 millionsSource: International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, IIEES, Teheran, Iran109

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives110Case: AlgeriaIn November 2001, unusually heavy rain fellin the Algerian capital, Algiers. Flash floodsand mudslides swept through many parts ofthe city, killing more than 800 people. At thetime it was suggested that disaster managementstructures and the population were woefullyunprepared for such an event. However,it turned out that several cases of human activityand unsuited policies actually may havecontributed to the severity of the disaster. Dueto the scope of the disaster and its location inthe centre of the capital, all levels of the governmentwere seriously shaken. Senior officialsexperienced, first-hand, the lack of coordinationof the various parties concerned with theemergency response, as well as having to accepttheir own failure of foresight.Since this disaster, there is a new way of thinkingabout disaster management in Algeria, particularlyin urban areas. This has been demonstratedthrough several initiatives that startedonly months after the disaster. For the first timeever, the Head of State ordered all the ministriesto take serious account of the notion ofdisaster reduction and include it in their variousprogrammes. The Prime Minister also discussedthe matter during the Council of theGovernment, and called for a permanent coordinatingstructure of all the actors involved indisaster management. The Ministry of Interioris developing a permanent structure whichwill coordinate all phases of disaster managementincluding risk reduction measures,response and rehabilitation. The GeneralDirectorate of Civil Protection is shifting itsattention towards prevention activities. Thecurrent ruling political party in Algiers ispreparing to include disaster management inits program for a forthcoming legislative electioncampaign. Senior party officials are solicitingexpert advice from scientific and technicaladvisors in preparing their programme.Since the floods, international organizationshave joined forces to help in risk reduction projects.The Mayor of Paris paid a visit to theaffected areas and signed a memorandum ofcooperation between the Wilaya (province) ofAlgiers and the Atelier Parisien d’Urbanisme for aprogramme to promote better urban planningin Algiers. In early 2002, another Frenchorganization, Architecture-Urgence, signed aconvention for cooperation with the Wilaya ofAlgiers to work on urban planning to reducedisasters.The UN office in Algiers also installed a commissionto work on disaster reduction in Algeriaand engaged an Italian specialist to discussthe matter with Algerian authorities.UN- HABITAT proposed a cooperation projectin disaster reduction with the Algerian government.A World Bank delegation has similarlyvisited Algeria to discuss a long-termproject in disaster risk management. An expertin urban planning from USAID visitedAlgiers less than a month after the disaster todiscuss eventual cooperation in disaster reductionin urban areas with many Algerian institutions.USAID has expressed an interest inpreparing a project proposal for that purpose.Within the first six months after the disaster,several seminars or conferences related to disasterreduction were either held or being planned.An Algerian-French colloquium on sustainabledevelopment and disaster reduction took placein Algiers only weeks after the disaster. Similarcolloquia are planned for other regions of thecountry. All of these actions demonstrate thatAlgerian authorities at all levels are more awaretoday about the risks they face.Case: KazakhstanThe Republic of Kazakhstan often experiencesearthquakes, floods, landslides, and coastalfloods. Only recently has the importance ofnatural disaster reduction been recognized. InMay 2000, Kazakhstan’s Emergency SituationAgency published the Plan of Preparedness ofKazakhstan for Natural Disasters with thecooperation of the National Red Cross andRed Crescent Society and UNDP. The introductionof the plan cites the considerable financiallosses incurred by the country because ofdisasters and urges all organizations to takeproper action to reduce their negative impacton the country’s development. The report providesguidance on preparedness activities fordisaster reduction, response scenarios for disasters,legislation for efficient mobilization oforganizations concerned, and implementationof different measures that can be deployedagainst various risks.

The last earthquake to devastate Kazakhstantook place in 1911, less than 30km south of theformer capital, Almaty. The memory of thisevent has faded from the country’s collectiveconsciousness. Recognizing that the Armenianearthquake of 1988 occurred along seismicfaults that had shown little movement for over3,000 years, the Emergency Situation Agencyhas worked to increase public awareness aboutearthquake risks.This activity is deemed to be crucial as mostapartment blocks in Kazakhstan are similar tothose that collapsed in the Armenian earthquakeand in the Sakhalin earthquake of 1995.Even though the government’s Institute ofSeismology has been working since 1976 tomonitor seismic movement, the institute alsoundertakes risk assessments, evacuation scenarios,and the analysis of ground conditions aspart of its research activities.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionSome common limitations in most regionsThe designation of administrative arrangements or even thepassage of legislation provides only a basic framework for a disasterrisk reduction strategy. Policies alone do not reduce thevulnerabilities of people exposed to the risk of natural hazards.Despite the implementation of policies, acts and regulations byofficial departments, challenges often remain to develop morebroadly based practices throughout countries that involve differentministries and departments at national, provincial, districtor even municipal and village levels.In some countries, disaster management information has beenclassified or restricted, as a matter of public security. Whencombined with a lack of coordination between various governmentagencies, competing departmental issues or a persistentemphasis given to emergency response, the ability to cite a particulardecree or policy initiative is not necessarily a guarantee ofreal commitment or demonstrated practical abilities on theground.3The country also experiencies other riks too.Due to the rising water levels of the CaspianSea over the past 20 years, the Kazakh shorelinehas grown by 20-40 km and water hasencroached about 70 km inland. The nationalWater Resource Committee has reported thattotal costs for preventing losses from thisincreasing water level will exceed US$ 3-5 billion,as researchers work intensively to reducethese future risks. The northern slope of thewest Tengshan range, where Almaty is located,is exposed to floods, mud and debris flows,avalanches and landslides. In particular, landslidesthreaten areas where more than 150,000people are living. In May 2002, southern partsof Kazakhstan were affected by storms andheavy rainfall that caused serious flooding incities.Although disaster awareness issues are beingraised in scientific and official circles, there isstill a lack of general public awareness,although that is slowly changing. The EmergencySituation Agency has prepared manybrochures, pamphlets and videos to expand thegeneral awareness of these hazards, and thepublic seems to be responsive. A recent newspaperadvertisement for a new apartmentbuilding referred to the structure as being seismic-resistant,a comment that evoked noticeableinterest. On the other hand, people havenot yet understood that investment in disasterreduction is a sound long-term investment.Even among national focal points, there are few standard criteriathat would emphasize the recruitment of trained disaster riskmanagers. Authoritative positions are most frequently occupiedby career administrators who may or may not have any formalprofessional expertise or even familiarity with matters of riskmanagement. Frequent inter-agency transfers of civil serviceofficials further impede opportunities for national organizationsto develop institutional memories with the result of consequentand irrevocable loss of valuable experiences and lessons learned.In terms of policies, many countries assuredly advise that theyhave prepared state, provincial or district level emergency contingencyplans, while some do not have any national disaster riskmanagement system at all. In recent years, national buildingcodes have been drafted in countries that did not before havethem, although compliance and enforcement both remain veryproblematic in many of them. Thousands of buildings are constructedannually in known seismic areas, without incorporatingany established seismic resistance techniques.Population pressures or economic necessities, easily transformedinto local political issues can frustrate the consistent application offlood or landslide protection zoning. Incidence of corruption orthe lack of enforcement of existing policies and regulations areunfortunately much more evident than is generally acknowledgedeither officially or in diplomatic discourse, even though suchadministrative laxity has an important bearing on the effectivenessof any disaster risk reduction programme. It is only when legislationis able to place legal responsibility on specific officials whosedecisions or lack of effective action perpetuate continuing conditionsof vulnerability will risk reduction be able to be truly measured.111

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesCoherent and comprehensive approaches tobuilding institutional frameworks, at bothnational and local levels, are essential if one isto speak seriously of a sustained commitmentto disaster risk reduction. This includes theneed of policies and collaborative effortsamong sectors, departments and institutionswhich deal with the different layers of development.While governments need to encourage, directand support these efforts, the vitality and effectivenessof the resulting organizational frameworksand operational capabilities remainbased on the understanding and motivation ofpublic interests. This includes, particularly, theengagement of people with a wide circle ofskills and attributes ranging from educationalpractices to various forms of technical expertise.Acceptance of the necessity of risk management,coupled with direction and coordination,all backed by resources, are the hallmarks ofinstitutionalized capabilities. The primarychallenges and priorities to accomplish thesegoals include:• Government authorities understandingthe distinctiveness of disaster risk managementand the value of investing in riskreduction to protect the well-being andthe assets of society.• The recognition and acceptance of allocatingresources, over time, based on collectivejudgement about the needs of sustaineddisaster risk management is essential.Calculating and understanding therelative costs and benefits of anticipatoryprotection needs to be emphasiyed in contrastto sustaining much greater avoidablelosses.• All communities and countries need toassess variations in the intensity and theextent of hazards, evaluate local prioritiesand determine the relative degree of riskinvolved. This in turn will determine therequirements for sound institutionalframeworks.• The primary challenge is to begin with aself-assessment of national capacities –from government to local level – in riskawareness and management. While thiscan be done by using self-determined criteria,abundant expert guidance and specialistknowledge is available throughoutthe world.• Examples cited display the importance oftranscending the theoretical expression ofpolicy frameworks and legal instrumentsand realizing their actual effects, in practice.• National authorities and local leaders needto embrace policies that:- are realistic for the case at hand;- are linked to regulatory mechanismsthat are enforced or effect change;- have an obvious benefit understood bylocal communities;- have obvious political advantages forpolitical power holders;- have economic advantages to the privatesector;- can be implemented with availableresources.• The extent to which disaster risk reductionis identified as integral to fundamentalpolitical responsibility can encouragegreater sustained commitment in supportof long-term national development objectives.It is essential that policy directionand operational capabilities be developedin multiple areas of governance and civilsociety if a culture of prevention is to becultivated and extended to future generations.112

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction33.2. Regional cooperation, interaction and experienceHazards, like social affinities, often reflect regional characteristics grounded in the predominantgeographic conditions. Historic and common political features also contribute to shared experienceswithin different regions or sub-regions around the world. Regional dialogue gives addeddepth and force to combined national interests, as much as regional institutions can tap andchannel broader international expressions of intent into coordinated and better-suited, practicalactivities.While the impetus may vary in different regions, natural hazards and the risks they pose to peoplewho share geographic attributes present opportunities for neighbours to multiply their effortsin risk reduction.They do this by sharing skills and experiences, and by combining resources to develop resilienceto disasters. As disaster risk management encompasses a wider range of interests and abilities,there is a growing requirement for more political and professional interaction through multipleand innovative forms of regional cooperation. Regional cooperation embodies sensibility as muchas solidarity.A review of some examples of regional cooperation will show the scope of organizational frameworksemployed to galvanize cooperation in disaster risk reduction. The fact that only few ofthese examples display organizational developments created expressly for the purpose of disasterrisk management, highlight the extent to which risk issues pervade multiple dimensions of societyand rely upon the work of many people.The AmericasA major shift is now taking placein many of the countries in theAmericas with more attentionbeing given to risk reduction.Triggered by several major disastersduring the last decadesand further motivated by promotional and technicalcooperation efforts and networking carriedout during the nineties by regional and internationalorganizations in support of the IDNDRobjectives, the region has been fortunate todevelop relatively advanced concepts andunderstanding of risk management. This is theresult of combined efforts of social research,practical experience widely shared, and frequentopportunities to engage an expanding range ofprofessional interests.There have been additional and mutually reinforcingefforts and long-standing involvementof such agencies as the PAHO, IFRC, andOFDA/USAID. More recently, UNDP andUNICEF have joined in providing technicalcooperation, training and more public awarenessfor vulnerability and risk reduction. Otherorganizations have encouraged the developmentof new capabilities over many years, frequentlybuilt around specific strategic programareas, and in some cases within national disastermanagement organizations. These haveincluded decades of efforts by OAS, ten yearsof existence of the Network for Social Study ofDisaster Prevention in Latin America (LARED), and a number of individual academicinterests or initiatives.The probability of loss and damages associatedwith the presence and complex interactionbetween hazards and vulnerability is now agrowing preoccupation throughout the region.Although it is not always explicit in governmentand societal discourse, most people nowrecognise the relationship between failed orinadequate development practices and the constructionof social vulnerability and increasedrisk to disasters.113

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives114High level commitmentAt the Third Summit of the Americas held in QuebecCity, Canada in 2001, the assembled heads of statedeclared:“We commit to strengthening hemispheric cooperationand national capacities to develop a more integratedapproach to the management of natural disasters.We will continue to implement policies thatenhance our ability to prevent, mitigate and respondto the consequences of natural disasters. We agree tostudy measures to facilitate timely access to financialresources to address emergency needs.”A regional – hemispheric- conference focussing onrisk reduction practices was held in Costa Rica inDecember 2001, as a follow up to this Summit.Moreover, the relationship between environmentaldegradation and hazard incidence hasbeen increasingly brought to the forefront byinstitutions such as the Central American Commissionfor Environment and Development(CCAD), IUCN, IADB, CAF, the CaribbeanDevelopment Bank (CDB) and the WorldBank. Climatic variabilities as manifested byEl Niño/La Niña phenomenon has promptedthe World Meteorological Organization (WMO)together with regional organizations to gobeyond the scientific and technical researchconcerns and seek application of availableinformation for early warning and institutionalstrengthening for risk reduction.This commitment to a shift towards integratedrisk management to reduce the impact of disastershas several times been re-affirmed at thelevel of heads of state.Central AmericaThe impacts of consecutive major catastrophesbetween 1997 and 2001 have profoundlychanged the way disasters are conceptualizedin Central America (Panama, Costa Rica,Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador,Guatemala). The effects of the El Niño/LaNiña episodes of 1997/98 were the most severethis century. Hurricanes Georges and Mitch in1998 devastated the economies of the entireregion, in addition to causing much damage topersonal property from floods throughout thecountryside. The El Salvador earthquakes of2001 raised serious questions about the riskconsequences of land use and inadequate environmentalmanagement practices. The fact thathurricane Mitch damaged the interests of boththe poor population as well as the private commercialsector served to create a collective viewof the need for change.In addressing these conditions, the governmentsof the region, working together throughthe Coordinating Centre for the Prevention ofNatural Disasters in Central America (CEPRE-DENAC), have confirmed a political commitmentto risk reduction and reconstructionprocesses through social transformation. Theirexperience is a valuable example for theworld.However, challenges still remain in successfullymoving from the expression of politicalintentions to fundamentally changed policiesand practices. Advances will require enormousefforts at all levels of activity, including greatersocial consciousness, legislative and institutionalchanges, modified social practices, thereduction of corruption, and the mobilizationof private-sector and commercial interestgroups. The objetive is to instil a society-wideacceptance of sacrificing short-term gains inexchange for long-term sustained protectionfor social and environmental resources.This advance in political will has beenachieved through expanding regional integration.Governments and heads of state haveshown a readiness to proceed jointly, workingto achieve common purpose and throughshared resources. This is reflected by theendorsement of a Strategic Framework for theReduction of Vulnerability and Disasters in CentralAmerica, and the adoption of a Five YearPlan for the Reduction of Vulnerability and DisasterImpacts (1999-2004).The strategic framework identified six majorwork areas:• Strengthening national disaster organizations.• Developing early warning systems andstrategic plans.• Increasing research on hazards and vulnerability,including the promotion ofinformation exchange.

• Formulating distinctive risk reductionstrategies for specific sectors.• Providing mutual assistance in case of disaster.• Enhancing local level risk management.There has been more collaboration with communityand municipal based organisationssuch as the Community Network for Risk Management,the Federation of Community Organisationsand the Central American Municipal Federation.There is a promising expansion of programmesdedicated to reducing vulnerabilityto natural hazards at local levels, buildingnational capacities, and exchanging experienceand information regionally.Beginning in July 2001, UNDP launched atwo-year Regional Programme on Risk Managementand Disaster Reduction. This concentratesCommunity - based regional inititiveInitial consideration given to community-baseddisaster reduction outlooks were boosted by aGTZ-inspired project for Strengthening of LocalStructures for Disaster Mitigation (FEMID). Toundertake a regional approach for introducingrisk reduction considerations within local developmentframeworks, it used pilot activities in allsix Central American countries. Experiencegained in the use of early warning in local communitieswas applied to floods in the projectpilot zones. In the Masica area of northernHonduras it became a regional and internationalexample of good practice. After early warningschemes had been consolidated in different areas,local committees – formed to promote this singleactivity – began to develop a broader interest inother primary risk reduction issues. This thenled to some of the groups establishing new relationshipswith development agencies, as occurredin the Chepo area of Panama.on improving local risk management practices,within the framework of CEPREDENAC’sLocal Level Risk Management Programme, andstrengthening the capacities of national riskreduction systems. A new phase of the UNDPcoordinatedinter-agency Disaster ManagementTraining Programme (DMTP) is being designedto concentrate particularly on structuringnational risk scenarios, identifying key actorsand determining the priority research and trainingrequirements of the region.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionCoordinating Centre for the Preventionof Natural Disasters in Central AmericaCEPREDENAC has been key in realising these changes. Startingas an informal group of scientific and official responseorganizations in 1987, it has become the official Central AmericanIntegration System’s (SICA) specialized organization forrisk and disaster reduction strategies.Following the coordination and operational demands imposedby the devastating disasters in the final years of the 1990s, ithas proven crucial in tying together many professional abilitiesand regional political interests. Importantly, the regional strategycalled for the updating and completion of CEPREDENAC’sRegional Plan for Disaster Reduction. Since 1999, this hasbeen the vehicle by which CEPREDENAC has promotedaction identified by the governments and many other projectsthroughout the region.CEPREDENAC has gained status through its work plans withother specialized agencies. It has undertaken risk reductionactivities with PAHO in the health sector, the Housing andHuman Settlements Coordinating Committee in the housingand human settlements area, the Central American and PanamanianInstitute for Nutrition and the World Food Programmein food security matters, and the Central American TransportCommittee in communications and transport. It has pursuedadditional endeavours to further risk reduction with otherregional agencies in the fields of agriculture, water management,telecommunications, and electricity generation and distribution.CEPREDENAC has moved toward broader regional programmedevelopment, encouraging projects to be implemented bynational authorities or local groups. Recently, CEPREDENACand the Regional Unit for Technical Assistance (RUTA) publishedguidelines for the introduction of risk management practicesin rural development projects throughout the region. In asimilar vein, CEPREDENAC is now addressing risk issuesassociated with the important Puebla to Panama Logistical Corridor,undertaking more work with the private sector, the regionaland international banking community, and promoting riskreduction issues in Central American development agencies.With IADB, World Bank and Japanese funds CEPREDENAC isfinancing a Regional Prevention and Mitigation Programme tofinance projects favouring risk reduction proposed by nationalCEPREDENAC commissions. At the beginning of 2001 it createda Local Level Risk Management Programme with the supportof IADB and UNDP. Initial activities have involved the establishmentof a conceptual framework for risk management thatwill encourage programme activities, and the start of a systematicprocess of recording experiences in local level management inthe region. A third initiative is the institution’s Regional ActionPlan for Central America, financed by UNESCO with Dutch,German and French support. This regional programme providestraining for specialists in the use of technologies for analysinghazards, particularly the use of GIS applications.1153

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives116Another programme for regional collaborationand capacity building was launched by theSwiss Agency for Development and Cooperation followinghurricane Mitch. A Disaster PreventionProgramme (PREVAC) is conceived to runfrom 1999-2003 with a budget of US$ 5 million.Support is being offered to Honduras,Nicaragua and El Salvador responding to theproposals coming from the Strategic Frameworkfor Vulnerability and Disaster Reduction.The programme concentrates on raising awarenessof natural hazards, capacity building andinstitutional strengthening, and works with anarray of institutional actors including ministries,national disaster organizations, scientificand technical institutions and universities.The CaribbeanThe past decade, has seen in increase of multidisciplinarydiscussions regarding disaster andrisk management in the Caribbean. Since itsestablishment in 1991 by the Caribbean Community(CARICOM), the Caribbean DisasterEmergency Response Agency (CDERA) hasworked to create an expanding infrastructurefor a methodical approach for developing disastermanagement programmes among memberstates, including multi-island projects.Initiated to enable countries to cope moreeffectively in the aftermath of a disaster,increasingly, more emphasis has been given todisaster risk reduction as part of developmentand environmental concerns. The idea of disasterreduction has been introduced in mostregional initiatives at policy level, includingthrough the Programme of Action for SmallIsland Developing States, among the CARI-COM priority areas for action, and the programmesof the Association of Caribbean States(ACS).These interests are consistently re-enforced ona sub-regional basis by the biennial CaribbeanNatural Hazards Conferences organized by theprimary regional disaster management stakeholders.These typically have included the Universityof the West Indies (UWI), CDERA,USAID and UNDP. Furthermore, the issueof vulnerability assessment has become one ofthe key foreign policy areas of CARICOM,and it has been raised in several forums includingthe World Bank, IDB, OAS and the Com-monwealth Secretariat. At the Conference ofHeads of Government of the Caribbean Community(COHG), the highest collective decisionmakingbody in the region, the portfolio of disastermanagement and the environment hasbeen declared a matter of cabinet level responsibility.Other agencies have also contributed to capacitydevelopment in the Caribbean throughfunding of disaster management programmesimplemented by government agencies andNGOs. In 1991, CARICOM committeditself to establishing a permanent agency with afocus on preparedness and response planning,supported by its member states. Since thenCDERA has worked to broaden the disastermanagement agenda in the region.It contributed to the development of disastermanagement among member states, as well astraining and development of a core of professionalswho are a valuable source of expertisefor all countries. In partnership with a varietyof donors, the agency has executed a number ofprojects aimed at building the capacity ofmember countries in disaster management.Andean countries of South AmericaThe five countries of the Andean sub-region ofSouth America – Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador,Peru and Venezuela – live with a high level ofrisk and must often cope with disasters. Theseinclude the Huaraz Earthquake in Peru in1970; El Niño/La Niña episodes in 1982-1983and 1997-1998, the volcanic eruption of Nevadodel Ruiz in Colombia in 1985; and themudslides in Venezuela in 1999.The most common types of disasters in theregion are associated with earthquakes, volcaniceruptions, floods and droughts. From asocio-economic point of view, the highestimpact is from hydrometeorological disasters.Aside from the common historic and culturalroots shared by the countries, along with sometopographic similarities, their institutional cooperationis enhanced through the AndeanIntegration System. Growing interest in collaborationwas displayed when the AndeanDevelopment Corporation (CAF/ADC) estab-

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3PREANDINOA regional cooperation programmeThe overall objective of PREANDINO is toencourage and support the formulation of nationaland sectoral policies for risk reduction and disasterprevention and the development of modelsand forms of institutional organization that introducea preventive approach into developmentplanning (see specific country information in the previoussection on national institutional development).Its objectives at the regional level are:• To promote, support and offer guidance onthe organization of schemes and programmesfor horizontal cooperation betweenequivalent institutions in the Andean countries,so as to strengthen their technicalcapacity for studying and adopting preventivepolicies and programmes;• To promote region-wide risk prevention programmes,primarily those related to awarenessof the threats to which there is thegreatest vulnerability;• To ensure the feasibility of, and to support and coordinate, technical cooperation initiatives among theAndean countries;• To encourage supra-regional bodies and international organizations to propose and implement cooperationprojects at the national and regional levels;• To promote the institutionalization of prevention in the Andean region.Strategic areasTo reach its above objectives, PREANDINO has defined a strategy designed primarily to:• Incorporate risk prevention in State policy and in the institutional and civic culture in the Andean region;• Emphasize three areas for action: the dissemination of information on risk, improved institutional managementof risk reduction, and the inclusion of prevention in national, sectoral and territorial planning inthe public and private sectors in each country;• Attempt to ensure, from the very beginning, the strongest possible commitment to the objectives of theprogramme at the highest levels of decision-making in the public and private sectors;• Create the best possible conditions for the exchange of information between the Andean countries on institutionaldevelopments, planning experience, and methodological and technological progress in identifyingand evaluating threats, vulnerability and risk;• Make ongoing efforts in the region and in each country to ensure that more is done to reduce the risksthat affect people’s quality of life;• Create a favourable climate for international technical and financial cooperation in the countries of theAndean region, so that optimal, effective and coordinated use is made of the resources for risk reduction.At the operational level, the key players in this initiative are the respective countries’ national committees for riskreduction. These include representatives from the ministries of planning, science and technology, and the environment,as well as from national civil defence or disaster management agencies. All of these institutions are linkedthrough a network that allows participants to share information about their activities and by so doing, to shape indicatorsthat can gauge the effectiveness of disaster management. This cooperation is augmented by conferences andworkshops, which facilitate the exchange of information and provide a common basis by which to conductnegotiations with financial bodies.117

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeslished the Regional Programme for Risk Preventionand Reduction (PREANDINO) in late2000, in accordance with the mandate entrustedto them by the Presidents of the five Andeancountries in 1999. Under this mandate,CAF/ADC is coordinating the cooperationactivities necessary to strengthen and developrisk prevention standards and institutions ineach country and the principal regional projectsthat share those aims.This mandate is rooted in an earlier one, underwhich CAF/ADC, on request of the Presidentsof the region, made a study of the economic andsocial impact of El Niño on the countries of theregion in 1997-1998 and an analysis of existinginstitutions dealing with disaster prevention. Aone-year participatory study exercise was carriedout engaging several insitutions in eachcountry. A detailed technical and institutionalreview of each country outlined, in particular,institutional weaknesses and the need forregional coherence, thus PREANDINO.In the Andean countries, the use of disasterrisk management as a public policy tool withindevelopment organizations is still in the earlystages of development. A previous lack offocussed institutional frameworks explains therelatively limited degree of civil awarenessabout risk in all of the Andean countries.However, an emerging trend now recognisesthe need for concrete and determined actionfor the incorporation of disaster risk reductioninto the broader context of development initiatives.Information systems to support disaster riskmanagement are scarce in these countries.There is a lack of consolidated information orchannels for easy access to information aboutthe different hazards. The information which isavailable is often highly technical and is noteasily understood by a general audience.To counter these types of problems, PRE-ANDINO is supporting the construction of anetwork that will foster the exchange of experiencesand contacts. Committees of knowledgeare being established in each country to promotethe creation of permanent channels ofinformation exchange among research centres,producers of hazard-related information, andpotential users within individual professionalsectors.Additionally, the civil defence organizations ofthe region have met several times since 2000 toconsolidate a regional basis to improve coordinationof response and preparedness activities.The southern command force of the USA hassupported these efforts, among others. Theseactivities have led to the formal establishmentof an Andean Committee for Disaster Preventionand Response (CAPRADE) within the AndeanIntegration Community in July 2002. Thisimportant initiative is a sub-regional mechanismfor improved and integrated risk managementaction. It was developed in accordancewith the objectives of ISDR and supportedby several regional institutions andbilateral actors.118

AfricaSouthern AfricaPolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Extending south from theDemocratic Republic of theCongo and Tanzania, the SouthernAfrican Development Community(SADC) comprises fourteenmember states. With a populationof approximately 200 million,SADC includes the following countries;Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of theCongo, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique,Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa,Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.In general, Southern Africa has not beenviewed as particularly prone to natural hazards,nor has it historically recorded massive lossesfrom sudden-onset disasters. Primarily, themajor risks that have affected the region havebeen slow-onset disasters related to drought,epidemic and food insecurity.Until the early 1990s, perceptions of risk wereshaped predominantly by armed conflicts andtheir destabilising consequences. In such acontext, it is unsurprising that issues of naturaldisaster risk received little attention. To a significantextent, prevailing disaster managementcapabilities have typically been grounded inmore narrowly focused efforts to monitor agriculturalconditions and food availability, or toplan emergency relief contingency measuresfocussed almost exclusively on droughts.There are a number of regional initiatives thatare now contributing to the growth of disasterreduction in Southern Africa, but it is importantto understand their antecedents. These date fromthe formation of the Southern African DevelopmentCoordination Conference (SADCC) in 1980, whichhad, as one of its priorities, the diversification oftransportation and communications throughoutthe region. To reduce the dependence of landlockedcountries on South African infrastructure,major investments to improve regional road andrail links was undertaken. These were consideredvital to the growth of struggling economies, butto an even more immediate extent, such infrastructurewas crucial for the movement of foodand relief supplies across the region in times ofdrought, conflict or other emergencies.By recognizing the strategic importance offood security, SADCC also made the subject apriority sector for regional coordination. Tothis end, it established the Regional EarlyWarning Unit which was tasked with consolidatingcrop information provided by nationalearly warning units of the individual countries,and monitoring trends in regional food security.From their inception, these SADCC mechanismsplayed key roles in assessing and managingrisks by establishing systems for the earlydetection and response to conditions of potentialfood shortages. Unlike institutional developmentsin other regions of the world, thesefirst political engagements with disaster reductionin Southern Africa countries were drivenby the protracted ravages of drought or otherslow-onset emergencies.Meanwhile, other political, social, economicand environmental changes have continued toshape the risk landscape in Southern Africa.With rapidly growing populations, many ofwhich are without acceptable levels of socialservices or sufficient economic opportunities,and increasingly concentrated in urban areas,the countries of the region already know thatthey can expect to be exposed to more hazardousthreats in the future. Since the floodsthat affected much of the region in 2000-2001,there is a growing recognition in official quartersof a much wider range of sudden threats.119

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives120There also continues to be the possibility of moreintense examples of slow emerging conditions ofdrought and disease, exacerbated by variations inclimate, increasingly fragile natural environments,and persistent impediments to nationaldevelopment that affect human livelihoods.These concerns have provoked recognition atthe highest political levels of the pressing needto focus on regional cooperation and to allocatemore resources to risk reduction. This contexthas driven SADCC’s successor organization,the Southern African Development Community(SADC), to devote considerable attention toissues of public vulnerability, irrespective ofwhether potential disaster threats result fromclimatic hazards or conditions of poverty, andeven more recently, disease. While SADC’stechnical engagement in disaster reduction hascontinued to evolve, it is important to note thatthe overall purpose of the reconfigured regionalpolitical community is to foster the economicintegration and the promotion of peace andsecurity among its 14 member countries.SADC has taken an initiative to develop disastermanagement as a regional priority, with theestablishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group onDisaster Management in 1999. An ExtraordinarySummit for SADC Heads of State and Governmentwas convened in Maputo, Mozambiquein March 2000 to review the impactscaused by the floods across the region. At thissummit, representatives of the SADC countriesexpressed the need for improved institutionalarrangements for disaster preparednessand management of similar risks in the future.Efforts have now been initiated to developgreater cooperation within the region to reducerisk generally, and to focus more attentionspecifically on anticipating, mitigating andresponding to sudden-onset natural hazards,such as cyclone-triggered trans-boundaryfloods. Moreover, some of the national governmentsin the region are in the process ofamending their own disaster legislation to placegreater emphasis on the anticipation andreduction of natural and other related risks.In May 2000, the SADC Sub-Sectoral Committeeon Meteorology Meeting was convened. There,the Directors of National Meteorological andHydrological Services (NMHS) in the SADCcountries recommended that a regional projectbe formulated to address and strengthen thelocal capacities of national meteorological andhydrological services for early warning anddisaster preparedness. A month later, theSADC Committee of Ministers for Water recommendedthat a strategic and coordinatedapproach be developed to manage floods anddroughts within the region. These decisionsunderlined the particular importance attributedto coordination of the technical abilitiesrequired to contribute to the early warning ofnatural disasters and to ensure the effectiveimplementation of related preparedness andmitigation activities. By August 2000, theSADC Council of Ministers approved anoverarching SADC Disaster ManagementFramework for an integrated regional approachto disaster management and established a fullTechnical Steering Committee on Disaster Management.By the end of 2001, SADC had developedand approved a multi-sectoral disastermanagement strategy for the region, and theSADC Water Sector Coordination Unit had drafteda Strategy for Floods and Drought Managementin the SADC Region.The SADC’s secretariat is in Gaborone,Botswana. It is responsible for developing anintegrated disaster management strategy and forcoordinating the efforts of other SADC technicalsectors whose work directly relates to disasterreduction. Several of SADC’s key technicalunits play critical roles in disaster reduction.The SADC Food, Agriculture and NaturalResources (FANR) sector gives specific attentionto the protection of regional food security.Its Regional Early Warning Unit (REWU) providesmember states and the international communitywith advance information on foodsecurity prospects in the region. This includesproviding information about food crop performance,alerts of possible crop failure andother factors affecting food supplies.The unit also conducts assessments coveringfood supply and demand, and makes projectionson related matters such as food importsand exports, the identification of areas oraffected populations threatened by food insecurity,as well as threatening climate conditionsthat could trigger food insecurity. The FAOhas long supported FANR with, among otherinformation, data from its Global InformationEarly Warning System (GIEWS).

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Objectives of the SADC strategy for floods and drought management in the regionSource: SADC Water Sector Coordination Unit, 2001The Regional Remote Sensing Unit (RRSU) ofFANR collaborates closely with the RegionalEarly Warning Unit by working to strengthennational and regional capabilities in the area ofremote sensing and GIS applications. It offersa range of specialized services for use in earlywarning for food security and natural resourcesmanagement, including training agro-meteorologistsin the use of satellite imagery products.It processes and disseminates a variety of satelliteinformation pertaining to meteorologicalconditions, vegetation distribution, crop outlooksand other development indicators. It isalso used to monitor and map land use patterns,land degradation and desertification conditions.The resulting information is distributedto a wide-range of users throughoutSouthern Africa, including government ministries,private trading and industrial sectors,banking and finance groups, farming organi-zations, NGOs, and international developmentassistance organizations.While the RRSU has already provided importantdata related to seasonal flood and droughtrisk, it anticipates being able to strengthen itscapacities in disaster reduction by generatingan integrated flood and drought risk profile forSouthern Africa in cooperation with the USGeological Survey. In a more general sense,RRSU can assume even wider importance toregional cooperation in disaster reduction asthe combined effects of climate variation andthe needs for monitoring environmental conditionsbecome more integrated into future riskmanagement practices.Despite the specific nature of its name, theSADC Drought Monitoring Centre (DMC)located at the Zimbabwe Meteorological Servicehas a primary responsibility to monitor climateextremes, especially as they relate to121

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives122droughts and floods. By working closely withall of the national meteorological and hydrologicalservices in the region, and with technicalsupport provided by the WMO, the centregenerates highly-regarded seasonal rainfallforecasts and provides additional climateanalysis and information. It also producesregional climate data, synoptic reviews andweather outlooks, semi-processed globalocean-atmospheric data, monthly and seasonalforecast updates, and a ten-day drought watchfor the SADC region. The centre providesopportunities to develop the technical and analyticalabilities of staff, drawn from nationalmeteorological and hydrological services in theregion, through a secondment programme. Italso manages meteorological and climate databanksfor the region.Every year, the DMC coordinates the SouthernAfrica Region Climate Outlook Forum (SAR-COF). Beyond playing a crucial role in forecastingseasonal rainfall, SARCOF has provento be a useful process that extends climateanalysis and training practices to an expandingrange of multi-sectoral users in SouthernAfrica. As the awareness of risk reductionbecomes a matter of pressing national andregional concerns, and the consequences ofchanging climatic conditions are more apparenton both environmental and water-relatedissues, the compilation and dissemination ofmulti-sectoral information by regional mechanismssuch as SARCOF will assume evengreater future importance.Both the SADC Water Resources Sector and theSADC Environment and Land Management Sector(ELMS) have crucial roles to play in developingpolicies and strategies for water resources andenvironment and land management issues in allSADC countries. The water sector has longgiven attention to the development of cooperativeagreements on shared river basins, but thefloods of 2000 and 2001 underlined the need forgreater attention to regional flood risk, in additionto recurrent drought. The need for interstatecooperation associated with water-relatedhazards in Southern Africa is particularly acuteas there are more than ten shared watercourses inthe region, with the largest, the Zambesi Riverflowing through nine different countries.The successful implementation of this disasterreduction strategy rests on interaction betweendifferent technical and administrative networksacross Southern Africa. In May 2001, an integratedStrategy for Flood and Drought Managementin the SADC Region was approved forimplementation over a four year period. Thestrategy focuses on preparedness and contingencyplanning, early warning and vulnerabilityinformation systems, mitigation measures,response activities and recovery strategies.The process involves regular consultationsthrough which the heads of disaster management,early warning, meteorology and waterauthorities from individual countries in SouthernAfrica will meet with SADC technical counterpartsin order to monitor progress and addressimpediments to reduce drought and flood-relateddisasters. This process has been complementedby the US Geological Survey’s support forthe development of flood and drought maps forthe region.Fifty real-time and coordinated data collectionstations are currently being installed in elevenSouthern African countries under the SADCHydrological Cycle Observing System (SADC-HYCOS). These stations and the informationthat they gather are expected to make majorimprovements in the timely availability of dataand to provide more real-time data transmissionand the dissemination of essential transboundaryhydrological information for floodforecasting. This EU-funded project is beingimplemented by the SADC Water SectorResources in association with the nationalhydrological services of the participating countries.In addition, the Zambesi River Authority(ZRA) was established by Zambia and Zimbabwein 1998 to coordinate their decisions onwater use, power generation, and upstream anddownstream risk consequences of their watermanagement policies. Following the 2000floods, the ZRA formed a Joint OperationsTechnical Committee with Hidroeléctrica deCabora Bassa in Mozambique to share dataand technical information about the operationsof their respective Kariba and Cabora Bassareservoirs. Their collaboration is an importantexample of shared institutional efforts byneighbouring countries to provide early warningfor floods and to monitor water levels forpower generation. This regional cooperation isfurthered by the weekly exchange of data and

y the conduct of monthly meetings during thecritical rainy season.The ELMS has undertaken a number of projectsrelated to land use practices as well as theconservation of environmental conditionswhich can reduce both flood and droughtproneconditions. ELMS has also been designatedas the coordinating authority withinSADC for all matters related to climate change,which places it in the forefront of inter-agencycooperation and collaboration to reduce the riskof future hydro-meteorological hazards.The SADC’s Health Sector works closely withthe WHO’s Inter-Country Office for SouthernAfrica, having long recognized the publichealth aspects of disasters. Programmes suchas the WHO-Southern Africa Malarial ControlProgramme address the causative factors of hazardsin creating epidemics. The very close correlationthat exists between temperature, precipitationand the incidence of malaria in specific locationsunderlines the essential cooperationbetween all of these various sectors relating towater, climate, land, environment, health anddisaster risk management practices.While not specifically a SADC institution, butsharing a common interest in furthering multi-Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductiondisciplinary collaboration, through expandedinformation exchange, the Southern AfricaResearch and Documentation Centre in Harare,Zimbabwe has published many professionalpapers and books that demonstrate both thebreadth and depth of related interests in theregion.One of the most pressing challenges in implementingprogressive disaster risk managementlaws and policies is the region’s pervasivesocio-economic and environmental vulnerabilities.When they are combined with theconsequences of increased climate variability,such as more intense drought events, as wellas cyclones and heavier rainfall, the urgencyto position disaster risk reduction becomes animportant development priority.The disaster reduction challenge at the beginningof the 21st century is to link creative andcoordinated strategies such as those outlinedabove that can reduce the impact of futureuncertain risks, with ongoing developmentefforts that can minimize prevailing vulnerabilitiesand hardships. If risks remainunchecked, they will accelerate an already spirallingtrend toward greater disaster-relatedlosses, human inequities, and weakened societies.3A Comparison of Rainfall and Malaria by Year in ZimbabweSource: Southern Africa Malaria Central Programme. WHO Countryand Inter-country office, Harare, Zimbabwe.123

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives124AsiaThere has been a discerniblegrowth in the attention to policyframeworks and structures forregional collaboration in disasterrisk reduction throughout Asia.In contrast to some other geographicregions, such as Latin Americaand theCaribbean, the regional collaboration in Asiaappears to stem less from the consequences ofa single devastating disaster. Rather it appearsto result more from shared outlooks emergingfrom different professional interests. In manyof the examples reviewed here, a growingawareness and involvement with broader riskissues is becoming evident in regional forumsthat previously adopted more narrow conceptsof crisis and emergency, or in some cases maynot have previously anticipated risk in explicitterms.It may be difficult at the present time to identifya clear and unambiguous approach to disasterrisk reduction among the many cultural,social, and political distinctions in Asian societies,but there is nonetheless a clear movementto identify, and begin to address disaster risks.While disaster management agencies are grapplingwith the changing world before them,people devoted to other features of nationalsocio-economic development are emerging aspotential allies in reducing disaster risk. Theseinclude policy-makers and practitionersinvolved in such areas as environmental management,climate variation, natural resourceutilization, regional planning, the constructionor protection of infrastructure, education andpublic communications, and public administration.Over the past two years, a Regional ConsultativeCommittee on Regional Cooperation in DisasterManagement (RCC) has been convened by theAsian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)with AusAid’s support, comprising heads ofnational disaster management authorities oroffices from 24 countries in Asia. Membershave endorsed the importance of the RCC as aforum to exchange information and experienceregarding national disaster risk managementsystems. Annual meetings held in 2000 and2001 have addressed capacity building andreviewed experiences of new legislation, policyand institutional reform, and related planningprocesses. Both meetings recommended thewider sharing of experiences to enable countriesdeveloping new or modified legislation orinstitutional arrangements, to learn from theexperiences of others in the region, as well as todevelop disaster risk management plans atnational, provincial and local levels. Throughthese actions, the RCC has served to consolidateand strengthen regional and sub-regionalcooperative initiatives, even though the variouspriorities and interests of the countries mayvary.Specifically, the second of these meetings urgedall RCC member countries to adopt a TotalDisaster Risk Management Strategy that wouldrepresent “a comprehensive approach to multihazarddisaster risk management and reduction,which includes prevention, mitigation andpreparedness in addition to response andrecovery.” Several primary areas of action wereidentified to advance this approach in comingyears:• Developing community level programmesfor preparedness and mitigation.• Building capacity within national disastermanagement systems.• Promoting cooperation and enhancing themutual effectiveness of programmes ofsub-regional mechanisms such as those ofASEAN, SAARC, SOPAC, ICIMODand MRC.• Creating awareness and promoting politicalcommitment through regional initiatives.The third RCC meeting, to be co-hosted bythe Government of India in New Delhi inNovember 2002, will review the progress madethroughout the region.Information on these initiatives and the experiencesof several countries in the Asian regionwere shared in a regional workshop on legaland institutional frameworks, and planning fordisaster risk management held in April 2002 inBangkok. The workshop, organized by ADPCwith funding provided by the ECHO,OFDA/USAID and ADB, provided a venueto share experiences and discuss issues aboutwhat is working, and what needs to beimproved in the institutionalisation of riskreduction efforts. This workshop providedanother opportunity to establish links and to

develop closer working relationships amongindividuals and institutions involved in disastermanagement policy and planning in the region.At the next phase, projects will be identifiedwhich can assist countries in documenting theprocesses involved, as well as highlighting bestpractices to disseminate for the benefit of awider audience.In a similar fashion, the Asian Disaster ReductionCenter (ADRC) has worked to foster cooperationamong countries in Asia. A multi-lateralorganization for disaster reduction based inKobe, Japan, ADRC is composed of 23 AsianMember Countries plus four additional AdvisoryCountries.By networking with focal points in each governmentand by facilitating the exchange of disasterrisk management information amongthem, it strives to identify their acute needs andcontributes towards the further development ofhuman resources dedicated to the subject inAsia. Beyond its immediate Member Countries,ADRC also works to strengthen networkingamong other relevant organizations workingwith disaster risk management in Asia, suchas UN-OCHA, UNCRD, ADPC, CREDand OFDA/USAID. It conducts studies andencourages research that will contribute to puttingdisaster management technologies to practicaluse. This includes coverage about the useof geographic information systems and satelliteinformation systems, as well as the introductionon its website of new products and techniquesthat are useful for disaster reduction such asanti-earthquake reinforcement, and methodsfor preventing landslides.ADRC has launched cooperative projects todevelop the disaster management capacities ofMember Countries, based on their respectiverequests. It provides financial and technicalsupport for selected activities, and then disseminatesthe outcomes and lessons from theprojects among its Member Countries and toother nations around the world. These programmesinclude the promotion of educationalprogrammes to develop disaster reductioncapacities, (community-based flood disastermitigation project in Indonesia, school educationalprogramme for disaster reduction in thePhilippines); activities that increase professionalskills for emergency search and rescuePolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction(urban search and rescue training programmein Singapore); furthering the development anddissemination of technical knowledge by invitingvisiting researchers from Member Countriesto ADRC, and by conducting short-termvisitor training programmes.Regional cooperation is promoted by ADRC’smanagement of an information database onnatural disaster reduction in Asia. With a particularfocus on matters of legislation, disastermanagement, training and country reports,their website shares lessons for disaster reductionamong Asian countries. ADRC alsoorganizes international conferences and workshopsto discuss the status of disaster reductionactivities in Asia. In 2002, it held the FourthADRC International Meeting in New Delhi,co-organized by the governments of India andJapan, followed immediately by a second meetingof the same regional participants to discussISDR involvement in Asia. Later in the year,ADRC and OCHA jointly conducted theRegional Workshop on Networking and Collaborationamong NGOs of Asian Countries inDisaster Reduction and Response in Kobe,Japan.With common objectives but different emphasis,both ADPC and ADRC have cooperatedwith OCHA to organize consultative meetingsof regional institutions, UN agencies and multilateraldevelopment assistance organizations.The first meeting was held in Kathmandu in2001 and more recently in June 2002 anotherwas conducted in Bangkok. This second consultativemeeting focussed on the concepts ofTotal Disaster Risk Management and discussedemerging international partnerships forreduction of risk and vulnerability to naturalhazards with additional partners in the region.These included the longstanding interactionwith UNDP programmes and IFRC activitiesin South East Asia, as well as further collaborationwith the USAID Regional Office inManila and the European Commission’sregional DIPECHO programmes based inBangkok. Additional interests in regionalcooperation for total disaster risk managementstrategy were expressed by the Asian DevelopmentBank, the International Institute of DisasterRisk Management (IDRM), EmergencyManagement Australia, ICIMOD, andASEAN.3125

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives126The 11th ASEAN meeting was held in ChiangRai, Thailand, in August 2000 and endorsed theurgent development of an ASEAN Regional Programmeon Disaster Management (ARPDM).With technical assistance extended by ADPCand financial support provided by the EuropeanUnion, the ASEAN secretariat andmember countries have reached an advancedstage of planning. This new regional programmewill guide cooperative action inASEAN member countries in the followingcore areas of activity:• Planning and conducting joint projects.• Collaborating on research and encouragingnetworks among member countries.• Building capacities and developinghuman resources in areas of priority concern.• Sharing information, best practices, anddisaster management resources.• Promoting partnerships among variousstakeholders including governmentauthorities, NGOs, community and internationalorganizations.• Promoting advocacy, public awarenessand education programmes related to disastermanagement.The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) is anotherregional platform composed of the ASEANcountries and 13 additional dialogue partners(Australia, Canada, China, Eu, India, JapanKorea, Mongolia, New Zealand, Papua NewGuinea, Russian Federation and USA). It isconvened to develop mutual confidence-buildingmeasures and to promote dialogue onregional security concerns. Under its umbrella,several groups have been established to promotecooperation in specific areas includingdisaster relief and marine search and rescue.Four inter-sessional meetings on disaster reliefhave taken place in Wellington (1997),Bangkok (1998), Moscow (1999), and Hanoi(2000). These meetings have included delegationsfrom ministries of foreign affairs, defence,and disaster management from all ARF membercountries and have thus provided a uniqueplatform for discussions at high levels focussedon multiple aspects of disaster management. Inaddition to these meetings, some specificachievements of ARF include a series of trainingactivities, developing a matrix of past cooperationin disaster relief among member countries,conducting an inventory of early warningsystems and drafting guidelines for post-disasterresponsibilities.Among the seven countries which belong tothe South Asia Association for Regional CooperationSAARC (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives,Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) issuesof disaster risk management have been periodicallytouched upon by the SAARC TechnicalCommittee on Environment, Meteorology andForestry. A regional study was conducted onthe Consequences of Natural Disaster, and Protectionand Preservation of the Environment in 1992.Most recently at a meeting of the TechnicalCommittee in January 2002 reference wasmade to “the need for mechanisms to promotecapacity building and technology transfer tosupport natural disaster management”. It wasfurther stressed that together with concernsabout the negative impacts which climatechange exerts in the region, a common SouthAsian position should be developed on theseissues in international forums.There have also been regular and continuedendorsements of inter-state cooperation in naturaldisaster management and resulting declarationsat SAARC Summit Meetings, even ifthey have seldom occupied primary attentionamong the many regional issues, typically onthe agendas. However, at the most recent 11thSummit Meeting of SAARC held in January2002 in Kathmandu, the view was more explicitlyexpressed as, “the Heads of State or Governmentfelt a strong need to devise a mechanismfor cooperation in the field of early warning,as well as preparedness and managementof natural disasters, along with programmes topromote the conservation of land and waterresources”.As all SAARC member countries are exposedto similar hazards, they have much operationalexperience in disaster risk management thatcould be exchanged to a considerably greaterextent than is currently the case. Importantareas that could benefit from cooperationinclude training, the exchange of both operationaland technical professional information,the exchange of government officials, and coordinationin policy formulation and implementation,especially in the case of disasters affectingneighbouring countries. The reduction of risksassociated with transboundary hazards is a particularlyurgent area in which to expand formal

mechanisms among SAARC countries forcooperation and improved coordination.There are other technical frameworks in Asiathat focus increasing attention on the consequencesof natural hazards. The application ofseasonal climate prediction and forecasting as anintegral part of comprehensive risk managementis one such example. The unprecedentedbreadth of impacts associated with the ElNiño/La Niña events during 1997-99 acrossmany sectors in South East Asian countriesunderlined the need for effective, and continuing,risk assessments. As climate became acceptedas a major determinant in contributing torecurrent risks, the meteorological services ofthe region have worked in close partnership withan increasingly wide range of sectoral agencies.Regional institutions such as ADPC have alsobecome more involved in working with nationalagencies and technical institutions to studythe impacts of past extreme climate events inorder to anticipate and mitigate the impacts offuture occurrences. Innovative capacity-buildingactivities have brought together specialistsfrom a variety of resource management responsibilitiesto assess and manage the commonrisks posed by climate variability. In May2002, a two-week workshop on the applicationsof climate information was organizedjointly by ADPC and the Thai MeteorologicalDepartment. It brought together, for the firsttime, meteorological forecasters, waterresource managers, agriculture sector managersand food logisticians. By working togetherand blending their respective professionaltalents, the participants assessed the risksposed by climate variability in the region andworked to develop strategies to minimize orreduce those risks. Such activities illustrate agradual movement towards the introduction ofrisk management concepts in other resourcemanagement sectors beyond traditional or singulardisaster management organizations.International relationships at the regional levelare a key requirement in the development ofeffective flood early warning systems as riverspass from one country to another. The developmentof expanded institutional capacities ofthe Mekong River Commission over the yearsis a fine example of good regional cooperationamong countries in the Mekong River Basin inSoutheast Asia.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionThe Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Programme(AUDMP) is being implemented byADPC with core funding provided byOFDA/USAID. It is founded on the overarchingbelief that loss of life and property fromdisasters hinder sustainable development, andthat such losses can be reduced if appropriatemethodologies are introduced through differentaspects of city administration. With a concentrationof both risks and resources, cities canrepresent a crucial focus to reduce vulnerability.Early warning in CambodiaAlthough there is a system for tracking river levels, there isstill no proper early warning system that will provide informationto disaster-prone populations, and there is no centralizedinformation centre. To address this and otherissues, the UN Disaster Management Team in Cambodiais currently supporting the develoment of a regional networkfor disaster management and mitigation in theMekong countries. This is to reduce the vulnerability ofthe poorest residents to the negative impacts of disastersand to protect broad based development gains.Response to ISDR questionnaire from Cambodia, 2001.The programme’s goal is to reduce disastervulnerability of urban populations, infrastructure,lifeline facilities and shelter in Asia byestablishing sustainable public and private sectormechanisms for disaster mitigation. Asgood governance and decentralization of governingresponsibilities are high on most countries’political agenda, AUDMP promotescountry initiatives that can demonstrate theworthwhile value of strategic approaches tourban risk reduction as part of urban developmentplanning processes.Working to common standards in associationwith partner organizations in 10 Asian countries,AUDMP works to build the capacities oflocal authorities, national governments,NGOs, businesses and others institutions thatcan contribute to urban disaster mitigation.Primary tools employed are facilitating organizationalnetworks, sharing knowledge and successfulexperiences and promoting dialogueamong key stakeholders. By these means, it isanticipated that successful mitigationapproaches can be replicated in other cities andcountries worldwide.1273

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesRisk reduction practices employed includephysical measures such as flood protectionembankments or safe building designs, butthey also include the promotion of otherpractical measures ranging from legislation,training, public awareness and advocacy thatfurther risk reduction. AUDMP supportactivities ranging from hazard mapping tocreating improved policy environments indisaster-prone countries.Information on these initiatives and theexperiences of several countries in the Asianregion have been shared further in a RegionalWorkshop on Legal and InstitutionalFrameworks, and Planning for DisasterManagement held in April 2002 inBangkok, Thailand. The workshop provideda venue for sharing experiences and discussingcrucial issues about the developmentof disaster risk management policies, legaland institutional frameworks, and the developmentof specific plans. The next phase ofthe projects initiated by ADPC will assist thecountries to document the process as well asbest practices, which can be disseminated forDemonstration projects undertaken by AUDMP partner organizations in 10 Asian countries vary widely inaccordance with local priorities.In Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Thailand the focus is on floods, while India, Indonesia and Nepal concentrateon earthquakes. The Philippines and Sri Lanka address multiple hazards. Laos is concerned with urban fire,and Viet Nam pursues housing requirements in flood-prone areas. Some of the specific project activities andlessons include the following:• Hazard mapping and risk assessment: Projects in Sri Lanka and Philippines have demonstrated methodologyfor development of urban land use plans through integration of risk reduction measures. Projects inBangladesh and Cambodia demonstrate community-based approaches.• Mitigation planning and implementation: Lessons learned from AUDMP initiatives demonstrate that theplanning and implementation of disaster risk reduction practices should involve government officials, communityorganizations, and NGOs working in partnership.• Public awareness and education: Different approaches, tools and products have been used in public awarenesscampaigns for different audiences in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal and Sri Lanka.• Capacity building: AUDMP’s approach to training, resource materials and continuing education is todevelop generic curricula on urban disaster mitigation, which are then adapted and institutionaliyed at thenational and local levels through national partner training institutes.• Safer building construction: Country projects have carried out detailed analysis of existing building constructionpractices and the condition of existing building codes, acts, bylaws and/or construction guidelinesto find ways to increase the effectiveness. Different initiatives have promoted safer construction in India,Indonesia, Nepal and Sri Lanka.• Community based approaches to disaster mitigation: As the community is where physical, social and economicrisks can be most adequately assessed and managed, community-based disaster risk reductioninvolves public participation in assessment, planning and implementation activities which take full accountof a community’s vulnerabilities and capacities. The country projects in Bangladesh and Cambodia specificallyfocus on the importance of people’s perception of flood risks, the purpose and tools of communityflood risk assessment, and the strategies for community organizing, resource mobilization and capacitybuilding.• Policy, legal and institutional arrangements: Sound policies and legislation for disaster mitigation, as wellas institutional arrangements that have clear lines of responsibilities need to be in place. AUDMP’s projectpartners in Indonesia and Sri Lanka have taken the initiative to review country policies related to disastermanagement.128

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Table: Sample criteria for accomplished disaster reduction. AUDMPBasic PrinciplesFactor ComponentsLevel ofImpactDescriptionEnactment and Modificationof Disaster ReductionPoliciesNational LevelHigh• The programmes has directly or indirectly influenced nationallevel policies in more than ten countries of Asia.• Policy modified or established to facilitate action: at least fourCity Municipal LevelMedium• At least eight municipal plans written or revised during the programmeperiod• Municipal bylaws modified• Municipality level Disaster Management Units establishedCommunity LevelHigh• The Cambodian project under AUDMP (Flood hazard mitigationprogramme) is basically a community-based programme. Italso influenced the community level. Several community-basedinitiatives were implemented (e.g., DMC ward No. 34 in KathmanduMetropolitan City)Assistance in IntegratingDisaster Risk Reductionin GovernanceDisaster Reduction incorporatedin national plan and policiesMedium• Background work done for incorporation in several countries• Municipalities in the process of incorporating disaster reductionin their agendaPoverty Alleviation and DisasterReductionLow• Background works done for incorporation in severalcountriesState Commitments for DisasterFree EnvironmentLow• Active participation in AUDMP national project by national andmunicipal governments• Indirect commitment expressed by government ministers, secretaries• National Committee for Earthquake Safety Day established inNepal• Additional investment of 5% of AUDMP budget from non-AUDMP sources• In-kind contribution additionalEnactment of Regulations forDisaster ReductionMedium• This is found to be a slow and complex process. AUDMP,together with other programmes, has influenced the process insome of the partnering countriesCreation of ImplementationMechanismsMedium• This is found to be a slow and complex process. AUDMP,together with other programmes, has influenced the process insome of the partnering countriesAwareness-RaisingAwareness-raising programmesHigh• Disaster Reduction Days established in Sri Lanka andBangladesh• Several thousand people made aware• Assessment, scenario and action planning found as a great toolfor awareness raisingAwareness-raising materialsHigh• Posters, pamphlets, handbooks, fliers prepared and distributed inproject cities• Other materials in the process of being preparedInstitutionalization of AwarenessraisingprogrammesHigh• Earthquake Safety Day observed in Nepal on an annual basissince 1999.• Disaster reduction days observed annually in Sri Lanka andBangladesh129

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesBasic PrinciplesFactor ComponentsLevel ofImpactDescriptionTrainingTraining curricula and materialsHigh• Improved access to hazard mitigation techniques and skills• More than 5% or public and private sector professionals trained indisaster management• Number of trained professionals: 150+• Twelve institutions in the region conduct training programmes regularly,based on the training curricula developed under AUDMPTraining institutionalizationHigh• A network of Asian disaster management training institutions(ADMIT) established• 30% annual increase in AUDMP network• First year baseline: 25 institutionsPromotion of PublicCommitmentsCreation and updating of DisasterMitigation Acts and RegulationsMedium• AUDMP process has greatly influenced the process of writingnew or revising existing legal process• SOP for municipalities written in BandungCreation and Reforming ofDisaster Management Councilsand CommitteesLow• Background work done by respective partnering institutions inAUDMP countries and cities leading to realization of needs• Disaster management committee(s) created at central, municipaland community levels in Nepal and Sri Lanka.Preparation of Disaster RiskMedium• Action Plans created and in the process of implementation in partneringcities• Number of operational plans developed: tenReduction Plans and ProgrammesMedium• This is found to be a slow and complex process. AUDMP, togetherwith other programmes, has influenced the process in some ofthe partnering countriesPublic Commitments in ActionLow• Community participation in the development process has been arecognized method by countries of the region. AUDMP processhas developed it further by implementing community-based disasterrisk reduction process in the partner citiesCommunity ParticipationNational CommitmentMedium• All the demonstration projects in AUDMP have developed mechanismsfor community participation in disaster mitigation work asappropriate to the countriesSetting up of mechanisms ofcommunity participationLow• Need for improvements realized in countries where it was lacking,but there has not been significant progress in legal status of NGOsin those countries.Enhancing Role of NGOImproved legal statusHigh• Partnership mechanism established, but need to make sustainableMechanism of PartnershipLow-Medium• Tremendous increase in the responsibilities. A successful NGOworking in Disaster Risk Reduction is overwhelmed by theincrease in its responsibilities as perceived by the government, thecommunity and even by the private sector. This is expected to createthe demand for improved legal status in countries where it isyet lacking.Internalizing disasterreduction as a way of lifeand cultureResponsibility enhancementMedium• Demands for improved safety started being expressed from thepopulation• Fatalism greatly reduced in project influence areas and zones, butneed to sustain the efforts: Examples are:- People bought in, even in Bandung where there was no earthquakeduring the past several hundred years.- Success in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal; Bandung, Indonesia; Ratnapuraand Nawalpitiya in Sri Lanka130

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Challenges for regional interaction in AsiaThe following issues have been cited by Asian practitioners as contributing to either sporadic or inconsistentattention being accorded to disaster risk reduction in international exchanges or regionally-basedendeavours:Tunnel vision that relegates risk awareness to marginal consideration in contrast to predominantpolitical visibility in responding to disasters that have occurred.Different constituencies and mandates pertaining to various sectors of disaster risk management.Scarcity of resource allocations for risk reduction, in contrast to emergency response.Weak or inconsistent reliance on dynamic risk assessments in national development strategies.No single umbrella organization representative of regional interests and priorities related to disasterrisks.Lack of awareness, policy or economic motivation to include disaster risk impact analysis in projectdesign.Different, over-lapping or over-looked, geographical coverage of countries’ or donor’s interests andproject distribution.Lack of programmatic mechanisms for matching regional providers with local needs – decisionsoften influenced more by political affinities than potential disaster risks.Nationalist motivations, or competing initiatives and duplication among donor interests.Bilateral versus multilateral initiatives, donor, or supply-side influenced projects.National policy objectives contrasting with broader regional collaboration.Insufficient working-level cooperation and knowledge transfer, duplication of information collectionand dissemination.Limited opportunities for dialogue on a regional level. Lack of structured communication andknowledge of other agencies’ programmes.the benefit of a wider audience. The followingtable gives an indication of criteria beingconsidered as suitable measures to gaugeaccomplishment in selected areas of responsibilityacross the region.From the AUDMP expereince, the followingconditions highlight current constraints whichremain to be addressed:• Lack of interest and willingness of governmentsand organizations to takeresponsibility.• Other political preoccupations or institutionalimpediments.• Scarcity or non-allocation of funds andhuman resources.• Lack of awareness of roles of other agencies.• Lack of recognized mechanisms for informationsharing and coordination.• Lack of consistent donor policies or limiteddonor collaboration.• Cooperation not sufficiently institutionalisedwithin countries, so that if a keyindividual leaves, cooperation and collaborationmay lapse.• Different, overlapping concepts of subregions,or even definitions of the Asianregion.The extent of cultural variation and politicaldiversity across Asia works against regionalcooperation. However, at least some of theselimitations could be overcome, or measurestaken to resolve them if the international donorcommunity and regional organizations alikecould work towards a more consistent andfocussed approach to accord disaster riskreduction a more distinctive and visible role indevelopment strategies.Pacific small island developing statesPacific small island developing states and territotiesquite diverse in their physical and economiccharacteristics and exemplify many differentcultures, languages and traditional practices.Most of these island countries comprisetiny areas of land widely dispersed throughoutthe Pacific Ocean, so that even within singlecountries, the distance between islands can beenormous.131

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe scattered distribution of these island states,together with their small size and relative isolation,makes development activity distinctive fromother parts of the world and quite costly. Humansettlements range from traditional rural villageswhere most people live, to rapidly growing modern,commercial cities. There are many forms ofland tenure throughout the region, but most arebased on communal land ownership throughwhich a large amount of joint community controlis retained over the use of land and the exploitationof natural resources.Despite a popular portrayal of the South Pacificas a region of islands with serene beaches,blue lagoons, and an idyllic lifestyle, SIDShave very fragile ecosystems. At the beginningof the 21st century there is now a greater concerngrowing about the longer term consequencesof climate change and rising sea levels.For this reason, Pacific SIDS have been committedto the implementation of developmentprojects to reduce risks to people and property,and have worked continually to strengthentheir national and regional resilience to hazardimpacts. The historical record of specific disasterreduction initiatives, albeit quite short, alsoshows that Pacific SIDS have taken a very positiveapproach both in traditional and morecontemporary ways to enable Pacific islandersto maintain their way of life.The management of disasters is widely recognizedin the Pacific as a national concern,although it is equally understood that strengtheningregional linkages and fostering a sense ofcommon purpose improves overall disaster andrisk management capabilities. The similarity ofhazards that Pacific SIDS face, the shared problemsthey experience, and a generally commonapproach adopted in their institutional arrangementsall provide a fruitful basis for regionalcooperation.However, as some types of disaster occur onlyrarely, governments and communities find it difficultto maintain a high level of awareness andpreparedness. The resources available for disastermitigation also have changed over time. Governmentsbecame involved in disaster assistanceearly in the colonial era, taking over responsibilitiesat independence, often by providing considerableassistance for immediate relief or to assistin rehabilitation after a disaster. Later, such aidcame to be understood by both donors and recip-Progress in the PacificThere has been admirable progress of well-structured programmes for disaster risk management in the Pacific, allguided by regional consensus, and with each one championed by respected regional organizations:• From 1990-1999, the IDNDR provided a common purpose and an international structure to address ashared need of disaster reduction across Pacific SIDS.• In 1993-94, Pacific SIDS developed a common programme on Natural Disaster Reduction in Pacific IslandsCountries, presented at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Yokohama, Japan, 1994.• From 1994-2000, the UNDP South Pacific Office supported the South Pacific Disaster Reduction Programme(SPDRP), which proceeded in two phases: 1994-1997 and 1998-2000.• A Tripartite Review conducted by UNDHA-SPPO-SPDRP in 1996, led to a Regional Disaster ManagementFramework being formulated in September, 1997.• Widespread discussion ensued about the best way to institutionalise a collective regional strategy for disasterreduction, with direction being provided by the Alafua Declaration adopted by the Pacific Island Forum inSeptember, 1999.• UN-ISDR in 2000, coincided with plans to conclude the SPDRP and to constitute its successor, the SouthPacific Applied Geoscience Commission – Disaster Management Unit (SOPAC-DMU), from July 2000.• With the design and official endorsement of a Regional Programme Plan, SOPAC-DMU embarked on animplementation process for the next three years from 2001-2004.• Future directions will be guided by the innovative Comprehensive Hazard and Risk Management Project(CHARM), an integrated risk management framework and practice to manage unacceptable risks in thePacific SIDS, in the context of national development planning, encompassing both regional and individualcountry initiatives.132

ients as unencumbered assistance. As theamount of disaster assistance has increasedsharply over recent years, with the expandedinvolvement of bilateral and international assistanceagencies as well as private voluntarygroups, so too has been the consequence of communitydependency.During the 1980s, the UN Coordinator forDisaster Relief Operations supported disasterpreparedness and response activities in thePacific by providing technical and financialassistance for disaster management seminars,workshops, and planning exercises. In October1990, a South Pacific Programme Office (SPPO)was established in Suva, Fiji, to act as the coordinationcentre for these activities. During thepast decade in particular, this proactiveapproach to disaster management has becomemore prominent in the evolution of a regionalstrategy and in the development of individualnational plans.Later, during much of the nineties, the overallobjectives of SPDRP proceeded in both itsfirst and second phases to:• Strengthen human resources and institutionalcapacity to manage the effects ofnatural disasters effectively and rapidly.• Provide appropriate technical supportmaterials for disaster management atnational, local and community levels.• Establish a disaster management informationsystem.• Achieve an acceptable and sustainablelevel of regional cooperation and collaboration.• Empower communities to reduce theirvulnerability to natural disasters.• Establish training capacities at regionaland national levels.• Increase national capabilities to reducenatural disaster risk through developmentand implementation of mitigation measures.• Strengthen sustainability through improvedregional and national coordination,including mutual support.To achieve these objectives, activities were clusteredunder six key programme components:• In-country training and technical assistance.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction• Regional training.• Disaster mitigation activities.• Regional support materials.• Information management.• Regional cooperation and coordination.Although SPDRP was planned and coordinatedon a regional basis, a high level of supportand activity was demonstrated by individualPacific SIDS. The collective programme alsoprovided a mechanism for international donorsto target their assistance for the region as awhole, in a coordinated and focussed way thatsuccessfully avoided both duplication of effortand inter-agency competition on all sides.Financial, material and technical support fordisaster reduction activities was channelledthrough SPDRP by Australia, China, Germany,Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, UK,and US.In the South Pacific, a risk assessment project, known asthe Pacific City Project is being implemented by the SouthPacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC) in thecapitals of Pacific SIDS. The project was originally basedon earthquake related hazards, but it will now be extendedto include other hazards. A micro-zoning map is now inplace for the seismic hazard maps.Response to ISDR questionnaire from Tonga, 2001.An integral part of the SPDRP was the PacificRegional IDNDR programme, greatly facilitatedby the interest and support of the AustralianNational Coordination Committee forIDNDR, which encouraged this coordinatedregional approach by funding 31 country projects.It also supported several other regionalprojects, conducted both regional and internationalmeetings, and maintained an active programmedisseminating information.A study by a Fijian, A. Kaloumaira (SOPAC-DMU, 1999a) highlights the state of capacitybuildingfor Pacific SIDS in 1999 in terms thatreflect the incorporation of mitigation strategiesinto national government and non-governmentalsystems. As the following excerpt pointsout, the relevance, and therefore the efficacy ofdisaster reduction is heavily dependent uponthe extent that it reflects prevailing social, cultural,and environmental interests of the peopleit is intended to serve.1333

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe South Pacific Applied Geoscience CommissionDisaster Management Unit (SOPAC-DMU)was established in July 2000. It was created toprovide an expanded approach to disaster riskmanagement throughout the region whilemaintaining a positive relationship to the previousdecade’s UNDP-SPO SPDRP programmeand its resulting partnerships.The present goal of the SOPAC-DMU projectis to strengthen national disaster managementprogramming capacities and to integraterisk management practices within the economicstrategies of countries in order to achievelong-term community resilience. This will beimplemented through the CHARM programme,a comprehensive strategy based onsustainable hazard and risk management, butone that also seeks to achieve greater effectivenessin disaster response and recovery practicesfollowing disasters.In addition to the annual Pacific Regional DisasterManagement Meetings, other SPDRPinitiatedactivities are continuing in theSOPAC-DMU programme. Information isdisseminated regularly through the publicationof SOPAC-DMU quarterly reports and anewsletter. Other major efforts continue toengage the commitment of international agenciesand to develop expanded partner relationshipsthrough formal memorandums of understandingwith foreign government agenciesand international institutions.The current strategy for improving Pacificregional collaboration rests on two primaryobjectives: to establish a highly functionalcoordinating body (SOPAC-DMU), and tostrengthen the capacity of national risk officialsto accomplish effective disaster managementprogrammes domestically. As no formal institutionalmechanisms existed to promote thistype of regional collaboration in support ofcountry programmes, this has become a priority.It is also expected that various CHARMstrategies will lead to a redefinition of NDMOroles and responsibilities in a number of countries,as disaster risk management is integratedwithin mainstream government planning.Therefore, advocacy at senior levels of responsibilityand appropriate professional developmentstrategies will also receive priority attention.Comprehensive Hazard And Risk Management(CHARM) programmes are keys to optimisingthe efficacy of donor aid and achieving sustain-Pacific Islanders have inherited a resilient social system. The strength of this system is in its extended family valuesand communal mechanisms that link to national systems. It requires only a little bit of restructuring and advocacyto integrate these into a practical organizational framework that will foster ownership, and promote joint participatoryapproaches to mitigation management between government and other stakeholders.The challenges on island nations arise from the expanding progress of development on an essentially limited volumeof natural resources. This has forced development to encroach into adverse environments, rapidly increasingcommunity vulnerability to natural disasters. Increasing awareness of mitigation measures through science andtechnology alone cannot foster preparedness. Strengthening the complementarity between science and the technologicaltools with the social and humanitarian aspects has to happen.Mitigation for Pacific disaster managers is in effect being good facilitating managers. It calls for skills to buildoperational networks so as to enthuse effective use of local resources. It requires forging collaborative efforts andtechnical competence. It needs building partnerships to equip stakeholders for effective field operation.In the past years, island nations have each established a strong national coordination unit. Importantly, each nationhas developed a national disaster management plan that establishes the management structures and allocatesresponsibilities to key organizations. The support plans and operational procedures are the critical forum thatorganizes the complexity of community involvement into a system that works in partnership with government.Mitigation pilot projects through this facilitative management approach are providing the building blocks thatsuccessfully incorporate mitigation planning into national systems.”Source: A. Kaloumaira, SOPAC-DMU, 1999a134

able outcomes within individual Pacific SIDS.While previous work was undertaken toenhance the existing national disaster managementcapacities and to strengthen institutionalmechanisms, it was related primarily to achievingmore effective coordination of emergencyresponse activities. More recently, changingoutlooks renewed efforts directed toward morecomprehensive programming that placed disastermanagement responsibilities within abroader risk management framework. Aknowledge base and institutional arrangementsnow exist within the Pacific region to commenceindividual country programmes andregional collaboration.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction• Fostering national development strategies:CHARM involves creating a participatoryinter-agency approach among governmentand non-government agencies. Itsexecution requires the involvement of keyrepresentatives in both individual andgroup consultations. The key elements ofthe CHARM process are:- Identifying known hazards.- Analysing each hazard against nationaldevelopment priorities.- Identifying vulnerable sectors in relationto hazards.- Identifying risks and determining themost appropriate ways to manage those3There are many government line ministries anddepartments, together with regional organisations,that are currently undertaking risk managementprojects. Many of these are undertakenin isolation, with very little information sharingor collaborating partnerships being established,which in turn leads to duplication ofeffort. In order for national officials to identifyprogramming gaps, they must first have a bigpicture of all the hazards and the risks that exist,together with an overview of what projects arebeing undertaken or proposed.Usually it is only the national planning officesthat would have this information. However,research has found that there is not usually amatrix that shows all projects and their linkages.The development of the tool as well as its application,need to be supported with skills, trainingand advocacy programmes. Because of this, theCHARM approach integrates all disciplinesfrom all sectors and allows the product to beassimilated into the national planning processes.In order to institutionalise the principles onwhich CHARM is based, strategic approacheshave been identified to translate the conceptsinto practical forms of activity. They are:• Creating a regional CHARM developmentstrategy: As a new concept,CHARM requires investment in the professionaldevelopment of senior officesfrom stakeholders’ agencies. It alsorequires close collaboration with theregion’s traditional donors and otherregional organizations, as it is a tool envisionedto enhance sustainable developmentand its many subsequent benefits.Disaster Managment Project in the Pacific"Disaster management is everyone's business. It is a fundamentalcomponent of individual, community, business, NGOand government safety and well-being. It is an essential prerequisitefor the achievement of community resilience andsustainable development. [To] ensure an integrated and sustainableapproach to comprehensive hazard and risk managementis achieved, a major function of the Disaster ManagementUnit (DMU) will be to act as a coordinator to bringtogether major stakeholder groups representing regional,governmental, community, corporate and NGO interests. Inthis broker/facilitator role, the DMU will play a pivotal partin identifying, encouraging and assisting in disaster reductionand risk management activities throughout the regionand within Pacific island countries."The SOPAC-DMU Disaster Management Project has fourkey components:• Establishment and effective management of the newDMU within SOPAC.• Guidance of professional skill development among keydisaster management officials.• Technical support for the formulation and managementof country programmes.• Promotion of the benefits of risk management amongpoliticians and policy makers.The CHARM programming approach has been developedto:• Intrinsically link together development priorities andprogrammes of individual countries.• Clearly identify gaps within existing or proposed countryproject activities.• Enable SOPAC to work closer with its regional partnersand to develop the SOPAC-DMU annual work planand activities schedule around clearly identified countryneeds and priorities.135

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesrisks within realistic time and resourceframeworks.- Identifying what activities or projects arealready being implemented or proposed,both at the country level and by regionalorganizations.- Identifying programming gaps.- Identifying possible options for altereddevelopment priorities in light of impactscenarios.- Determining lead responsibilities andagencies for managing the implementationof the risk reduction strategy.• Training: As a new concept, the developmentof CHARM will require time andthe collaborative effort of all major stakeholdersfor it to be fully implemented. Incountrytraining capacities need to be developedand strengthened to drive this process.• Strengthening Information TechnologyCapabilities: A critical success factor willbe to ensure that national disaster managementoffices throughout the region areequipped with human and technicalcapacities to manage multi-disciplinaryinformation resources. This will requireappropriate technological tools and computer-basedinformation and communicationsystems.Comprehensive Hazard And Risk Management (CHARM)Six underlying strategic principles to underpin the implementation of CHARM:• Ensure ownership by the national countries.• Ensure linkages with National Strategic Plans.• Ensure linkages and harmonizing with existing systems.• Ensure appropriate communication and consultation with communities, stakeholders, donors and developmentpartners.• Establish the principle that risk reduction is vital to national development and that CHARM is a powerfultool in the reduction of risk.• Ensure CHARM is promoted as a public safety tool, a risk reduction change driver, as cost-effective andas part of an agreed regional programme with donor support.Immediate challenges to CHARM include:• Reaching agreement on the processes and means to guide a uniform approach among all participatingcountries.• Establishing a regional implementation framework.• Identifying training strategies and other essential implementation supports.• Marketing CHARM effectively, with a view towards sustainability.• Advocating for and gaining high level support for its adoption as a national initiative.136

EuropeWestern EuropeResearch is one of the necessaryand fundamental pillars of disasterreduction. The European Commission(EC) has promoted collaborativeresearch between commercial interests,universities and research centres in thefield of disaster reduction, with an increasingbudget allocation for this purpose:• European Cooperation in the Field of Scientificand Technical Research (COST), whichstarted in the 1960’s and has the aim ofsupporting joint European research.• European Strategic Programme for Researchand Information Technology (ESPRIT),which started in 1983.• Framework Programme, started in 1984 asmulti-annual research programmes, aresummarized below:Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionProgramme Duration EU contribution(Euros millions)1st Framework Programme (FP1) 1984-8 73,7502nd Framework Programme (FP2) 1987-91 5,3963rd Framework Programme (FP3) 1990-94 6,6004th Framework Programme (FP4) 1994-98 13,2005th Framework Programme (FP5) 1998-02 14,9606th Framework Programme (FP6) 2002-06 17,500Source: European Commission, Directorate General on ResearchIn particular, the launch of the multi-annualresearch Framework Programme marked themove towards a more targeted collaborationbetween universities, research centres and privatecompanies. Such strategic partnershipswere created with the political intent to promotesocial unity in Europe’s research community.European research in the field of disasterreduction can be traced back to the EPOCHProgramme of 1987-89 and has continuedthrough strengthened political support to thecurrently envisaged European Research Area(ERA) by bringing science closer to the needsof society. Almost 15o research projects havecontributed to hazards studies and disaster riskreduction with the support of the EC over thepast 18 years.Another important initiative promoted by theEC is the Global Monitoring for the Environmentand Security (GMES) that fills the needfor independent information on key issuesaffecting the world’s environment and thesecurity of citizens. It focuses primarily on theuse of earth observation techniques for maintainingan adequate long-term watch on keylandscape parameters, such as vegetation cover,land use, resource degradation or depletion. Itwill also call for techniques to support theassessment of naturalrisks and the managementof catastrophicevents.Under the frameworkof ERA, theEU aims to launch aconcerted effort toface problems affectingthe economy,society and citizensfor which scienceholds the key. Furthermore, as sustainabledevelopment is a major political objective inthe EU’s agenda, it demands specific researchrequiring interdisciplinary approaches. Disasterreduction is one of these areas. ERA can beschematically explained by the following figure:3137

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesERA - backgroundof natural hazards such as floods, storms, fires,avalanches and landslides.Within the sixth framework programme, theDirectorate General Joint Research Centre (DGJRC) has a key role of supporting policy developmentthrough applied research. The JRCwill concentrate on issues of natural and technologicalhazards and will continue to supportefforts which develop a European frameworkfor forecasting, assessing, managing andreducing risks in the community. The JRCwill carry on with institutional projects in thearea of disaster risk reduction, including:138ERA will work to foster closer collaboration andcoordination of research and innovation activitiesat both the national and European levels bymeans of networking of key organizations,involvement of main actors, and project integrationwith EUREKA/“Innovation 2000 Initiative”.The initiative will strive to promote thecoherent development of research and innovationpolicies in Europe by pursuing common targets,benchmarking RTD policies, mapping designatedcentres of excellence, employing scientific andtechnological foresight, statistics and indicators,and supporting the improvement of regulatoryand administrative environments. Finally, it willstrive to ensure the lasting effect of long-termprogrammes covering elements of variable scale.Specific research priorities that are dedicated todisaster reduction include the following:• Mechanisms of desertification and naturaldisasters where research will focus on largescale integrated assessment of land/soildegradation and desertification; long termforecasting of hydro-geological hazardsmonitoring; mapping and managementstrategies; improved disaster preparednessand mitigation.• Impact of environmental issues on health,including methods for risk assessment andthe mitigation of risks of natural disasters topeople.In addition, research will be geared to analysinglinks between climatic change and natural disastersby concentrating on the development ofinstruments that can identify and gauge hazardsbetter, or by working to reduce the consequences• Natural and Environmental Disaster InformationExchange System (NEDIES)http://nedies.jrc.it• Natural Hazardshttp://natural-hazards.aris.sai.jrc.it• European Laboratory for Structural Assessment- Earthquake Engineering (ELSA)http://structural-mechanics.jrc.itThe JRC will further develop a systemapproach to the management of these hazardsand efforts will be centred around its operationand improvement of harmonised Europeanmonitoring systems. A link to the GMES initiativewill be developed. The JRC will focusparticularly on the development of EU policyapplications which contribute to the GMESconcept in three areas of work: support tointernational environmental agreements,assessing risks and hazards, and evaluatingenvironmental stress.In parallel to the JRC projects, other ECDirectorates General are supporting complementaryinitiatives in disaster risk management.In the DG Environment there are projectswhich supplement the research carried outin the EU. Some are linked to civil protectionareas of cooperation such as:• Major Project on Preventionhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpmaj01.htm• Flood projects:PREMO98'http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact05g.htmReduce the Risk of Floods in the River GeulCatchment.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact05c.htmFlood and Erosion Management in AlpineRiver Basins.http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact05e.htmDevelopment of rescue actions based on dambreakflood analysis (RESCDAM).http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact05h.htmAnalysis of the 1993/1995 Floods in WesternEurope.http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact05a.htmThe European Environment Agency’s (EEA)core task is to provide decision-makers withthe information needed for creating soundpolicies to protect the environment and supportsustainable development. It carries outstudies on issues such as the impact of extremehydrological disasters in relation to Europe’swater resources. It also supports the EC in diffusinginformation on the results of environmental-linkedresearch. http://org.eea.eu.intThe EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreementconstitutes an open agreement on setting upcooperation in major natural and technologicaldisasters. It has been signed by 23 MemberStates of the Council of Europe. Its aim is tocarry out a multidisciplinary study of the cooperationmethods through political, scientificand technical activities.http://www.europarisks.coe.intCentral EuropeThe Central European Disaster PreventionForum (CEUDIP) was established in 1999through the joint efforts of the National Committeesfor the IDNDR from the CzechPolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionRepublic, Germany, Hungary, Poland andSlovakia, to continue activities of the ISDR.The specific motivation was to formulate aninstitutional mechanism that could increasethe collaboration in disaster reduction relatedto all types of hazards, and particularlyfloods, shared among these neighbouringcountries.Following the shared experience of the destructiveOder River floods early in 1999, the initialinterest that stimulated the participating countrieswas a common desire to improve earlywarning capabilities both among and within theindividual countries. Other issues have emergedsubsequently, such as the role of the media indisaster reduction, national legislation aboutdeclared emergencies, the participation of civilsociety in disaster reduction activities, and thepreparation of training materials.The forum has conducted annual meetingssince 1999 in Prague, Warsaw, Bratislava andBonn. The members of CEUDIP agreed attheir meeting in 2000 that closer cooperationwould be required with EU policies related tocivil protection and disaster reduction. As fourof the CEUDIP countries are candidates forfuture membership in the EU, they haveassigned particular relevance to assess theirpresent capabilities.In particular, they have recognized the growingimportance of strong and active participation ofthe public, working through civic groups andother NGOs to supplement the efforts of governmentinstitutions and agencies. Thisapproach to foster common and improvedregional standards was augmented atCEUDIP’s meeting in Bratislava in 2001 whenit was agreed to develop a project of cooperationwith the EU institutions involved with emergencies,risk and disaster reduction issues.3139

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesIn reviewing the accomplishments of regionalcooperation, interaction and experience for disasterrisk reduction in different parts of theworld, two success factors stand out: the sustainedcommitment of permanent facilities orinstitutions having the primary objective ofpromoting the multi-disciplinary aspects ofdisaster risk management, and an incontrovertiblebelief in the shared values of countries ofthe region concerned in their various forumsand agendas.It is clear that both policy interests and materialresources must transcend strictly nationaloutlooks. Mobilising regional or sub-regionalefforts must support national institutional andcapacity strengthening. The examples citeddemonstrate that in some instances such awarenessis thrust upon a region abruptly as throughHurricane Mitch in Central America, or it mayevolve more methodically through shared orientationsas is the case for Pacific SIDS.In all cases there needs to be an established andconsistently supported institutional hub that canboth promote and respond to multi-disciplinaryand inter-state issues related to disaster risk reduction.The function which these institutions serve asa dissemination vehicle, acting as clearinghouses for diverse material that merges political,professional and public interests, shouldnot be overlooked as a critical contributor tobuilding regional collaboration. There is littledoubt that the momentum and resulting successthat has been realized in terms of regionalcooperation owe much to the efforts of bothregional and international organizations suchas PAHO, OCHA/UNDP, OAS, CEPRE-DENAC, PREANDINO in the Americas,ADPC and ADRC in Asia, and SOPAC inthe Pacific.While SADC and IGAD currently displaysome initial policy impetus for disaster riskawareness in Southern and Eastern Africa, thefuller realization of practical forms of institutionalcommitment remain a challenge inAfrica. Throughout the Arabic-speaking worldand among all European countries, there is anabsence of consolidated recognition or materialsupport for a sustained regional focus.An international framework of regionallyfocussed institutions could be created that arededicated to the various aspects of disaster riskmanagement practice.140

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction33.3. Community action“Much has been learntfrom the creative disasterprevention efforts of poorcommunities in developingcountries. Prevention policyis too important to be left togovernments and internationalagencies alone. Tosucceed, it must also engagecivil society, the private sectorand the media.”Kofi Annan, IDNDRProgramme Forum,Geneva, July 1999Risk reduction measures are most successful when they involvethe direct participation of the people most likely to be exposed tohazards, in the planning, decision-making, and operational activitiesat all levels of responsibility. Local leaders, drawn from political,social and economic sectors of society need to assume a primaryresponsibility for the protection of their own community.Community processes and actions to accomplish disaster riskreduction is much talked about, in theory, but it is much moredifficult to realize in practice. There is however experience to suggestthat the involvement of local residents in protecting their ownresources is possible and can work – if sufficient attention andinvestment is devoted to the subject. The salient issues and exampleswhich illustrate successful practice are presented under thefollowing headings:• The essential role of community action• Community leadership and relationships• Increasing community capabilities• NGO and volunteer activities• Building local self-reliance: sharing resources, building partnerships• Dynamics of local collaboration• Traditional community coping mechanisms at stakeThe essential role of community actionDisaster reduction is most effective at the communitylevel where specific local needs can bemet. When used alone, government and institutionalinterventions often prove to be insufficientand frequently are seen to be sporadic andonly responding to crises. They are inclined toignore local perceptions and needs and thepotential value of local resources and capacitiesin the process. As a result, it is not surprisingthat emergency relief assistance far exceedsresources invested to develop local disaster riskreduction capabilities.First, communities must be aware of theimportance of disaster reduction for their ownwell-being. It then becomes necessary to identifyand impart essential skills that can translaterisk awareness into concrete practices of sustainedrisk management. Such an approachneeds to develop activities that can strengthencommunities’ capacities to identify and copewith hazards, and more broadly to improveresidents’ livelihoods.CommunityThe definition of community in this context refers to asocial group, which has a number of things in common,such as shared experience, locality, culture, heritage orsocial interests.The Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Programme(AUDMP) has validated these principlesthrough its activities with local institutionsworking in local Asian environments.Community-based disaster mitigation is a croscuttingtheme where assessment, planning andimplementation are participatory in design andaddress the community’s vulnerabilities andcapacities.Projects in Bangladesh and Cambodia havebeen built around the concept of specificallyfocusing people’s perception of flood risk; thepurpose and tools of community flood riskassessment; the strategies for communityorganizing, and resource mobilization andcapacity building. All of these elements and141

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesstrategies contribute to mainstreaming community-baseddisaster management in poorand vulnerable communities as a cost effectiveoption.Community leadership and relationshipsAny system of local planning and protectionmust be integrated into larger administrativeand resource capabilities such as provincial,state and national disaster plans and riskreduction strategies. It is equally important torealize that communities cannot implementcommunity-based disaster mitigation alone.Viable forms of community-based disasterreduction depend on a favourable politicalenvironment that understands, promotes andsupports this participation process.A recent Australian study found that the extentof commitment by local governments to takeaction depends on emergency managers makingthe right choices about citizen involvementin planning risk reduction processes. This canbuild an informed constituency for disasterreduction and drive a real commitment amongelected officials to take action. Key decisionsinclude:• Objectives to be achieved by involvingcitizens.• Areas in the planning process where, andwhen, citizens participate.• Which citizens to include.• Techniques to use in order to obtain citizeninput.• Information that is to be provided to citizens.Disasters are opportunities for change andcommunity development. Women are participatingactively in rehabilitation and reconstructionaround the world. Their organizationshave a special role to play, and are doingso in several places. “Networks of networks” isan increasing phenomena among communitybasedorganizations and NGOs to share theirown experiences among community leadersand groups. One such network linkingwomen’s organizations is the Grass Root OrganizationOperating in Sisterhood (GROOTS).The following are examples from Gujarat,India, and Turkey, of shared experiences withinthis network.People - especially women - rebuilding their own communities in GujaratImmediately after the Gujarat, India, earthquake in January 2001, Swayam Shiksam Prayong (SSP), (self-educationfor empowerment), an Indian NGO, joined many community-based organizations in the recovery effort. Drawingon their prior experience following the Latur earthquake in the Maharashtra State of India in 1993, they proposeda policy, which would not only rebuild the devastated Gujarat communities but reform and strengthen their socialand political structures. The central concept was that people – especially women – need to rebuild their own communities.Key elements of the strategy included:• Using reconstruction as an opportunity to build local capacities and skills.• Forming village development committees made up of women’s groups and other community institutions tomanage rehabilitation.• Engaging village committees to monitor earthquake-safe construction.• Redressing grievances at the village level.• Striving to locate financial and technical assistance within easy reach of affected communities, and not bedependent on its being mediated by others.• Arriving at a clear definition of the role of local governments in planning and monitoring, information flow,problem-solving, and infrastructure use and development.• Distributing information about earthquake safety and entitlement to all homeowners.• Encouraging the use of local skills and labour, and retraining local artisans in earthquake-resistant technology.• Including women in all aspects of the reconstruction.• Assigning titles of houses in names of men and women.• Encouraging coordination among government officials, district authorities and NGOs.• Seeking to facilitate public-private partnerships for economic and infrastructure development.www.sspindia.org142

Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3Women community groups active in risk reduction and reconstructionTurkish women displaced by the major earthquake that struck Turkey’s Marmara region inAugust 1999, began organizing themselves immediately after the disaster. Assisted by theFoundation for the Support of Women (FSWW) and obtaining funds from NOVIB and theAmerican Jewish World Services they worked together with government agencies, localmunicipalities, other NGOs and technical professionals.FSWW built eight women and childcare centres to provide a safe environment for childrenand a public living room for local women, providing day care services as well as incomeearning opportunities for women. Additionally, these facilities have become centres forwomen to consider housing and resettlement problems and priorities, such as:• The future utility and limitation of temporary prefabricated settlements.• How to resolve problems of isolation, transportation, local governance, minimal infrastructureand wide-spread unemployment.• Housing requirements of renters and others who are not legal owners.• Earthquake safety standards for future housing.Groups of women go door to door in their community to gather basic information abouttheir settlements, to publicize meetings and to increase participation. The women discussproblems, consider solutions and their own role in motivating changes. They invite expertsto their centres, visit construction sites, prioritise a list of officials to contact, and devisestrategies to hold authorities accountable for the information they provide and the promisesthey make. They visit local authorities to get information about reconstruction activities andthen post their findings at the centres, the settlement administration office, shops andschools.In all eight centres a women’s group meets regularly with local officials. They also exchangestrategies across centres. In Izmit, they signed a protocol with the City Council and anotherwith an organization responsible for the local implementation of Agenda 21 to develop policyproposals on the future of prefabricated settlements and housing safety in the region.Local authorities have started to understand that the women serve an effective communicationfunction within the community.The most important lesson women feel they have learned is that resettlement is a longprocess that requires ongoing monitoring. The following lists the women’s response to workthey are doing:• Are more confident and feel stronger.• Have begun to see that they can influence the decision-making process if they acttogether.• Believe that only a common and widespread sense of responsibility in the communitycan promote public safety and mitigate the effects of a new earthquake.• Are comfortable with the technical language related to construction and can questionsafety and quality standards.• Can understand infrastructure issues.• Can do repairs and become plumbers, electricians and carpenters for the benefit of thecommunity.Source: Huairou Commission Newsletter, volume 3, No. 1, April 2001143

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives144Increasing community capabilitiesInhabitants of local communities are potentialvictims of natural disaster. They also representthe greatest potential source of local knowledgeregarding hazardous conditions, and are therepositories of any traditional coping mechanismssuited to their individual environment.Furthermore it is their personal assets, physicalproperty, and way of life that are likely to bethreatened by hazard.It is little wonder that it is the local populationwhich responds first at times of crisis. They arealso the last remaining participants as strickencommunities strive to rebuild after a disaster.Given these conditions, it is striking that theparticipation of local communities often provesto be problematic in so many disaster risk managementstrategies. There are several constraintsor reasons why this may be so, and eachpoints to a lesson for effective engagement ofcommunity participation.A bottom-up approach is needed to promotechange. Local communities are those mostaware of historical risk scenarios and the onesclosest to their own reality. It is not only aquestion of public awareness, it is a question oflocal community groups having the chance ofinfluencing decisions and managing resourcesto help reduce vulnerability and to cope withrisks.Neither the widespread dissemination of priorexperience nor the abundance of scientific andtechnical knowledge reaches local populationsautomatically. An informed and sustained programmeof public awareness is essential to conveythe benefits of experience to vulnerablecommunities in terms that relate to local perceptionsof need.The effective use of knowledge not onlyrequires wide dissemination, it must also bepresented in a way that relates to local conditionsand customs own conditions and risks.While this has long been accepted as a cardinalprinciple for development accomplishments, ithas remained a difficult principle in many disasterrisk reduction strategies.The realization of virtually all disaster riskreduction is essentially local in nature – andthat requires community action.In every community, knowledge, professionalabilities, and experience fashioned from adversitycan be found, but seldom are theseresources called upon or fully utilised. A specialeffort is required to recall locally valuedtraditional coping mechanisms and strategies.Modern concepts can provide innovativeapproaches. The advantages of modern technology,such as those provided by GIS oraccess to satellite weather forecasts need notdiminish the values of traditional wisdom.Vietnamese villagers maintained irrigationchannels and protective dykes for a reason, justas Pacific islanders were guided in their choiceof materials and construction techniques inbuilding their earlier disaster-resistant houses.NGO and volunteer activitiesExperience demonstrates that NGOs involvedin disaster risk reduction are focussed primarilyon public awareness activities and advocacyprogrammes. They particularly seek to encouragethe desired shift in emphasis from emergencyassistance and disaster response to themore engaged roles of local community participationin planning, vulnerability assessment,and risk management practices.Some Asian countries, such as the Philippines,Bangladesh and India have elaborate policies,strategies, legal and operational mechanisms toaccommodate the participation of NGOs andcommunity based organizations in all aspectsof national development. But the extent towhich they have embraced risk reduction activitiesis still modest. In the Americas, there hasbeen a recent spurt of interest in the subject.The results of that remains to be seen. InAfrica, a handful of small initiatives seem to beas much a consequence of recent or continuingthreats than representing a fundamental shiftin policy awareness or local community commitments.Case: PhilippinesIn the Philippines, the Citizen’s Disaster ResponseNetwork (CDRN) is a national network of 14NGOs that promotes community-based disasterpreparedness work. Since its inception in theearly 1980s, it has conducted campaigns andadvocacy work to mitigate the impacts of disas-

ter. By working together with communities,CDRN has developed strategies to enhancepeople’s capacities through community organizing,forming village-level disaster response committees,developing local early warning systems,organizing rescue teams and diversifying localsources of livelihoods. Receiving little externalsupport from donor agencies, it has reachedhundreds of villages and initiated communitybaseddisaster mitigation initiatives.Case: BangladeshTo reduce the vulnerability of flood-prone communitiesin the Tongi and Gaibandha municipalitiesof Bangladesh, CARE Bangladesh hasadopted a community-based approach workingin collaboration with partner NGOs in themunicipalities and with the Disaster ManagementBureau of the Government of Bangladesh.This urban disaster mitigation project, fundedby OFDA/USAID and managed by ADPC’sAsian Urban Disaster Mitigation Programme,began by motivating community volunteers toconduct baseline surveys and vulnerabilityassessments. Through this initial activity, differentcommunity groups recognized the importanceof their joint community participation andhow each could contribute to practical riskreduction activities. This project emphasized theimportance of promoting hazard and riskawareness among community groups andsought to involve collaborators in other subjectareas by placing community-based disaster riskmanagement issues on the political agenda.Since 1998, in order to promote communityawareness about the value of disaster risk reduction,the government of Bangladesh has designatedthe last working day of March as NationalDisaster Preparedness Day. In 2001, thisnational day was organized jointly by the Tongiand Gaibandha Municipality Disaster ManagementCommittees, CARE Bangladesh andother partner NGOs.Case: ZimbabwePolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionstrengthen drought mitigation in Zimbabwe.The current members, ENDA, ORAP,ZFFHC, World Vision and Zimbabwe Projectsstrive to implement joint communitybasedrisk reduction projects, conduct publicdebates on drought mitigation, and produceand distribute the Living with Drought newsletter.These efforts seek to share lessons that havebeen learned and recent scientific researchresults related to disaster reduction. Meetingsare also convened between rural farmers, scientistsand innovative farmers.A similar regional network is the anticipatedSouthern African Drought Technology Network. Itwill work to facilitate the sharing of informationamong small-scale farmers, NGOs and community-basedorganizations working with ruralfood security, agricultural research institutions,agricultural extension work, and agribusinesson drought-coping strategies that are responsiveto the needs of the rural poor. Communitybaseddisaster risk reduction initiatives are welldeveloped in Zimbabwe, but documentation ofsuccessful practices must still be improved. Itwill be important to complement this with furtherresearch to feed into the national disastermanagement plans and strategies.Case: GermanyThe Community Action Group for Floodwater inthe Old Community of Rodenkirchen (BürgerinitiativeHochwasser, Altgemeinde Rodenkirchen) isa non-profit association in a district ofCologne, founded after the severe flooding ofthe Rhine River in 1993 and 1995. This self-“We are convinced that protection against flooding canonly be successful in the long-term if all inhabitantsalong the river perceive themselves as a communityworking in solidarity with each other. As we ourselveshave experienced with our own considerable efforts andthe many setbacks we have suffered, acting togetherdoes not come naturally but, rather, it is a product ofknowledge, experience and conviction, mediatedthrough communication – and this is best achievedthrough personal contacts.”3The Community Drought Mitigation Partners’Network is an NGO network chaired by thelocal NGO SAFIRE and aims to promote andSpeaker for Community Action Group for Floodwater in theOld Community of Rodenkirchen, Cologne, Germany145

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeshelp group advocates the interests of more than4,000 residents in matters of local flood protection.It strives to achieve a balance between thelegitimate protection of the population and theaims of a sustainable floodwater policy whichalso must include the rights of downstreaminhabitants and the river as a whole. Thismeans, for instance, that while the group supportsthe construction of polders on the upperreaches of the Rhine and its tributaries, it alsoexpects the city of Cologne to undertake itsown considerable efforts to ensure that anyretention areas which are sacrificed as a resultof structural mitigation practices are compensatedby other natural means of water retentionin the municipal area.Building local self-reliance: sharingresources, building partnershipsDisaster reduction depends on the consciouscommitment of individuals and communities– understanding and accepting the values ofchanged behaviour, having access to the technicaland material resources necessary fordoing so, and accepting the personal responsibilityto carry through the efforts involved.Communities are generally unaware of thehazards they face, underestimate those theyknow of, and overestimate their ability tocope with a crisis. They also tend not to putmuch trust in disaster reduction strategies,and rely heavily upon emergency assistancewhen the need arises.Taking such a viewpoint into account highlightsthe need for tools that can create a cultureof prevention against all forms of hazardswithin local communities. This requires theknowledge of practical and low-cost methodswhich address likely hazards that can be conveyedto a wide-variety of participants including,community groups, trades people, commercialand financial interests and local governmentemployees.Case: IndonesiaIn recent years, Bandung, Indonesia has sufferedrepeated floods. The communities mostaffected are low-income populations. They sel-dom have ready access to warning informationor emergency equipment that would enablethem to evacuate or otherwise protect theirpossessions. Efforts to reduce the risk of annualfloods through strategic plans on reducingdamage created by disasters are necessary.These plans should include knowledge on protectinglives and assets, encouragement to thecommunity for minimizing risk of disasters,and continuing to improve the quality of life.In 2000-2001, the government of Indonesiaasked the Bandung Institute of Technology (BIT)to implement a community empowermentproject in cooperation with ADRC. ADRC,located in Japan, learned lessons from theGreat Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in 1995,about how community participation is indispensableto enhance disaster managementcapability at local level. Thus the project wasaimed to enable local residents in the communitiesto cope properly with flood disasters.Two flood-prone districts were taken as modelcases. This project included town-watching, inwhich local residents walked around their communitieswith experts such as researchers fromBIT and related institutions, to discuss the riskof disaster occurrence and points to beimproved for disaster reduction. As a result,local residents themselves proposed specificmeasures, such as making roadway improvements,constructing protective banks and betterdefining the watercourse in order to reducefuture flood risks.Case: selected Asian countries(India, Indonesia, Nepal, and Uzbekistan)The United Nations Centre for RegionalDevelopment/Disaster Management PlanningHyogo Office (UNCRD Hyogo Office) wasestablished in Kobe, Japan in April 1999 topromote disaster mitigation activities by examiningthe reconstruction process in Hyogo anddisseminating the experiences there to disasterdamagedareas in developing countries. It providesadvisory services to vulnerable communities,especially in ways that can improve thesafety of primary community facilities such asschools and hospitals vulnerable to disasters,and by identifying and then disseminating bestpractices in disaster management at the communitylevel. UNCRD Hyogo Office helps todevelop disaster resistant communities by link-146

ing socio-economic considerations with physicalhazards in urban development work at thelocal levels.Under the framework of human security, thegoal of the initiatives is to attain safer and moresustainable livelihoods. To achieve this goal,the initiatives focus on community developmentand empowerment activities. In specificprogrammes such as the School EarthquakeSafety Initiative, new approaches are formulatedto integrate disaster mitigation componentsinto urban development work at different levelsof urban growth processes through variousactivities for schools. The programme is beingconducted in India, Indonesia, Nepal, andUzbekistan with the overall goals to:• Empower the community with know-howand technology for safer earthquake construction.• Build a disaster-resilient and self-reliantcommunity.To achieve this, a specific focus has been givento the school systems, where the vulnerabilityof the school buildings are evaluated and technicallytested, and affordable retrofitting techniquesare then provided. There are five directobjectives of the project:• Evaluate the vulnerability of school buildingsin each of the selected cities.• Recommend designs and affordablemeans of strengthening vulnerableschools.• Retrofit one or two demonstration schoolsusing appropriate or improved traditionaltechnology.• Provide training to workers from the localconstruction industry who build schoolsand residential dwellings.• Prepare disaster education materials forschool children, teachers and communitiesand use them for training and educationpurposes.Case: IndiaMore than one year after the earthquake inGujarat, most of the affected families were stillstruggling to put their lives together. While insome places aid agencies had built and handedover houses to villagers, the experience of aPolicy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionlocal community in Patanka shows how community-ledrehabilitation can yield results.Patanka, a village of about 250 families, sufferedextensive damage during the earthquake,with about 170 houses collapsing an the restbeing badly damaged. Since it lies in and areabeyond the focus of most relief teams, itIn Japan, local community organizations withresponsibility for disaster preparedness cover halfthe population of the country.Japan response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001received less attention from aid agencies. Evendistribution of government compensation, aseverywhere, was taking time.Kheemabhai, a village leader from Patanka,found out about a Delhi-based disaster managementNGO called SEEDS. He expressedto SEEDS his community’s desire to reconstructthe village, themselves. AlthoughSEEDS had been working in the area, this wasthe first time it confronted a community keento reconstruct for itself. The village onlyrequested logistical support from the NGO.First, a meeting was organized with the districtgovernment to ensure speedy distribution ofcompensation so that the villagers could startrebuilding their homes. After a visit to the village,the enthusiasm he witnessed convincedthe official to extend full support to the villagers.Patanka became a scene of hectic activity.Everyone was busy building their houses,getting material from a special material depotand collaborating with engineers about technicaldetails of earthquake-resistant construction.Entire families became involved, with womenand children seen curing the masonry workwith water, or ferrying material to their sites.In the partnership approach everyone contributes.The initiative was truly led by thecommunity. The SEEDS team helped the villagersobtain building materials, including limitedamounts of cement and steel. The villagessupplied their own stone, bricks, wood, rooftilesand labour. Architects and engineers fromSEEDS trained the masons, labourers and thevillagers themselves on earthquake-resistanttechnology through on-the-job training, andthrough periodic training workshops.1473

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPatanka is on its way to becoming an internationalexample of good practice in community-led rehabilitation. Two expert masons fromNepal’s National Society of Earthquake Technologycame to teach their Gujarati partnershow to build safe houses. They developed avery good rapport with all the villagers, andexpressed considerable respect for the abilitiesof the local masons. Language barriersnotwithstanding, they could all be seen working,guiding and advising at the constructionsites well into the evening.While there were many supporters, the decision-makingwas done by the community itself.Each family determined its own house design,the material to be used, and initiated the construction.Upon completion of construction inthe village, there was a pool of trained masonsable to continue playing an important role inthe rebuilding of the rest of Gujarat. Recognizingthe strength of this community-ledrehabilitation model, organizations includingthe UN Centre for Regional Development,Gap Inc., the Earthquake Disaster MitigationResearch Centre in Japan and a consortium ofNGOs from Japan, all pitched in to supportand promote it.A wider dissemination campaign is beingplanned to promote such work and create moreawareness about the success of do-it-yourself,low-cost earthquake-resistant construction. InPatanka, there was not only excitement aboutbuilding a new village, but a great sense ofownership and pride among the villagers onhaving done it themselves, paid for it themselves,and also having done it in a technicalway that will protect their homes in the future.Case: South Asian countries(Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan,Sri Lanka)Duryog Nivaran – the South Asian Network forDisaster Mitigation, sponsors a project calledLivelihood Options for Disaster Risk Reductionthat proceeds from the recognition that formany thousands of people in South Asia, if notmillions, living with disaster risk is a fact ofeveryday life. It is therefore only by strengtheninglivelihoods and by building more effec-tive coping capacities within individual communitiesthat a viable foundation for disasterrisk reduction can be created. The project isfundamentally community-based, with theintention of identifying crucial linkagesbetween livelihoods and the related optionswhich have the potential to reduce disasterrisks. Supported by the Conflict and HumanitarianAffairs Department of DFID, the projecthas the following components:• Research that can identify the implicationsof disaster risk on livelihoods.• Formulation of strategies that strengthenlivelihoods and can reduce disaster risks.• Developing the capacities of stakeholdersthrough community-based approaches todisaster management.• Undertaking pilot demonstrations of riskreduction strategies.• Advocating and promoting policies toinfluence a paradigm shift that recognizesthat disasters are part of the developmentprocess, and empowering people and theirlocal communities to take an active role inbuilding resilience to hazards and to minimizefuture exposure to disasters.The project has attracted cooperation fromgovernment institutions, NGOs, research anddevelopment planning organizations andmedia, in a process of localizing adaptations tosuit the specific nature of hazards, vulnerabilitiesand the needs of individual South Asiancommunities.Case: MaldivesIn the Maldives, community efforts to reducevulnerability is common, where the entire landmasscomprising low-lying coral atolls is particularlythreatened by rising sea levels. From1998-2000 there were five damaging stormsthat affected 43 islands and 5 atolls. In June2000, severe waves lashed the resort island ofBolifushi causing US$ 1.3 million in damage.To prevent these types of hazards from becomingfuture disasters, local communities andNGOs have worked together in planting treeson the beaches and in constructing sea walls toprevent beach erosion, thereby minimizing theimpact of tidal waves on the islands.148

Case: Central American countries,community based organizationThe Central American Community Risk ManagementNetwork was inspired by the impact ofHurricane Mitch. The perceived exclusion ofcommunity-based organizations from thereconstruction process became a stimulus toincrease the participation of community organizationsand to foster the development of grassrootsapproaches to risk management and disasterreduction.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reduction3The Network was formed in Nicaragua inMay 1999 with the support of CEPRE-DENAC, GTZ, HABITAT and theIDNDR. The network works through existingcommunity organizations in many areas ofCentral America by providing training andtechnical advice. It has focused its attentionparticularly on the popular understanding ofthe relationships between disasters and development,and the need to strengthen existingcommunity-based development organizationsrather than creating new, local disaster organizations.Member communities of the networkhave participated in early warning projects andtraining activities supported by organizationssuch as GTZ.Dynamics of local collaborationWith the proper motivation, local communitiesare receptive to new ideas. However, the fullparticipation of community members is onlypossible to the extent that efforts are based onmutual trust, a clear definition of the decisionmakingprocess, and transparency of managementpractice and economic expenditure. Politicsand financial disparities exist in villagesand neighbourhoods, so it becomes importantto identify shared values and concerns.Scientists and engineers are challenged totranslate their research findings into conceptsand language understandable by communities,as much as administrators must strive tomotivate risk management practices that protectresidents’ own interests and assets. Moreoften than not, successful community actionin disaster reduction hinges on appropriateand low-technological approaches that areeasily and economically adopted by inhabitants.These conditions underline the importance ofrecognizing that community action must beassociated with a larger national strategy inwhich local efforts play a crucial part.There must be a sense of local ownership and acooperative working relationship among differentorganizations if local capacity is to flourish. Successfuloutcomes depend on community involvementfrom planning to the implementation andmonitoring of activities so that local people feel thatthe work of reducing risks has relevance to theirlives. Risk and resource analysis should includerapid appraisal tools and techniques. This meansthat local people have to be involved in both riskmapping and resource assessment, as too often theneeds and resources that already exist within acommunity are overlooked or discounted. If theseassets are harnessed and developed from the beginning,they form a valuable part of the process.The IFRC Disaster Preparedness AppealsAnalysis Mapping for 2002-03 indicates that asignificant percentage of the sample group of 32National Societies reviewed were including community-baseddisaster management activities intheir 2002-03 programmes.The IFRC learned that successful integratedand participatory planning needs to lay out adistinctive methodology with clear aims andobjectives, and one that includes the involvementof different actors drawn from govern-149

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesment, technical agencies, NGOs, communities,UN and other internationalagencies. The strategy requires a seriouscommitment to identify genuinestrengths and weaknesses, opportunitiesand threats of National Societies as integratedapproaches of participationshould mirror the basic processes associatedwith vulnerability and capacityassessments.It has proven important to identify what elementsand criteria are relevant for community-based disasterpreparedness and to consider the developmentof a unified conceptual framework whichdefines its role within the larger context of othernational programmes. Equally, there is a need forbetter indicators of performance to indicate impacteven when disaster does not strike. Careful thinkingis necessary to consider a reliable fundingstrategy to ensure sustainable commitments. TheThe Benefits of Experience / National Red Cross and Red Crescent SocietiesWhat worked well in community participation?• Participatory rapid appraisals provide relevance, increase ownership, and motivate self-initiated projects(Nepal: increased indigenous knowledge and confidence, unity of communities’ beliefs).• Bridges the gap between relief and rehabilitation (Mozambique).• Increases the number of volunteers – the formation of Red Cross community groups increase capacityat the local level.• As mitigation components increase, so does resilience at community level, encouraging partnershipprocesses.• Action planning and identification of vulnerability become more problem oriented (India).• The development of community disaster plans creates a more organized response, and become a unifyingforce (Peru).• Integrating community-based disaster preparedness with health programmes promotes developmentand income generation, increasing resilience to disasters.• Establishing networks with local government mobilizes leaders. (Community Based Self Reliance Programmein Papua New Guinea, which is completely owned by the National Society.)• Community originated empowerment supported by National Societies through moral support ratherthan hardware, for example by encouraging the identification of risks by communities.• Integrating disaster preparedness into health workshops merges similar programme interests and aidscooperation within volunteer training of civil protection, ministry of health, and National Society(Syria).• Creating regional awareness for community action and promoting HIV/AIDS as global disaster andhealth issue (North African Integrated Disaster Preparedness and Health Initiative).What did not work well?• Sometimes there was misunderstanding with local authorities, who saw the programme as a threat tomaintaining a culture of dependence by the local population.• Inadequate capacities in the National Societies to support activities at the community level. However,community-based disaster preparedness approaches progressively are resulting in increasing NationalSociety capacities at national, branch and community levels of activity.• Poor planning processes in some areas.• Insufficient efforts to ensure sustainability after initial funding period.• Roles can sometimes clash with those of local authorities, especially in the absence of an inclusive planningprocess.• Lack of community-based disaster preparedness and management was a serious detriment in gainingpublic response at local level (Turkey earthquake).150

experience of National Societies of Red Crossand Red Crescent in Bangladesh and Philippinesdemonstrate a positive correlationbetween integrated participatory planning andenhanced levels of local self-reliance.Traditional community copingmechanisms at stakeCollective and environmentally sound land useand tenure at community level is in manyplaces still based on traditional and commonlyaccepted practices, which help to cope withphenomena such as drought and floods. Thisconventional practice is respected more thanmodern laws in many communities in Africaand elsewhere. However, traditional ways aremore and more being replaced by western or"modern" economic and social interests andvalues, increasing vulnerability and exposure tohazards and weakening coping capacities.Examples can be found in the Brazilian rainforest,where indigenous groups interests arebeing replaced by economic ones that turnforests into pastoral land, thereby imposingland degradation, increasing drought or floodpatterns and forcing social exclusion.Policy and public commitment: the foundation of disaster risk reductionLong before there were national governmentsor development planners, Pacific islanders hadto live with natural hazards and extensive losses.While a considerable sense of traditionalvalues and social conditions remain, the internalmigration from villages to urban areas arethrusting significant numbers of people intochanging lifestyles in the Pacific island statesand elsewhere. Urban immigrants frequentlylack knowledge about local hazards and urbanrisks, and are seldom familiar with appropriatebehaviour to minimise potential losses. Theyare often marginalized politically, and frequentlylack the social network of kin, whichprovides vital support and can be relied uponfor information and communal responsibilitiesin most villages. As far as hazards are concerned,the process of urban adaptationinvolves a shift away from community selfrelianceand shared knowledge towards anexpectation that formal government organizationswill provide protection, warnings, supportand relief.These are considerations yet to be seriouslyaccommodated in national strategies of disasterreduction and risk management.3151

3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesFuture challenges and prioritieschallengesCommunity participation is something that isunderstood differently in each cultural or politicalcontext. Some universal and specific challengesand priorities are outlined below.A satisfactory link needs to be enhancedbetween the development of national policyguidance and direction and the widespread useof viable mechanisms that can actually translatethose principles into sustained, but flexible,locally-based activities. People also have tounderstand and accept that they, too, have aresponsibility towards their own survival – it isnot simply a matter for governments to findand provide solutions.The following priorities can be identified:• Enhancing local technical skills:- Transfer of expertise at a local levelshould be enhanced and developed,e.g. early warning systems and proceduressuited to small-scale requirements.- Transfer of local experiences, andtheir tematic application within variouscommunities have to be developed.- Better communication is requiredamong authorities and managers, andamong community leaders for thispurpose.• Increasing social cohesion and communityempowerment at all levels:- Local communities, civic groups, traditionalstructures, public services,collective achievements and valuesshould be encouraged and financed,as they considerably reduce vulnerabilityand strengthen local capacities.- Existing grass-roots and communitybasedorganizations at communitylevel, including women organizations,should be reinforced, for them to takeaction and participate on disaster riskreduction activities.- Mechanisms for community participationin information, decision-makingand resource management toreduce risk should be strengthened.- The involvement and participation of"ordinary" people in all technical,developmental and policy-relatedprojects, needs to be encouraged, bycreating inclusive discussion forums.There, people would be able to evaluate,explain and discuss their ownneeds, as well as debate with scientists,politicians and other skilled personsabout what could be done toreduce risks.- A re-evaluation of externally determinedpolicies by local people shouldbe done to make them compatiblewith their needs and more people-oriented.Ultimately, effective risk reduction has totake place within the much broader contextof initiatives that build an informed, capableand resilient community by drawing on itstraditional strengths and the benefits of collectiveexperience and skills. This must bepursued conscientiously over a period oftime, and supported with necessaryresources – long before there is any immediatethreat of crisis.152

Chapter4Building understanding: development ofknowledge and information sharing4.1 Information management and communicationof experience4.2 Education and training4.3 Public awareness153

Photo:University of Costa Rica

Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharing44.1. Information management and communication of experienceEffective disaster risk management depends upon a series of related actions and the means toengage the informed participation of all stakeholders. Exchange of information and communicationpractices play key roles in the realization of these activities. Data availability is crucial forongoing research, to monitor hazards and for assessing risks. Informationdescribes working conditions, provides reference material and allows access toresources. It shapes many productive relationships. Rapid and widespread developmentsin modern communications record and disseminate the value of experience,convey professional knowledge, and contribute to decision-makingprocesses. Integrating new developments in information management withestablished and more traditional methods can help to create a much betterunderstanding about hazards and risk at all levels of responsibility through publicawareness programmes. They inform are instrumental in achieving morecomprehensive early warning systems and effective mitigation efforts.Effective information management and communication about disaster riskreduction is conveyed through:• An awareness of current issues of information management• An appreciation of initiatives around the world• Selected national information programmes• Technical information, experience about different hazards• Using cyberspace to discuss disaster risk reduction"Prevention beginswith information"IDNDR theme for publicawareness campaign, 1998Current issues of information managementAdvantagesAs disaster risk reduction issues pervade bothpopular interest and official policy outlooks,related information to the subject is expandingrapidly. The sources, previously associatedmainly with the catastrophic events, or consideredas the exclusive domain of specialists, cannow reach a wider range of users. The numberof interested people, educational institutions,organizations and local community users isgrowing, as are relevant websites, networks,and multidisciplinary and professionalexchanges.In addition to these many sources for exchangingtechnical or specialized data, other means of communicationhave emerged to disseminate researchabout disaster risks, to convey information aboutnew activities and programmes, and to seek newways through which people can work together inreducing risks. Within the ISDR framework, theuse of Internet-based and electronic conferencesand discussion forums have been successful on severaloccasions.Innovations in GIS technology are increasinglybecoming an accepted tool for the presentation ofhazard vulnerabilities and risks. Other forms ofinformation dissemination provide new insightsabout knowledge engineering, management techniquesand cognitive sciences. Some of the most significantand useful developments in the evolution ofinformation systems relate to innovative machineuserinterfaces that rely on natural language processingfor searching and analysing data. Others rely onthe expanded use of “fuzzy logic” and expert learningsystems such as those based on neural networks.Many of these advanced techniques hold particularpromise in communicating data, information orexperience in quicker or automated early warningsystems, distinctive public awareness programmes,and for a wide variety of educational or communitybasedapplications. They can assist in the developmentof learning materials, but rather guided by thespecific needs and interests of communities or individualusers.155

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives156LimitationsThe exponential growth in the volume ofsources and data also poses continuing challenges for the processing and dissemination ofmeaningful information. Users find it everharder to assess the accuracy, veracity, and insome cases, the validity of the content. Whilesystematic gathering and timely provision ofinformation are keys to ensuring the effectiveuse of information, processes of sorting,analysing and targeting information for primaryinterest groups are at least as important toavoid information overload and confusionamong users.Moreover, there is a growing tendency formany information providers to rely on increasinglysophisticated means of electronic communication,thereby excluding many potentialLack of information-or lack of access?As conveyed in the regional ISDR report which tookaccount of conditions in Southern Africa, but which nodoubt apply elsewhere, there are many countries inwhich a wealth of disaster risk information exists inarchived form: hydrometeorological data, early land-userecords, historical natural resource conditions, waterrecords and related issues. Such information might berecorded in an unsuitable form, or more seriously, mightnot be readily accessible because of restricted institutionalor technical reasons. These might include conditionsin which,• Data is retained or restricted under presumed securityconsiderations, or as an institutional powerbase;• Inadequate cross-sectoral reference or communicationabout the existence of data so that other potentialusers are not aware of the information;• Compilation and dissemination of information arenot considered a priority by organizations;• Information is maintained in specialist, non-standard,incompatible or even archaic formats;• Information that exists in spatial or other formatscan be costly to convert into more readily accessibleformats;• Data compilers might not have consulted potentialusers about their respective data requirements soavailable data are not structured to easily addressthe needs of either current or subsequent users.users that live in impoverished areas. Whilesome institutions have been hesitant to adapt tonew forms of communication and technologies,many others now rely on electronic communicationsor web site access for information thatis often beyond the reach of the people mostvulnerable to disasters.Several factors have hindered the developmentof efficient information systems for general use,while other constraints might be more institutionalin nature. Several commentators in Africahave conveyed to the ISDR secretariat theirview that the provision of timely, definitiveinformation remains problematic throughoutall aspects of disaster management responsibilities.A response from Bangladesh to an ISDRsurvey on the status of disaster reduction shareda common concern voiced by other countries aswell. Their concern results from the fact thatvarious government agencies, internationalorganizations, technical organizations or academicinstitutions, as well as NGOs, all producedata and information relevant to disasterrisk management processes. The need of individualorganizations or external donor agenciesto have adequate information for their own programmeinterests has motivated most agenciesto develop information systems that cannot easilybe applied to other settings.While many of them are involved in variousprojects concerned with hazard and risk issuesor land-use planning, no commonly acknowledgedfocal point exists to provide easy or consistentaccess to such information. As a consequence,important data or information relatedto risk maps, or associated public awarenessand education programmes about hazards,might either be scattered or confined amonglibraries, individual government offices, academiaor individual technical programmes withno common point of access.An appreciation of initiativesaround the worldThere are numerous examples that illustratehow information management, innovativecommunication practices about hazards andvarious professional initiatives associated withdisaster issues, have helped to advance publicunderstanding and professional involvement indisaster risk reduction in recent years.

International scope of informationThere are two primary global informationsources that are widely used for access to accumulatedhazard and disaster reduction information,both located in Europe. One, the Centrefor Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters(CRED) is a World Health Organization(WHO) collaborating centre at the School ofPublic Health of the Catholic University ofLouvain in Brussels, Belgium. It maintains anEmergency Events Database (EM-DAT). Thiscomprehensive record of natural disasters thathas documented more than 12,500 events bytypes and country of occurrence during thetwentieth century, was created with the initialsupport of WHO and the Belgian Government.The CRED database is widely recognizedprofessionally for its efforts to provide aconsistent rendering of the often casual, vagueBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingor conflicting information about disasters thatis frequently conveyed in different formats. Itcan be accessed on the following web site:www.cred.be.A second highly regarded source of cumulativeinformation about natural disasters that haveoccurred around the world since 1965 is theNatCat Service database maintained by theResearch and Development Department ofMunich Reinsurance (Munich Re), in Munich,Germany. Information derived from this hazarddocumentation service is published in five majorlanguages by MunichRe and circulated widelyin Topics, an annual review of natural catastrophes.Munich Re also provides more specificinformation to commercial clients and otherinterested parties about the extent and intensityof specific disaster events or amalgamated informationregarding regional or global exposure4GLobal IDEntifier Number (GLIDE)Accessing disaster information can be a time consuming and laborious task. Not only is datascattered but frequently identification of the disaster can be confusing in countries with manydisaster events. To address both of these issues cred is working with a technical advisorygroup of partners on a globally common Unique Identification code for disasters, proposedby the Asian Disaster Reduction Centre (ADRC).The partners include ReliefWeb-OCHA, OFDA-USAID, FAO, US/NOAA Office forGlobal Programs (OGP) and the World Bank. A GLobal IDEntifier number (GLIDE) isissued every week by EM-DAT at CRED for all new disaster events that meet the EM-DAT criteria (www.cred.be). The components of a GLIDE number consist of two letters toidentify the disaster type (e.g. ST - storms); the year of the disaster; a four-digit, sequentialdisaster number; and the three-letter ISO code for country of occurrence. So, for example,the GLIDE number for hurricane Mitch in Honduras is: ST-1998-0345-HND.This number is posted by CRED, ReliefWeb, NOAA-GOP and ADRC on all their documentsrelating to that particular disaster and gradually other partners will include it in whateverinformation they generate. As information suppliers join in this initiative, documentsand data pertaining to specific events may be easily retrieved from various sources, or linkedtogether using the unique GLIDE numbers. The success of GLIDE depends on its widespreaduse and its level of utility for practitioners.ADRC has prepared a specific website http://glidenumber.net/ to promote GLIDE. Beingin its experimental phase, the group encourages visiting this website and welcomes commentsor suggestions.For more information contact CRED or ADRC (arakida@adrc.or.jp):157

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesanalyses and trend studies. The Munich ReWorld Map of Natural Hazards has been valuedby disaster and risk management professionalssince its first publication in 1978. Its subsequentGlobe of Natural Hazards most recently updatedin 1998, has also proved to be an effectiveinformation tool. Munich Re regularly producesadditional publications and has recently issued aCD-ROM, World of Natural Disasters, toadvance the public knowledge of hazards andexposure to risk. By employing digital technologyand the benefits of GIS representation ofinformation, this CD-ROM is easily able to providethe risk identification and evaluation expertiseof the reinsurance industry to engineers, governmentofficials and other interested people. Itis able to make a quick assessment of the basicnatural hazard potential at any terrestrial positionin the world at the click of a button. Additionalinformation can be found at www.municre.comAnother widely used source of public informationand database is the ReliefWeb, operated byOCHA. Located at www.reliefweb.int, itfocuses primarily on current internationalemergencies and disasters with humanitarianimplications, although it also provides currentresponse-oriented information about naturaldisasters. ReliefWeb provides an excellent andwide-ranging selection of information, pressaccounts, related contacts and operationalinformation, as well as archived informationdrawn from public, governmental, NGO andauthoritative sources about various types ofemergencies and their consequences. However,as its name indicates, it largely relates to emergencypreparedness and response interests.In November 2001, IFRC launched its DisasterManagement Information Systems (DMIS).This provides a single entry point for relevantdisaster-related information and multiple disastermanagement information sources that isbrowser-accessible for members of the RedCross and Red Crescent Movement. Supportedby four National Societies, the UnitedKingdom bilateral development agency,Department for International Development(DFID) and the commercially sponsoredEricsson Response Program, the project aimsto provide information about disasters in a systematicway and to monitor a number of factorsthat might signal an impending disaster. It providesa toolbox of working documents, tem-Global reports about disaster, riskand vulnerabilityWorld Disasters ReportOne of the most respected sources of informationabout disasters is the World DisastersReport, an annual publication of the InternationalFederation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties (IFRC). Published since 1993, theWorld Disasters Report provides the latesttrends, facts and analysis of the world'shumanitarian crises. Described by the WorldBank as "a very valuable resource for the internationalcommunity", the report is an indispensablereference work for those searchingcurrent information about strategies and tacticsin the face of disaster. The report is backedby the resources and expertise of IFRC.The 2002 edition of the World DisastersReport is focusing on risk reduction issues.The report analyses the challenges and opportunitiesfacing risk reduction, and examinespreparedness and mitigation initiatives fromdisaster-prone countries around the globe. Inaddition, the report studies the issue ofhumanitarian accountability, presents amethodology to assess vulnerabilities andcapacities, and concludes with disaster datatables that are updated annually. It addressessuch current issues as whether disaster preparednessand mitigation can convincingly beshown to pay off in terms of lives, livelihoodsand assets saved. (www.ifrc.org)Global Environment OutlookIn line with its role in environmental monitoringand assessment and early warning,UNEP has launched the Global EnvironmentOutlook (GEO) series, which contains baselineinformation on emerging environmental issuesand threats, as well policies being implementedat the global and regional levels. The findingsand recommendations of the GEOreport series constitute the basis of UNEPactivities in early warning and vulnerabilityand risk assessments.The GEO-3 report of May 2002 specificallyaddresses the issue of human vulnerability to158

environmental changes, including elaborationon the specific relationship between theimpact of natural hazards and emerging disasters.It also includes a section on disasters,in which the ISDR secretariat collaboratedwith information. UNEP also produces otherassociated reports of regional and/or thematicscope, such as on small island developingstates. More information about GEO-3 canbe found on the UNEP web site(www.unep.org).World Vulnerability ReportSince 1989, the annual UNDP HumanDevelopment Report has increased a widerpublic understanding of the social or humandimensions of development. The humandevelopment index and the subsidiaryhuman poverty index are both based on asmall number of carefully selected parametersfor which data are available and providealternative indicators to conventional grossdomestic product (GDP) measurements.Awareness of the linkages between naturaldisasters and development has also increasedconsiderably in recent years. Vulnerability tocalamities is now recognized by many institutionsas an important issue for sustainabledevelopment. However, while HumanDevelopment Report has been far more successfulthan was originally envisaged, thelinkages between increasing disaster risk and"human" development have yet to be fullyexplored and addressed.In this regard, UNDP is in the process ofproducing a first issue of the World VulnerabilityReport (WVR). The goal of WVR is toincrease the attention of governments and theinternational community to viable approachesto managing and reducing disaster risks.As part of this report, UNDP will present aGlobal Vulnerability Index, which will comparecountries according to their relative risklevels over time. The index will highlight thelevel of national efforts and progress made onmitigating disaster risk annually, and will promotethe further production of related nationalreports. The first issue will be made availablein the second half of 2002.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingplates, operational guidelines and links toonline data sources and more than 400 websites all sorted by categories. It is expected tospeed up emergency awareness and action byproviding decision makers with timely information,as well as with feedback from the RedCross and Red Crescent network throughoutthe world. Specific operational links to datasources during a disaster are grouped, highlightedand then archived for future reference.The Preparedness Section of the site allowsdelegates and National Societies to directlyinput information on disaster trends from anywherein the world and potential response tounfolding disaster situations. During largescaleemergencies, ongoing operational informationcan be exchanged, as logistics mobilizationactions and contact details are also postedto improve communication and cooperationbetween the different actors involved. Thisdynamic and interactive working tool continuesto evolve and adds new features on a regularbasis in response to the needs of its users.After a first year of activity, the password-protectedsite has over 600 users from 178 NationalSocieties, delegations, IFRC and InternationalCommittee of Red Cross staff.Other institutionalized efforts also are underway to facilitate the global use of shared disastermanagement information. Workingthrough both negotiated international agreementsas well as efforts to standardize communicationprotocols and technical compatibility,some governments and disaster managementprofessionals are working to realize a comprehensiveinitiative to increase the availability andimproved utility of advanced communicationand information technologies for more effectivedisaster management. While the objectivesof the Global Disaster Information System(GDIN) are yet to be fully realized, this internationalcollaborative association of specialistsfrom governments, international and donororganizations, NGOs, commercial and academicinstitutions is working to enhance itscapacities to receive and use disaster information.In a general sense, GDIN seeks to offer avariety of services that can link users withappropriate information providers and toencourage the use of greater technical compatibilityor integration of information systemsacross geographical regions so that informationcan be shared more effectively. While much of4159

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesits interest revolves around remotely senseddata, GIS applications, mapping and displayinformation, GDIN also tries to assist disasterspecialists in obtaining information that mayotherwise be difficult for them to locate or toaccess through individual efforts. It particularlystrives to benefit disaster managers in areaswhere there are limited resources or limitedaccess to technology. Further elaboration aboutGDIN activities and intentions can beobtained at www.gdin.org.Using cyberspace to discussdisaster risk reductionAt a more individual level of informationexchange, there is an increasing number ofpublicly accessible and free multidisciplinary e-mail discussion groups, listserves and relatedelectronic networks that can be accessed.An NGO network, The Stakeholder Forumfor Our Common Future, and the ISDR Secretariatorganized an online discussion duringMay 2002, on the subject, "Links between naturalhazards, environment and sustainabledevelopment: Taking action to reduce the riskof disasters". An effort was made to broadenthe discussion of these related topics to a muchlarger group of interested people than thosewho may otherwise be involved with matters ofsustainable development. More than 350 participantsfrom 80 countries registered andmany engaged in an active exchange of views,experience and concerns. These were all postedon a dedicated website which can be viewed atwww.earthsummit2002.org/debate. Numeroustopics emerged, including: the impact of naturalhazards on development and how to reversevulnerability; risk assessment and early warningsystems; fostering community involvementand developing coping capabilities within communities;and the promotion of education andcapacity building. A wealth of experienceunfolded during the month, as case examplesillustrated a variety of specialist knowledge.There were also carefully considered commentsabout current limitations, and the imaginedroles and responsibilities that may lead topotential solutions. Some of these outlooks areincluded in this global review. Regardless ofthe individual views expressed, a readily per-ceived value of such exchanges is the ease ofbeing in touch with other people around theworld who share a professional interest andpersonal commitment to these issues. It is anexcellent form of networking, that is stimulatingtoo. It is easy, and does not require a largeinvestment - beyond ones' own time and wishto contribute.A similar discussion was and cyber conferencewas organized in Novermber 2001 with theDivision for the Advancement of Women(UN/DESA), on disaster reduction and naturalresource management with a geneder perspective,see: www.un.org/womenwatch/dawOne such initiative is the natural-hazards-disastersnetwork that is a managed informationservice and discussion group that covers socioeconomic,psychological, organizational, scientificand technical aspects of disaster triggeredby all kinds of natural and technological hazards.Its members are drawn from operationalagencies and academic institutions throughoutthe world and anyone with an interest in thesubject can join through the list's web site atwww.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/natural-hazards-disasters.Another similar and lively source of information,discussion and professional debateregarding the social dimensions of hazards,vulnerability and risk particularly following amajor disaster, is the Radical Interpretation ofDisaster Experience (RADIX) web site, locatedat www.apu.ac.uk/geography/radix, which wasinitiated by the scholar Ben Wisner . IRADIXseeks to provide a venue for discussion, workingpapers, opinion pieces, resources, or linksthat can help in understanding the root causesof disasters. This includes issues such ashuman rights, respect for diversity, translationof available knowledge into action, linksbetween disasters, economic development andpolitics, with particular relevance to local communityinterests and people-centred activitiesfor risk reduction. RADIX seeks to bringtogether groups related to disaster risk reductionthat have not always shared informationeasily with one another, including scientists,human rights activists, development workers,government officials, business executives, environmentalists,media representatives, etc.160

Regional initiativesRegional information or documentation centresrelating to hazard awareness or risk reductionactivities have been established in severallocations. A review of some of these centres willillustrate the different approaches and thediversity of interests that are served in differentparts of the world, while the value of their variousproducts and services all contribute to thebody of international experience in disaster riskmanagement.AfricaThere is no region-wide disasterinformation centre covering thewide variety of hazard or riskconditions on the African continent,but there are several specializeddocumentation centresthat are expanding their activitiesinto related fields of risk. The SouthernAfrican Research and Documentation Centre(SARDC) is one such highly regarded centre.Based in Harare, Zimbabwe, SARDC is anBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingindependent regional information and documentationcentre that seeks to enhance theeffectiveness of key development processes inthe region. It pursues this aim through the collection,analysis, production and disseminationof information and by working to enable localcapacities to generate and use information.It has operated as a non-profit foundation since1987 and its objective is to improve the base ofknowledge about economic, political, culturaland social developments and their implications,by making information accessible to governmentsand policy makers, NGOs, the privatesector, the media and regional and internationalorganizations. The documentationcentre contains more than 9,000 subject fileson regional issues, a library of books and periodicals,computerized databases of selectedmaterials that are retrievable through the use ofkeywords and maintains specific bibliographicand contact databases on primary areas ofinterest.Particular areas of interest related to riskreduction include the state of the environmentin Southern Africa, disaster management infor-4Drought Information in AfricaMention should also be made of several other specialized or technical organizations in different regions of Africa thatproduce and disseminate numerous information products related to the specific hazards or risk reduction activitieswith which they are involved. As these have not been constituted for fulfilling comprehensive functions related to disasterrisk management and as they do not exist primarily as information or documentation centres, they are discussedin further detail elsewhere in other sections of this review. Nonetheless, the IGAD Drought Monitoring Centre, locatedin Nairobi, Kenya, and the SADC Drought Monitoring Centre in Harare, Zimbabwe, have expanded their professionalinterests in recent years to become important regional centres for information about a wide range of climate conditionsand hazards. Periodic and semi-annual climate forecasts are produced by each of these centres and circulatedwidely among both technical and policy officials in most countries of Southern, Eastern and Central Africa.Similarly, the Regional Early Warning Unit (REWU) and the Regional Remote Sensing Unit (RRSU) of the SADCFood and Natural Resources Development Unit (FANR) produce both routine and specialized information on droughtand related potential risks affecting food security in the 14 SADC countries. The SADC Environment and Land ManagementSector (ELMS) Coordination Unit and the SADC Water Sector Coordination Unit are also both involved significantlyin project activities, policy development and information dissemination pertinent to the natural hazards and risksassociated with their respective areas of interest. In the Sahel region of West Africa, AGRHYMET (www.agrhymet.ne)is a specialized hydrometeorological institution of the Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel(CILSS) with the primary function of producing and disseminating information and related products. These institutionswork together to improve the extent and quality of technical information about environmental hazards, drought and otherrelated disaster risks that is available for policy makers in the region. However, in the broader context of information managementand communication of experience on disaster risk reduction, the example of such specialized centres of knowledge,working within specific professional environments, highlights the problem of incorporating their information capabilitiesmore systematically into conventional practices of risk reduction communication.161

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives162mation devoted especially to drought and otherregional socio-economic and political issuesrelevant to the development process and governancethat have a direct bearing on matters ofrisk awareness and management practices. Inthis latter respect, SARDC maintains theMusokotwane Environment Resource Centrefor Southern Africa (IMERCSA) which providesusers with current information on environmentand disaster management in SouthernAfrica. It is also the leading regional centre forglobal reporting on the state of the environment,producing fact sheets on environmentalissues and a newsletter about the ZambeziRiver basin. It published the comprehensivebook, State of the Environment in SouthernAfrica, with the thematic updates, Water inSouthern Africa and the forthcoming "Biodiversityof indigenous forests and woodlands".With offices in Dar es Salaam, Harare andMaputo, and by working with partner organizationsin all SADC countries, SARDC is wellplaced to facilitate seminars, to conduct briefingsand undertake consultancies for informationexchange on environmental issues, humandevelopment, gender, electoral processes andrelated aspects of information networking.Additionally, SARDC staff and correspondentsproduce a variety of articles and reportson these same subjects for the SouthernAfrican News Features media service. As partof its commitment to develop professionalinformation and reporting capabilities in theregion, SARDC also conducts regional trainingprogrammes involving attachments andexchanges for Southern African journalists,editors and documentalists.Latin America and the CaribbeanAs elsewhere, the worldwide revolutionin digital communicationshas swept through Latin Americaand the Caribbean. As an examplein a crucial area of disaster managementresponsibility, by 2000practically all Ministry of Healthdisaster programmes in the region had beenconnected to the Internet. This global "networkof networks" served as one of the keytools for response to the many emergenciesspawned by the El Niño phenomenon of 1997-1998. The response and reconstruction activi-ties that followed Hurricane Mitch are consideredthe first in which computer-mediatedcommunications played a major role in decision-making.Risk management institutionsand professionals are now routinely accustomedto seeking information from a largenumber of World Wide Web sites, such aswww.disaster.info.desastres.net, sponsored byPAHO.Regional Disaster Information Centre(CRID)One of the most comprehensive sources ofinformation on disaster and risk managementin Latin America and the Caribbean is theRegional Disaster Information Centre(CRID), located in San José, Costa Rica. ThisCentre was established from a pilot schemeoriginally developed by the Pan AmericanHealth Organization (PAHO)/WHO in1990, with a mission to reduce disaster vulnerabilityby promoting a culture of risk reductionand cooperative efforts in risk managementactivities.In 1997 it was conceived as a multi-organizationalproject supported by PAHO, IDNDR,CEPREDENAC, IFRC, CNE, MSF.CRID has proceeded to offer information anddocumentation online and for direct consultationat its offices on a wide range of subjects, inboth Spanish and English. CRID providesgovernments, professionals and civil societyorganizations with abundant, unrestricted andfreely available disaster information. A web siteat www.crid.or.cr or www.crid.desastres.netprovides online access to CRID resources aswell as convenient links to other disaster informationresources. It now responds to some120,000 information requests yearly as measuredby use of the information products availableon the web site, requests for technicaladvice and information searches by electronicforms and mail.Additional products available from CRIDinclude a Virtual Disaster Library CD-ROMin English and Spanish, produced by the UnitedNations system, and the LILACS BibliographicDatabase on CD-ROM, updated peri-

Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharing4The Centre has become a regarded regional institutionthrough its gathering, processing and disseminationof high-quality information, as well as a focalpoint for training and knowledge engineering relatedto bibliographic information technologies. A primaryaspect of all its activities is the building ofadditional institutional capacities for the bettermanagement and wider dissemination of disasterinformation, or the management of national or localdisaster information centres. While its efforts contributeto the institutionalization of a regional disasterinformation system, CRID also promotes the concept of decentralization and disaster informationexchange so that institutions and users can access materials more easily. In order to fulfil these functionsCRID provides the following information services:• Assists a wide variety of institutional and individual users to search and find disaster and health-relatedinformation available through physical or electronic media;• Electronic access to an extensive collection of documents and other source materials;• Publication and distribution of information products such as bulletins, bibliographies, and othermaterials for both public and technical use;• Development and delivery of training for disaster management information centres, in such areas asthe use of databases, controlled vocabulary for disaster-related information, use of the Internet, etc.;• Design, production and distribution of training materials;• Collaboration with other institutions interested in disaster information management;• Management of information management projects;• Organization of information stands, participation in specific events, etc.odically. Furthermore, CRID produces specializedbibliographies on specific disaster related issues. Sofar 30 issues of this Bibliodes series have been publishedand distributed to several thousand users inboth print and electronic versions. Other informationproducts developed by CRID include a varietyof training modules on information managementand the digitization of documents, made availableonline or on CD-ROM. The Centre also providesinformation management project administrationservices and provides technical advice to sisterorganizations on the development of web sites andother information products. Currently with fundingfrom ISDR, PAHO/WHO and the UnitedStates National Library of Medicine, CRID isimplementing a project aimed at creating betterinformation management capacities in El Salvador,Honduras and Nicaragua.CEPREDENACMore specific to the disaster reduction activities ofindividual countries in Central America, theCEPREDENAC web site (www.cepredenac.org)contains continuously updatedinformation on plans, programmes andprojects in the region. The web site containsdisaster statistics and analysis for theregion, as well as links to the web sites ofeach of the national disaster organizationsin Central America and many other riskand disaster management organizationsactive in the region. As the regional coordinationcentre for disaster prevention,CEPREDENAC has an importantresponsibility in encouraging economic andsocial planners working at national, regionaland international levels to incorporate allinformation available in project design.This necessarily includes information abouthazards and risks and how they may affectcost-benefit analyses of development andinfrastructure projects, leading to possibledesign modifications that can bolsterdurable investments.In 1999, CEPREDENAC produced adetailed inventory of available hazard, riskand vulnerability maps and related informationas a first step in making them availableto decision makers regionally and163

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives164A simplified version is available on the CEPRE-DENAC web site and an interactive format isbeing prepared to allow users to conduct searchesand queries while online. Every source is describedby the• Type of map support, digital format, originalsoftware, etc.;• Thematic nature of map (hazard, vulnerability,risk/type of hazard);• Scale on which map is displayed, geographicalcoverage, year of last update;• Institution in charge of compiling map information;• Means of accessibility, reciprocity conditions.investors worldwide. This inventory of 314different cartographic references presentssources of information related to hazard, vulnerabilityor risk issues in Central America in aconventional database format. The inventoryincludes institutions located outside the regionthat have produced additional cartographicmaterials about Central America. The relationalformat of the database allows searches bycountry, institution and type of hazard.Disaster Inventory - LA REDWider public dissemination of disaster informationis similarly served by the DESINVEN-TAR disaster inventory programme that wascreated and is maintained by the Latin AmericanNetwork for the Social Study of DisasterPrevention (LA RED). This innovative softwarepermits the storage and recovery of statisticalanalysis and graphic presentation of informationabout all types of damaging events registeredin a database at the smallest territorialscale. Its utility has been demonstrated throughits having become the official software used byall of the national disaster organizations in theregion through an agreement fostered byCEPREDENAC. It will soon be introducedinto the Caribbean under the joint auspices ofthe Association of Caribbean States andCEPREDENAC. In addition to this specificdisaster inventory, the LA RED web site(www.desenredando.org) contains publications,reports about ongoing projects and additionalinformation about social science initiatives invulnerability and risk reduction throughout theLatin American and Caribbean region.The Caribbean Disaster Information NetworkThe Caribbean Disaster Information Network(CARDIN) (www.cardin@uwimona.edu.jm)was established in 1999 at the library of theUniversity of the West Indies at Mona,Jamaica. By drawing on the previous experienceof, and working closely with, CEPRE-DENAC and CRID, CARDIN has pursuedsimilar information objectives: to serve as asubregional Disaster Information Centre andto become the central focal point for theexchange of disaster information in theCaribbean. CARDIN provides importantinformation and communication linkagesbetween the various national disaster managementorganizations in Caribbean countries.The CARDIN focus is to provide wideraccess and coverage of disaster information inthe region and to facilitate the dissemination ofdisaster-related information to the generalCaribbean public. It will strive to do that byworking through electronic means on theWorld Wide Web, by publishing a newsletterand by document delivery services. It alsointends to create a database of disaster relatedinformation that is available on the Internet,CDs and in print formats that will provideessential resources for policy makers, practitioners,researchers and the general public.CARDIN offers the following services:• Document delivery services ;• Documentation centre ;• Online search for disaster information;• Reference services;• Electronic journals;• Links to selected full-text databases;• Dissemination of disaster information tothe public through a web site, newslettersand document delivery services;• Creation of full-text documents andscanned images pertaining to disasterrelatedissues in the Caribbean for widerelectronic circulation;• Expanded working relationships withother agencies for more effective coordinationof disaster information activitieswithin the region.

North AmericaThe Natural Hazards Researchand Applications InformationCenter at the University of Coloradoin the United States wasfounded 30 years ago to"strengthen communicationamong researchers and theindividuals and organizations concerned withmitigating natural disasters". Its Natural HazardsObserver is a free publication publishedten times a year that provides current hazardsand risk reduction information, resource andinstitutional contacts, new publications,announcements, research initiatives and findingsacross the entire range of professional disciplinesand jurisdictional responsibilitiesBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharinginvolved with risk issues, predominantly inNorth America.Copies of the Center's Disaster Research, an e-mail newsletter, the Natural Hazards Informer,a peer-reviewed series that summarizes currentknowledge in specific areas of natural hazardinterests, and many selected disaster-relatedInternet sites are all available on the Center'sweb site at www.colorado.edu/hazards. TheCenter also has an extensive specialized librarywhich is catalogued on the web site as well as awealth of material related to hazards researchand the mitigation of natural disasters. All titlesand the procedures to obtain the Center's manypublications are also available on the Center'sweb site.4There are many other noteworthy disaster risk management or hazard research centres in the UnitedStates covering different subject areas or specializations. As the subject reflects rapidly growing publicinterest and professional relevance throughout United States society, several new centres dedicated to variousaspects of risk management are being established. While many exist as part of a university or academicinstitution, others have been established as "charitable institutions", foundations, professional or scientificorganizations, NGOs or commercial enterprises. Practically all of them are engaged in theexchange and dissemination of information related to risk reduction and virtually all such centres haveweb sites and additional information materials. An extensive list of these many sources of hazard and disasterinformation, institutes for study in related fields and all of their contact information are available onthe Natural Hazards Center web site.An example of regional collaboration to publicize hazard and risk assessments to a wider public audiencecan be cited from North America. In 1999, the National Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection andEmergency Preparedness (OCIPEP) in Canada coordinated research with the National Centre for DisasterPrevention (CENAPRED) in Mexico and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to producethe North American Map of Natural Hazards and Disasters. This comprehensive and informativeseries of maps drew on information from a number of existing sources and was published with very widecirculation by the American National Geographic Society * . The distribution of different natural hazardswas combined with population characteristics to provide a simplified picture of risk and vulnerabilitythroughout North America. Beyond the public education values served by the map, the joint exercise inproducing it was instrumental in initiating cross-border dialogue and the sharing of knowledge betweenhazard experts and national, state/provincial and local organizations with interests in supporting hazardawareness and risk reduction in the three countries.* The National Geographic Society, Natural Hazards of North America Map (Washington, D.C., July 1998).165

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesAsiaIn Asia, barely a start has beenmade to adequately compile thevast range of institutional abilitiesand breadth of information availableon disaster risk reduction.There are important institutionalfocal points for the subject such asthe ones that follow, but there are many moreacademic and technical facilities that addressrisk matters in their own areas of professionalexpertise or within the context of individualcountry needs.Asian Disaster Preparedness Centerwww.adpc.ait.ac.th.The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center(ADPC) is a regional resource centre dedicatedto disaster reduction for safer communitiesand sustainable development in Asia and thePacific. Located in Bangkok, Thailand,ADPC is recognized as an important focalpoint for promoting disaster awareness anddeveloping capabilities that foster institutionalizeddisaster management and mitigation policies.ADPC maintains a specialized library ofdisaster-related material and publishes thequarterly Asian Disaster Management Newsnewsletter for the disaster management communityin Asia and the Pacific. It also supportsregional information exchange, networkingand capacity- building through a EuropeanCommunity Humanitarian Office DisasterPreparedness (DIPECHO) programme inSouth-East Asia and by working through itspartner organization in its Asian Urban DisasterManagement Programme supported by theUS/AID. Additional information about itswide-ranging information services and projectsis available on the web site.Asian Disaster Reduction Centerwww.adrc.or.jpSimilarly, by collaborating with partners inAsian countries the Asian Disaster ReductionCenter (ADRC) located in Kobe, Japan,accumulates and provides disaster reductioninformation throughout the region. The bodyof information available at ADRC provides abasis to carry out research into multinationaldisaster reduction particularly as it relates tomultidisciplinary and multinational cooperation.The Center works through severalmechanisms to convey information and to linkdifferent institutional activities related to disasterrisk reduction in Asia. ADRC has developeda unique geographical information systemfor disaster management called VEN-TEN with the objectives of providing both acommon structure for referring to disastersand also the data that it contains. It has alsodeveloped a comprehensive database on disastermanagement in collaboration with existinginstitutions such as CRED andOCHA/ReliefWeb and by drawing on theinformation resources of ADRC member andadvisory countries. A network of NGOs inAsia called the Asian Disaster Reduction andResponse Network (ADRRN) is also beingformed to recognize the importance of NGOsin disaster reduction by exchanging informationand promoting more collaborative relationships.These and other activities are accessiblethrough the informative ADRC website, and are addressed through a bi-weeklyADRC newsletter. Additionally, by includingan extensive list of related institutional linkagesin its web site, ADRC seeks to expandaccess to current information and to motivatebroader opportunities of cooperation amongalready existing institutions.166

EuropeA different type of informationis provided by the BenfieldGreig Hazard Research Centre(BGHRC) located at UniversityCollege, London, in theUnited Kingdom. This centrehas been recognized as a modelof productive public-private collaboration inextending the availability and wider exposureof information about disaster risk reduction. Ithas the primary objective of providing a meansto transfer advanced natural hazard and riskresearch, practice and innovation from the academicenvironment to the business world, governmentand international agencies. The intellectualproducts of BGHRC and CranfieldUniversity of the UK fall into the two categoriesof strategic research about natural hazardsand the processes that drive them, andmore specific applied studies targeted at reducingthe impact of natural hazards on society.There are also plans to publish a series of topicalpapers, "Issues in risk science", summarizingand promoting new research about naturalhazards and associated risks, disaster managementand related issues. Current informationsupplied by the Centre for disaster managementprofessionals and the public includes thequarterly newsletter Alert and a series of workingpapers on disaster management that waslaunched in 2001. Individual projects haveBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingyielded their own materials for wider circulation,such as the operational manuals CommunicationDuring Volcanic Emergencies andCorporate Social Responsibility and DisasterReduction.Additionally, by being able to draw on an enviablerange of hazards expertise from UniversityCollege, London and through its own extensiveresearch network, BGHRC provides publicinformation resources and media access to academics,research organizations and governmentinstitutions in the United Kingdom, throughoutEurope and internationally. This includesthe dissemination of professional analysis andobservations through an information serviceand the publication of event and post?lossreports that are all used widely by the media,including all the major United Kingdom radioand television news services and others inEurope, the United States and elsewhere.In France, PRIM.NET (www.prim.net) is aFrench educational multidisciplinary internetportal from the Ministry of land-use planningand environment (MATE) which promotesthe culture of natural and technological disasterprevention. It underlines the close relationshipbetween the human being and its naturalenvironment in the framework of sustainabledevelopment. It is a forum for teachers, studentsand citizens where they can find usefulinformation in French.4167

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives168Selected national information programmesTo varying degrees and with different intentions,individual countries have establishedtheir own distinctive approaches to institutionalizinginformation functions for disasterreduction. While recognizing that the informationneeds of countries vary and there are reasonsfor different emphases, there is nonethelessa growing recognition of the need to combinedifferent types of information that couldbe collected or maintained historically withinvarious departments or agencies. The examplesthat follow demonstrate some of the challengesthat countries have faced in gaining a clearunderstanding of their respective risk issuesand how four different countries are proceedingto update and consolidate the body of theirinformation for improved disaster risk reduction.In all of the cases cited, improved hazardand disaster risk information was an essentialprecursor to the further development of strategicnational disaster risk management programmes.Recognizing the similarities between these factors and thoserevealed by the LA RED DESINVENTAR database in LatinAmerica, the MANDISA disaster event database was conceivedwith the following considerations in mind:• Disaster incidents can occur at different scales, ranging fromhousehold to provincial and national levels;• Disaster risk is driven by the interaction between triggeringhazard factors and underlying conditions of social, economic,environmental and infrastructural vulnerability;• Disaster impacts can occur in different socio-economic sectorsor subject contexts, and therefore may be recorded in awide range of formats or institutional locations;• Disaster risk can be reduced by minimizing vulnerabilityideallythrough ongoing, practical initiatives that achievemultiple development objectives; and most fundamentally,• Public access to information about local patterns of disasterrisk is empowering and facilitates community participationin decision-making, thus strengthening opportunities forresponsive governance.South AfricaIn South Africa, the University of Cape Town'sDisaster Mitigation for Sustainable LivelihoodsProgramme (DiMP) has developed adisaster information management system forthe Monitoring, Mapping and Analysis ofDisaster Incidents in South Africa (MAN-DISA). The objective of the project, cofinancedby OFDA/USAID and DFID/UK,is to create a system that can document hazards,vulnerabilities and trends related to localizedsmall to medium-scale disaster incidentsand to organize that information for betterdecision-making. Despite an earlier fragmentedto non-existent information base causinglocalized events to be frequently overlooked,these smaller events are now considered to havedisproportionate impacts on already marginalizedcommunities. Moreover, as informationabout these disaster events is stored in differentgovernment services, it has been nearly impossibleto create a consolidated profile on municipaldisaster occurrence and losses-either bytype, location, consequences or over time.During 1999/2000 a team of researchers identifiedmore than a dozen sources concerningdisaster losses in Cape Town alone, containingmore than 10,000 records of disasters. Thiswas in glaring contrast to only 20-30 disastersthat had been officially declared during thesame period. One of the telling observations ofthe research was that, with the exception of twoelectronic sources, all other information wasconfined to paperbound materials. Such widelydistributed and often-incompatible sourcesof information highlight the challenges of creatingeffective, synthesized disaster informationsystems. This has made integrated disasterreduction planning virtually impossible.The information organized by the project is nowmaintained in a database and linked to a GISsystem, visible on a publicly accessible web site.Since the end of 2001 www.MANDISA.org.zahas been consolidating data on disaster eventsthat occurred in Cape Town between 1990 and1999 and has been displaying them with relatedinformation in tables, maps, graphs and photos.Users can interrogate the database online andgenerate additional information about trendsand patterns of disaster risk. It is anticipated thatthis will enable municipal planners and residentsalike to consider disaster risks more strategically,just as crime, public health, traffic incidentsand other forms of risk are considered to beimportant developmental priorities underlyingbroader aspects of basic human security.Improved access to additional information has

created a more readily understood concept ofhazards and risks now that they are not marginalizedas rare or unique occurrences "caused"simply by either natural or divine intervention.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingbeing established. The Center is expected toopen officially in 2002.India4ChinaIn another context related to national policiesfor improved disaster risk reduction, theNational Disaster Reduction Plan of the People'sRepublic of China (NDRP) adopted anobjective to establish a comprehensive informationsystem for the entire country. It seeks tostrengthen the institutional abilities of sharinginformation, communication technology andoperational experience among the many governmentdepartments and agencies alreadydoing so, but only within their own respectivefields. The central Government authoritiesapproved a project in 1997 to create the ChinaNational Center for Natural Disaster Reduction(CNCNDR) and for it to act as the comprehensivenational disaster information systemserving the State Council, all ministries andgovernment commissions, and linking centralGovernment authorities with provinces andmunicipalities. It is expected that the systemwill be able to incorporate inputs from satelliteremote sensing systems, provide comprehensivemanagement system displays of disasterinformation, and form the basis of assessmentand decision support systems by drawing onthe widest possible range of professional andtechnical expertise throughout the country.This wealth of material will then be providedfor analysis and synthesis by the many technicaland multidisciplinary abilities located in theNational Academy of Sciences. By this unifiedprocess, the National Center will be able tomake full use of the disaster reduction informationand operational experience of all therelevant ministries, commissions, researchinstitutions and social groups. It can then providesenior level officials with comprehensiveinformation, professional services and technicalguidance for more effective decision-makingin matters of disaster risk management.Moreover, the Center is also expected to playan important role in professional training andpublic education in those specific fields concernedwith national risk reduction. A newpurpose-designed facility for the NationalCenter for Natural Disaster Management isIndia has also embarked on a strategic plan toimprove the extent and availability of improvedinformation for risk management activities.The Government of India's High PoweredCommittee on Disaster Management Plans(HPC-DMP) has decided to establish aNational Natural Disaster Knowledge Network.The programme aims to facilitate an interactive,simultaneous dialogue between all officialauthorities, many professional disciplines andinterested communities throughout the countryinvolved with hazards and natural disasters.The Nanadisk-Net is planned as a powerful"network of networks" to store, manage anddisseminate information and to connect governmentdepartments, research institutions,universities, community-based organizationsand individuals working with the variousaspects of hazard and disaster management.The system is intended to serve as a commonrepository for accumulated disaster managementexperience, with the advantage that theNetwork may then serve as a basis for expandedopportunities of distanced, electronic training.By including access to libraries and otherresource institutions, these digital services willbe able to provide much wider access to globaldatabases, training materials and early warningsystems. It is also anticipated that more technical,academic and professional institutions willbecome motivated to link into an integratedprofessional network that spans multiple professionalsectors of interest.AustraliaThe Australian Geological Survey Organizationhas been working with Emergency ManagementAustralia (EMA) to establish the AustralianDisaster Information Network (AusDIN).AusDIN is a consortium of national agencies,state emergency authorities, universities andprivate enterprise representatives working todevelop an information network that providesinformation for all types of crisis managementincluding risk assessment, mitigation, planning,response and recovery activities. It is169

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesdesigned to be an Internet-based service thatprovides accessibility to data and informationservices for a wide variety of people involved indisaster and risk management. AusDIN isbeing developed within the internationalframework provided by GDIN and is plannedto be linked with GDIN information systems.It is, however, just one part of a more comprehensiveAustralian undertaking to improve themanagement of information for disaster andrisk management purposes. Additional nontechnicalapproaches are being developed tofoster networks and forums for people involvedin the provision of information relevant toanticipating and managing crisis.One such related initiative has been undertakenby the Urban Geoscience Division of Geo-science Australia, the national agency for geoscienceresearch and information. The AustralianDisaster Management Information Network(ADMIN) undertakes holistic and comprehensiveassessments and numerical modellingof risk from natural and man-made hazardsin priority urban areas and addressesissues of concern to urban communities thatrequire geoscientific information. The geophysicalnetwork carries out synoptic observationsof earthquakes, tsunamis, geomagneticfields as well as nuclear explosions. It seeks toincrease national capacities for the distributionof comprehensive technical data and informationfor better disaster risk reduction andresponse.170

Technical information service conveyingexperience about different hazardsAside from the specific requirements of earlywarning which are reviewed in section 5.6,there are other examples of information centresdevoted to specific hazards. Typically they conveyfrequently updated technical data as well asmore general information about the changingevents and circumstances pertaining to theirindividual hazard interests. They all fulfil apublic information function and many areengaged in providing specialist reference materialor advice to policy makers. A selection ofthese hazard information centres is provided.While most of them focus on a single type ofhazard, the range of their professional contactsis typically quite extensive, reaching from scientificdisciplines through environmental conditionsto the social and economic dimensionsof local communities where disaster reductionmust eventually take place. Each of the examplesbelow relates to the broad contexts inwhich disaster risk management informationfunctions need to occur.Integrated Hazard InformationThe United States Geological Survey's Center forIntegration of Natural Disaster Information(CINDI) is a good example in which informationabout multiple hazards is collected, integratedand communicated to a wider public. Itswebsite at cindi.usgs.gov provides informationabout drought, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes,landslides, volcanoes, wildfire, geomagnetismand other special topical areas of risk viewed inthe context of the earth sciences or naturalresources involved. With Outreach, Researchand Response dimensions this information centeris able to provide near-real time monitoringof hazards by integrating a variety of technicalinformation drawn from many sources, andthen to communicate to either technical teamsor decision-makers. After a disaster, the Centercan combine remotely sensed data witharchived information to assess the nature andextent of impact from a particular event. Thecompiled information which has internationalapplication is also available for use in inter-disciplinaryresearch that contributes to theimproved use of data for hazard and risk assessment,or in the development of risk managementstrategies by local or national officials.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingHydrometeorological HazardsInformation about hydrometeorological hazardsis widely available through many institutionalsources around the world, with specificcurrent information as well as archived datarelated to individual countries accessiblethrough every national meteorological andhydrological service. A wide variety of globalproducts including forecasts valid for a periodof 10 to 30 days are available at the three WorldMeteorological Centers located in:• Melbourne (www.bom.gov.au),• Moscow (www.mecom.ru/roshydro), and• Washington, D.C. (www.nws.noaa.gov).Specialized geographical products, and informationrelated to specific types of hazards arecompiled and widely disseminated by morethan 20 World Meteorological Organization SpecializedRegional Meteorological Centers,(RSMCs). There are 24 RSMCs with relatedgeographical specialization located in Algiers,Beijing, Bracknell, Brasilia, Buenos Aires,Cairo, Dakar, Darwin, Jeddah, Khabarovsk,Melbourne, Miami, Montreal, Moscow,Nairobi, New Delhi, Novosibirsk, Offenbach,Pretoria, Rome, Tashkent, Tokyo, Tunis/Casablanca, and Wellington.There are also eight designated RSMCs forthe provision of computer-generated modelsfor analyzing environmental crises and for providinghydrological or meteorological guidancein emergency actions. These centers can providespecialized transport, dispersion, and depositionmodels in accordance with internationallyrecognized arrangements and standards.These centers are located in Bracknell UK. forEurope; Toulouse, France for Africa; Montrealand Washington D.C., for the Americas;Beijing, Obninsk (Russia) and Tokyo for Asia;and Melbourne for the Pacific Region.Hydrological information is also available frommany regional centers throughout the world.Hydrology and water-related issues are thefocus of many international agencies. One suchcenter with a global focus is the Centre for Ecologyand Hydrology (CEH) www.nerc-wallingford.ac.uk.By contrast, extensive informationand widespread institutional linkages related todrought and associated environmental conditionscan be found at the International Drought1714

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesInformation Center at the University of Nebraskain Lincoln, U.S.A. (www.ngdc.noaa.gov andenso.unl.edu/agmet/ centers.htm), which alsooffers a series of regional training seminars ondrought management and planning techniquesaimed at training scientists and policymakersworldwide in the science of drought managementand preparedness. Another source is theOxford Drought Research Institute in the U.K.Climate ChangeAn important international initiative has beenproceeding since mid-2001 by an Inter-CommissionTask Team convened under the auspicesof the World Meteorological Organization(WMO), its technical commissions and MemberStates to create a series of associatedRegional Climate Centers (RCCs) Althoughindividual centers are not yet established, theyare being planned in order to increase the collaborationamong climatological, meteorologicaland hydrological /water resources manage-ment technical communities and to facilitatethe widespread availability of climatic informationpertaining to longer term forecasting.With the recognized need for more consistenttechnical criteria for data generation andexchange, and broader forms of inter-sectoralinformation analysis and dissemination particularlyregarding the availability of seasonal tointer-annual forecasts, work is continuing todefine both the potential organizational andfunctional responsibilities of Regional ClimateCenters.While this endeavor will necessarily drawheavily on the already established NationalMeteorological and Hydrological Services ofindividual countries, as well as the RSMCsengaged in providing a variety of hazard informationand forecast products, the initiative is atimely indication of institutional moves toaddress emerging global needs for both technicaland public information about changingperceptions of risk. In recent years the RegionalClimate Outlook Forums have played a keyOther RSMCs specialize in tropical cyclone forecasting and the dissemination of related information services.These include:• Nadi, Fiji Tropical Cyclone Centre covering the South-west Pacific Region, (www.met.gov.fj/advisories);• Honolulu Hurricane Center for the Central North Pacific Ocean,(www.nws.noaa.gov/pr/hnl/cphc/pages/cphc.shtml);• New Delhi Tropical Cyclone Centre, for the eastern Indian Ocean,(www.imd.ernet.in/services/cyclone/cyclone-warning-services);• Miami Hurricane Center for the Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean Sea, (www.nhc.noaa.gov/products),;• Tokyo Typhoon Centre for the western Pacific and Asian Region(ddb.kishou.go.jp/typhoon/cyclone/cyclone);• La Réunion Tropical Cyclone Centre for the western part of the Indian Ocean, (www.meteo.fr/temps/domtom/La_Reunion/trajGP/data/home_trajGP).In addition there are Tropical Cyclone Warning Centers that have more specific localized regional responsibilities,such as those exemplified by the following:• the Perth Bureau of Meteorology coverage for Western Australia, (www.bom.gov.au/weather/wa),• the Darwin Bureau of Meteorology for the waters north of Australia,(www.bom.gov.au/weather/nt/inside/cyclone/cyclone.shtml),• the Brisbane Bureau of Meteorology for coverage of the Coral Sea,(www.bom.gov.au/weather/qld/cyclone),• the Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea National Weather Service for the Solomon Sea and Gulf ofPapua, (website under preparation) and• the Wellington Meteorological Service of New Zealand, Ltd. for the Southern Seas etc. (www.metservice.co.nz/forecasts/high_seas.asp)172

ole in defining these future requirements forRCC functions in the Regions through theircross-program analysis and wide circulation ofmulti-disciplinary information. At the sametime the predominant, and distinctive, rolesand requirements of different geographicalregions around the world are recognized asbeing crucial to the most effective accomplishmentof the intended objectives. As a broadconceptual framework of RCCs continues toemerge, attention will proceed with individualRegions considering their specific requirementsand assessing current operational andtechnical abilities to meet them.Wildfire and related hazardsThe current state of fire science that includesfundamental fire research and fire ecology andthe results of bio-geochemical and atmosphericsciences research of the last decade providesufficient knowledge to support decision-makingin fire policy at most management levels ofresponsibility. However, in many countries thiswealth of knowledge and expertise is either notknown or is not readily accessible and availablefor developing adequate fire policies and relatedmeasures of operational management. Theprolonged and severe fire and smoke episodethat occurred in Southeast Asia in 1997-98demonstrated that the available knowledgeabout fire and the related management expertisewas utilized only to a limited extent. Thesecircumstances led to confusion and uncertaintyat national, regional and international levels ofresponsibility, resulting in delayed decisionsand the late application of appropriately targetedinternational response to the fire and smokeemergencies. Retrospectively this could beexplained by the lack of a regional SoutheastAsian fire information system.Considering the wider extent of fire issuesaround the world, as well as the extent of globalexperience in the field. The establishment ofan institution preliminarily designated as a"Global Fire Management Facility" was proposedby a number of international conferencessince 1996. On the basis of these recommendationsthe Government of Germany respondedthrough the Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Assistance in the Ministry ofForeign Affairs to establish a Global Fire MonitoringCenter (GFMC) at the Max PlanckBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingInstitute for Chemistry in Freiburg, Germanyfrom October 1998.The GFMC serves an active role in the documentation,information and monitoring servicefunctions among the fire science community,the technical community of engineering, technologydevelopment, the primary user communityof fire managers, as well as policy makers.It aims to provide widespread and timely informationin the field of long-term strategic planningfor the prevention of disastrous wildlandfires as well as enabling preparedness measuresand appropriate responses for fire emergencies.A worldwide network of many institutions andindividuals generates GFMC products of bothnational and global scale. All of that informationand data are systematically collected, interpretedand displayed on the Internet by theGFMC at www.uni-freiburg.de/fireglobe.The information remains current, being updatedfrequently, and as may be required, daily. Itis then archived for future reference orresearch purposes.Seismic HazardsWhile there are many seismological and seismicengineering institutes around the world,widely known among the practitioners mostimmediately involved for their technical orinformational services. Two representativeexamples of information centers are cited herethat are particularly engaged in the disseminationof information about the seismic hazards.The Earthquake Hazards Program of theUnited States Geological Survey (EHP/USGS) is part of the National EarthquakeHazards Reduction Program lead by the FederalEmergency Management Agency. Thisprogram has the primary objective to providerelevant earthquake science information andknowledge for reducing deaths, injuries, andproperty damage from earthquakes throughunderstanding of their characteristics andeffects and by providing the information andknowledge needed to mitigate those losses.The EHP/USGS' role is to provide earth sciencesinformation and related products forearthquake loss reduction. Information is availableon its website at (www.earthquake.usgs.gov/ ) to serve its specific goals.1734

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe Earthquake Engineering Research Institute(EERI), in the United States is a nationalnonprofit, technical society of engineers, geoscientists,architects, planners, public officials,and social scientists, with the objective toreduce earthquake risk by advancing the scienceand practice of earthquake engineering.The organization seeks to accomplish thisobjective by improving the understanding ofthe impact of earthquakes on the physical,social, economic, political and cultural environments,and by advocating comprehensive andrealistic measures for reducing the harmfuleffects of earthquakes. EERI is recognized asthe authoritative source for earthquake riskreduction information in the USA, and in partnershipwith other nations, and is involved indeveloping earthquake risk reduction informationworldwide.The Institute is best known for its field investigationsand reconnaissance reports detailingthe effects of destructive earthquakes. OftenEERI serves as coordinator for the investigativeefforts of several organizations. EERImembership includes leading earthquakeinvestigators in all relevant fields from manycountries, and has been engaged for manyyears in a project, with National Science Foundationsupport, to maximize the learning fromdestructive earthquakes. Preliminary informationon the effects of destructive events is pub-Primary GFMC products include• early warning of fire danger• near-real time monitoring of fire events• interpretation and synthesis of fire information• archive of global fire information• facilitation of links between national and internationalinstitutions involved in fire research, developmentand policy development• support of local, national and international bodies todevelop long-term strategies or policies for wildlandfire management• emergency hotline and (restricted) liaison capabilitiesfor providing assistance in rapid assessment anddecision-support for responding to wildland fireemergencies.lished in the monthly Newsletter. Largerreports on major earthquakes are published assupplements to Earthquake Spectra, EERI'squarterly professional journal. EERI alsosponsors post-earthquake technical briefings,an effort to reach professional communitiesthroughout the United States.In addition to its publications, EERI has producedmore than 50 slide sets covering specificearthquakes and their impacts, earthquakeresistant design, seismicity, unreinforcedmasonry buildings, loss reduction measures,mitigation of earthquake hazards, and a newseries on earthquake basics. Videotapes producedby EERI include technical briefings onthe Armenia, Loma Prieta, and Hokkaidonansei-okiearthquakes. Further informationabout EERI and the availability of its informationmaterials can be found on the organization'swebsite at www.EERI.org.Volcanic HazardsWithin the volcanological community, theWorld Organization of Volcano Observatories(WOVO), a commission of IAVCEI, is startingto build a major database involving informationabout the former "Decade" volcanoes.(www.volcano.undp.nodak.edu/vwdocs/wovo)By providing both researchers and citizensalike more access to the details that scientistsare monitoring, it will help everyone proceedfrom overly simplistic considerations of"whether a volcano will erupt tomorrow ornot", to a more realistic availability of data withinterpretations provided along with theiraccompanying uncertainties. The system willalso convey information about what is beingmonitored to reduce those uncertainties, andclarify what else can and cannot be forecast.Initially, the database, WOVOdat will be an historicaldatabase so that observatories can conducttheir own research for two years beforeproviding data to WOVOdat, but eventually, itis anticipated that observatories may realize thebroader benefits to be gained by sharing data inreal-time.174

A second initiative to disseminate more volcanologicalinformation more widely alsoinvolves public electronic access. It is widelyknown that volcanic eruptions affect peopleand things in often predictable ways, but informationabout these effects has been spotty andnot relayed systematically from the site of oneeruption to the next. Many lessons are unnecessarilyrelearned, and further research elsewhereis impeded by others rediscovering basicknowledge derived from previous global experience.Efforts are currently underway toupdate a global compendium that will compileBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingcurrent information about the effects of volcaniceruptions - including practical tips fortheir mitigation. This will be placed on theInternet for easy access from nearly any countryand allow, for example, a water supply engineerand rice agronomist in one country tolearn from the prior experience of a water supplyengineer and rice agronomist in anothercountry, within minutes. Pictures will illustratethe problems, while text will provide detailsand suggest possible mitigation measures.4175

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesFuture challenges and prioritieschallengesThe wide range of selected information servicesand program initiatives described above providea basis to identify primary areas for futureimprovements in information management andthe communication of experience in disasterrisk reduction. Five key areas are identified:• Availability of information• Necessary capacities to utilize data• Clearing house responsibilities• Expanded access to information• Future technologyAvailability of informationThere is currently abundant information,available globally, on disaster risk reductionbut that does not necessarily translate into itswidespread availability, nor is it particularlywell targeted for all potential users. In manyplaces and cultures there is little relevant informationconveyed that is suited to local languagesor the actual living conditions of peopleexposed to natural hazards.The very abundance of information also createsa problem for non-specialized or publicusers to ascertain the relative value or quality ofspecific information, if they are unaware of theoriginating source or broader professional contextof the various sources.Useful information demands that databases bekept current, bibliographic resources be continuallyexpanded, and that access and searchcriteria should remain consistent and be widelyunderstood by an expanding user group.Necessary capacities to utilize dataFrequent observations are made by individualcountry authorities about the inadequacy ofmany institutions that frustrate their desire toknow exactly what relevant information exists,where to find it, and how to access it in themost efficient manner.A priority initiative of considerable benefitwould be the joint conduct of a national auditabout risk-related information needs, availabilityand limitations. International organizationscould help by providing guidance about existingsources or means for obtaining well-suitedinformation.The engagement of existing regionallyfocussedinformation centres such as CRED,CARDIN, ADPC, ADRC, and the Universityof Colorado’s Natural Hazard Center, andthe use of their experience in linking suppliersof information with practitioners would be particularlyvaluable.Clearing house responsibilitiesThere is a glaring need for an internationalcapacity to fulfil clearing house functionsspecifically related to the identification, orderingand dissemination of hazards and disasterrisk-management information. The intendedrole is one that could foster the exchange of relevantinformation through the use of lists oflists, directories, and catalogue/search/retrieve/deliver procedures that would serve todirect and connect a very wide range of usersand practitioners for all policy-making levels.Such facilities exist but concentrate on internationaldisaster response or disaster preparedness,such as ReliefWeb and GDIN.The ISDR secretariat is working in associationwith partners, and is in the process of strengtheningits web site and resource centre to builda comprehensive and easily accessible series ofdirectories and linkages that can form the basisof an approach to such a global clearing housefunction for disaster reduction.By pursuing the issue globally, the existence ofprimary information gaps, the inadequacy ofrelevant data, or geographical shortfalls ininformation availability or dissemination maybe more easily identified and addressed. Such acoordinated approach can also, with adequate176

support, contribute to the establishment ofcommonly accepted protocols or proceduresfor recording or exchanging disaster riskreduction information, similar in function tothe new XML protocol being used in the globalsoftware industry.Other commonly acknowledged practicescould greatly expand the availability of riskrelatedinformation by establishing nomenclatureand facilitating search procedures relatedto key words, such as yellow pages type directories,contact details of widely recognized specialistinstitutions and international experts inkey areas of risk reduction.Experience gained over the years from the evolutionof ReliefWeb as an acknowledged information-richresource could be beneficial to thedevelopment of a similar comprehensive informationplatform dedicated to risk issues anddisaster reduction information. Such a comprehensivePreventionWeb does not yet exist butcould be a powerful instrument within ISDRto motivate and serve the different constituenciesassociated with disaster risk assessmentand reduction activities worldwide.Expanded access to informationBeyond the technical limitations of informationsystems, more attention needs to be devoted tothe human dimension of communication, withboth policies and facilities that encourage amuch wider opportunity for popular and community-basedinvolvement in information processingand dissemination. This can beachieved through local risk maps based oncommunity needs and values, public accessinformation portals, or facilities that enable theshared exchange of locally-derived risk informationamong communities or countries.In all such efforts to bring information practicecloser to people most at risk, much moreattention must be given to ensure that the costsassociated with the availability or exchange ofdisaster information are affordable at localscales, particularly when applied to low andBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingmedium income countries, or among more isolatedand distant communities. There is a needto support and expand local, national andregional documentation centres and libraryservices related to the topics.The rapid and widespread use of mobile telephonesand the often innovative economiesassociated with their use, offers a promisingopportunity to marry technology with localcapacities. The more effective use of radiomedia, in association with the availability ofwind-up radios, represents another example ofexpanding traditional means of communicationfor a more informed and engaged populationin matters of risk management. (See section onpublic awareness.)Future technologyThe wider public use of learning systems andartificial intelligence can lead to an increasedaccess to risk management information, whichwould be better adapted to the needs of specificusers. The applications offered by the latestinformation technology provide a powerfulinteractive working tool for the extended disasterrisk community. Through applications suchas electronic conferencing and distance learningvia Internet, immediate sharing of documentsand drafts, efficiency and timeliness willincrease.Other applications could be developed furtherto enhance information on disasters and riskreduction. GIS, remote sensing imagery andsatellite observations can help considerably toshow vulnerable areas, enhance mapping, andameliorate the understanding of hazards.Agencies like the United Nations Office forOuter Space Affairs (UN/OOSA), the Committeeon the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space(COPUOS), the Committee on Earth ObservationSatellites (CEOS), the Council ofEurope Major Hazards Agreement (EUR-OPA), and the European Commission JointResearch Centre (EC/JRC) already contributeto these tasks.4177

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives4.2 Education and TrainingThe highest priority has to be given to present the various dimensions of disaster risk within acommunity through structured educational programs and professional training. As people'sunderstanding and the exercise of their professional skills are essential components of any riskreduction strategy, an investment in human resources and capacity building across generationswill have more lasting value than any specific investment made in technological systems toreduce risks.Education and training for disaster risk reduction takes many different forms:• Basic role of education and training• Disaster risk management training centers• Academic and educational programs• Primary and secondary schooling• Professional trades and skills training• Capacity building• Future challenges and priorities178Basic role of education and trainingAs disaster risk reduction has evolved over thepast two decades years from interests focussedon the study of specific hazards, the responsibilitiesof civil defence authorities and the largelystructural nature of physical protection, boththe needs and the institutional resources relatedto education and training have also changed.Academic research has become much more"One of the most significant trends affecting disaster preparednessand response is the transformation that has occurred in disastermanagement….. Once focused equally on war readiness and planningfor disasters and viewed as the exclusive purview of individualswith military backgrounds, 'civil defense' has evolved into theprofession of emergency management - a profession that requiresdiverse skills, ranging from the ability to develop formal disasterplans, to skills in community outreach and organizational development,the ability to mobilize political constituencies, and knowledgeof new and emerging technologies. The professionalizationof the field has been accompanied by the development of neworganizations, specialty fields, and credentialing processes, as wellas the growth of college and university curricula focusing on principlesof emergency management. With this ongoing evolution indisaster management, disaster research must continue to documenthow and why disasters occur as well as their immediate andlong-term impacts.Source: K. Tierney, 2001.focused on the transfer of knowledge and experience,which in turn has established the needfor much closer association between the sourcesof specialist knowledge and the population it isintended to serve. With more attention beinggiven to the social and economic conditions ofvulnerability, conventional thinking about disastermanagement has become much moreclosely linked to basic developmental issues. Bylooking beyond the physical attributes of hazards,a greater emphasis has been placed onmatters associated with disaster risk issues andpreparedness.Education and training about disaster managementcan no longer be considered as an area ofspecialist scientific study. The very concept of adisaster manager, fostered in the 1980s andearly 1990s, no longer sufficiently conveys theexpanded roles and responsibilities involved incontemporary strategies of disaster risk reduction.This historical context is important to demonstratethe evolution of education and trainingas the concept of disaster management hasgrown and diversified. As increasing attentionmust now be given to the changing nature ofhazards and the more complex conditions ofrisk, institutional facilities and relationshipsrequired for educating future populations willlikewise have to become more diverse. A needremains to accommodate the combined influencesof environmental and land management

issues, climatic uncertainty, changing demographics,and the pressing demands for sustainablelivelihoods.Education and training for disaster risk reductionmust proceed along several fronts. Wheredisaster management training programs arealready established, there is evidence that theframes of reference and the intended audienceis expanding. More attention is being given tointegrating disaster risk reduction into nationaldevelopment planning processes and in creatingmore resilient local communities.There is now a recognition that disaster riskscan only be successfully managed on a broadand multidisciplinary basis that narrows theexisting gaps between researchers, teachers,and practitioners. While there is a muchgreater need for wider dissemination of professionaland technical knowledge, there is at leastas much need for study and understandingabout the underlying social and economicdimensions of risk too.Professional training for risk reduction willplay a growing role as both the public andpolitical authorities recognise that effective riskmanagement strategies require many differentskills. But such an investment in the developmentof human resources can only be sustainedto the extent that the value of risk managementis institutionalised. The examples that followgive some indication of the extent and varietyof activities furthering the education and trainingof disaster risk management.Disaster risk management training centersThere are a number of highly regarded disastermanagement training institutions that haveevolved from an earlier emphasis on operation.Earlier attention devoted to such subjects ascontingency planning and community preparednessactivities has been reorientedtowards motivating more local participationand multidisciplinary outlooks that can createdisaster-resistant communities. As these centershave been organizing a variety of trainingprograms over the past 15-20 years, alumnifrom one or the other of these centers frequentlyconstitute the core of disaster professionalsin many developing countries, particularlyin Africa and Asian Regions.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingEstablished training centers include:• Disaster Management Center (DMC) at theUniversity of Wisconsin in Madison, UnitedStates• Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)in Bangkok, Thailand,• Cranfield Disaster Preparedness Center(CDPC) at Cranfield University in Cranfield,United Kingdom• Emergency Management Australia Institute(EMAI) in Mt. Macedon, Australia.• Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) inKobe, Japan.National Training CentersAsia• International Institute for Disaster Risk Managementin Manila, Philippines• National Center for Disaster Management atthe Indian Institute of Public Administration inNew Delhi, India• Uttar Aranchal Disaster Mitigation and ManagementCenter in Dehra Doon, India• National Institute of Rural Development inHyderabad, India• Center on Integrated Rural Development forAsia and the Pacific in Dhaka, Bangladesh• International Center of Integrated MountainDevelopment (ICIMOD) in Kathmandu,NepalAfrica• Disaster Mitigation for Sustainable LivelihoodsProgramme of the University of the WesternCape in Cape Town, South Africa. This programmeconducts a course that aims to achievean integrated understanding of disaster risk andits implications for sustainable development insouthern Africa, with a specific focus on SouthAfrica. It assumes an interdisciplinary perspectivein disasters and conceptualizes disaster riskas an outcome of the interplay between humanand natural factors. The programme also workwith community outreach.• Africa University in Mutare, Zimbabwe• Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit ofthe National College for Management andDevelopment Studies in Kabwe, Zambia•· Disaster Management Institute of SouthernAfrica (DMISA) in South Africa1794

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEarlier training has in turn given impetus to thecreation of national training programs or centerswithin individual disaster-prone developingcountries which impart instruction for furtherextension of risk reduction practices throughcommunity-level practices. These initiatives alsofoster the growth of smaller informal trainingadapted to local situations and needs.Academic and educational programsNatural hazards have always been studiedwithin the physical sciences, or expressed interms of physical forces considered by othertechnical disciplines such as engineering.There was little academic interest in relatingthe study of hazards or their social and economiceffects to societies.Noteworthy exceptions in the United Statesincluded the early exploration of sociologicalaspects of disasters in the mid 1960s at the OhioState University Disaster Research Center whichled to the creation of the Natural HazardsResearch and Applications Information Center atthe University of Colorado in 1974.Parallel developments occurred in Europeduring the 1970s as a variety of technical specialistscontributed to ideas that coalesced inthe creation of the Center for the Research andEpidemiology of Disasters (CRED) at the Schoolof Public Health, Catholic University of Louvainin Brussels in 1972. The ideas of a multidisciplinarygroup of technical researcherscalled the London Technical Group led to thecreation of the International Disaster Institute,a specialist research centre, in London in 1978.Academic programs related to hazard studiesand the different but related fields of emergencymanagement have expanded widely overthe past 10 years but only in some parts of theworld. More than 60 centres that study hazardsand disasters are listed by the Universityof Colorado Natural Hazards Center web site(www.Colorado.edu/hazards/). In addition, anequal number of academic institutions are listedthat offer either graduate or undergraduateprograms in emergency management coursesat colleges, universities, and other educationalinstitutions located principally in the UnitedStates.A similar record, but with a wider internationalscope, is maintained by the Asian DisasterReduction Center in Kobe, Japan. Its web site(www.adrc.or.jp) lists more than 70 traininginstitutions and program contacts for an extensiverange of technical specialist, national andprofessional organizations including some academicinstitutions that offer short-term professionalcourses in various aspects of disastermanagement.One academic program that reflects the developmentof programs in disaster risk managementis the Masters of Science Course in DisasterManagement offered by Cranfield Universityin the UK Now in its third year, it aimsto attract experienced mid-career personneldrawn from all organizational sectors amonggovernments, UN agencies, uniformed servicesand NGOs, while at the same time cateringfor newly graduating students from a variety ofacademic backgrounds such as geography,development and environmental studies, politicalscience and various technical courses ofstudy. The focus is on the development oftools, techniques and approaches for effectivedisaster management rather than giving prioritystrictly to academic study and reflection.The aim of the course is to build effective disastermanagement capacity as well as reducingrisks from natural disasters, complex emergenciesand human induced disasters. Furtherinformation can be obtained fromwww.rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk/dmcRegional variations also exist, although comprehensivelistings of formal programs are notso readily available. However, in Latin Americanand the Caribbean there are several universitiesthat offer postgraduate programs in disasterrisk management.180

Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharing4In Latin America and the Caribbean• The University of Antioquia in Colombia hosts the PAHO/WHO collaboratingCentre for Education in areas of public health. In addition, the same University offersa Masters Degree in Contemporary Social Sciences and Risk Management within thefaculty of social sciences.• The University of the Andes in Bogota, Colombia offers a Risk Assessment and DisasterPrevention Postgraduate Program of Disasters.• The University del Valle in Bogota, Colombia offers a post graduate program in IntegratedRisk Management.• The Cuyo National University in Mendoza, Argentina offers a postgraduate degree inPrevention, Planning and Integrated Management of Risk-Prone Areas.• The Venezuela's Institution of Technology of Ejido (Instituto de Tecnología de Ejido)offers a technical degree in Emergency Management and Disaster Response.• The Faculty of Medicine at the Central University of Venezuela has included subjectsrelated to emergency and disaster preparedness in the undergraduate curriculum formany years.• In Chile, the first postgraduate course on journalism and disaster management hasbegun.• In Costa Rica: UNICEF, the Latin American Social Science Faculty (FLACSO) andLA RED promoted in 1998 a project to introduce reforms in the curriculum of riskand disaster education. The project undertook theoretical development, which arepublished in Education and Disasters (Educación y Desastres), and are also containedin a website www.desenredando.org.• In the Caribbean region, the University of West Indies (UWI), has several disastermanagement related programmes out of the Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago campuses.These include earthquake and volcano monitoring systems, disaster research units,crop production and management of tropical hazards, natural resource managementprogrammes, as well as coverage of disaster management as part of Bachelors degreeprogrammes. In addition at the Masters level, at the Mona and Cave Hill Campus,disaster management components are included in the Environmental programmes.Four universities in Central America are presently conducting or developing Mastersdegrees in disaster-related fields.• The National University (UNA) of Costa Rica offers a Masters degree in NaturalDisaster Mitigation for Central America, established through cooperation with theSwedish Agency for Research Cooperation with Developing Countries. It involvesmany other Central American state universities.• The University of Costa Rica (UCR) offers a series of courses related to hazards.•·The National Autonomous University of Nicaragua is currently designing a Mastersdegree in Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Disasters in conjunction with possiblesupporting interest from the Swiss Government.• The Del Valle University in Guatemala is designing a Masters degree related to disastersoriented towards emergency preparedness and response.Other courses:• In Bolivia, an administrative resolution has encouraged the designation of risk managementas an elective course or a technical discipline at college level.• In Colombia, a higher education policy on risk prevention is being designed through a"National Commission on Disaster Prevention Education"• In Venezuela, an existing program is being restructured to include disaster reductionsubjects while a parallel initiative seeks to improve the disaster resilience in the designand construction of school facilities.181

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesProfessional trades and skill trainingOne notes a different orientation for educationand training in disaster or risk managementpractices in Asian countries. The past thirtyyears have seen a remarkable growth in thenumber of professionals trained in differentscience and engineering branches related togeological, hydrometeorological and climatichazards so that there are now many more peopleto assess and interpret the physical phenomenaof natural hazards, even within smallerdeveloping countries.A variation of this approach is the Kathmandu Valley EarthquakeRisk Management Project implemented by the NationalSociety for Earthquake Technology (NSET) in Nepal.Engineering students participated in a building inventory andvulnerability analysis program during their summer vacation.More than 100 students were involved in the program andlearned different aspects of safer construction in earthquakeproneareas, which had not otherwise figured in their engineeringcurriculum.Even such an informal exposure of students to risk issues andtheir own recognition of the relevance to their studies, demonstratesa potential for future courses for the younger generation.However, the teaching of science and engineeringonly infrequently proceeds into mattersof hazard and risk assessment. When the subjectis addressed, typical courses of study willrely on teaching structural mitigation and tendto feature physical means of seeking to controlthe effects of natural hazards, such as by theconstruction of check dams, flood embankments,or retaining walls.ed under the auspices of ADPC in 10 Asiancountries. This program's approach to training,learning materials and continuing educationis to develop generic curricula on urbandisaster mitigation, which can be adapted andinstitutionalised at national and local levelsthrough training institutes.An array of training programs, methods andtools have been produced over the past sevenyears including courses on floods, earthquakesand technological hazards. Other courses haveemphasised community-based approaches todisaster reduction, while courses for safer constructiontechniques for masons have also beendeveloped. In Asian countries, there is muchmore likely to be specialised institutions relatedto disaster management created by stateauthorities.The on-line discussion in the lead up to the2002 World Summit on Sustainable Developmentconsidered how best to promote educationand capacity-building for the managementof risk reduction. It considered means to incorporatedisaster risk reduction issues in sustainabledevelopment practices and reflected acommon understanding that education islinked to safety in many immediate and longerterm ways. It noted that education involves anumber of relevant aspects including publicawareness of hazards, advocacy for publicadherence to creating a culture of prevention,development of school curricula and professionaltraining. However, it was also observedthat the issue is not simply one of recommendingmore education. There is equally a need toaddress the ways in which these various formsof education and training can link and complementone another (see more: www.earthsummit2002.org/debate).182While modern social science and publicadministration widely acknowledge the prevalenceof increasingly complex societies, there iscorrespondingly little attention paid in formaleducational programs to the human social factors,economic rationale, or political responsibilitiesassociated with risk management.Accordingly, there is a visible lack of social scientists,community-based leaders or broadlyinformed public administrators practising inthe field of risk reduction.One exception is the Asian Urban DisasterMitigation Program (AUDMP), implement-Such a gap becomes apparent when one considersthat a disproportionate exposure to riskis concentrated in countries of the developingworld where a dramatic potential for loss canbe attributed to unsafe buildings. Most ofthese buildings are constructed informally. Theinvolvement of certified technicians, or theapplication of formal engineering practices inthese constructions is limited, due to economicrealities.The problem of safer construction becomesone of conveying sound, risk reduction buildingpractices to the building owner. One mech-

anism that has been exploited to only a limitedextent is by working with a more concentratedeffort to involve the artisanal carpenters,masons and other locally skilled tradesmenwho provide the great majority of technicalexpertise in construction. As they are local residentsthemselves, they can work as motivatorsfor both current and future improvements. Toaccomplish this form of risk reduction training,it is necessary to recognise the role of these artisansmore fully and to engage them in betterunderstanding about the issues involved andby encouraging them to use technical knowledgein their work. Where the time has beentaken to do this, such as in the Core Shelter ConstructionProgramme in the Philippines and theNSET activities in Nepal, considerable interestwas shown by the participating communitieswith rapid replication of the principles inneighbouring locations.A significant advance in disaster education hasbeen observed in Latin America and theCaribbean in recent years. There has been agrowth in educating and employing professionalswith skills necessary for risk reductionfrom within the region in contrast to an earlierreliance on external technical advice and abilities.This practice of developing local capabilitieshas been encouraged by international agencies.A few years ago, most courses andinstructors had to be imported but that is nolonger the case.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingtraining of disaster managers, the transfer oftechnical abilities or expertise, the disseminationof traditional knowledge and know-how,strengthening infrastructure or organizationalabilities at local community, national andregional levels.Most of the Programmes and agencies of theUN system are geared to provide and supportcapacity building in their respective areas ofcompetence. For example, in 2001, UNDPthrough its country offices, Regional Bureauxand specialised programmes, strengthened disasterreduction capacities in over sixty countries.These programmes included buildinglocal capacities for disaster reduction in CentralAmerica and Jamaica, developing a newnational risk and disaster management systemin Haiti, strengthening national disaster officesin the English Caribbean countries, developingregional strategies for disaster managementin the SADC countries and in the StabilityPact area (South-Eastern Europe countries),addressing flood risk reduction in the TiszaRiver Basin (Hungary, Romania andUkraine), and addressing drought risks inIran, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. UNDP alsosupported several capacity-building programmesincluding in Albania, East Timor,Romania, Madagascar, and Malawi (see moreinformation on UN agencies in chapter 6.2).Latin America and the Caribbean4Capacity buildingThe concept of capacity building is to providea target group with skills, resources and technicalabilities to enable it to better help itself. Inrecent years, increased emphasis has also beenplaced on developing overall policy frameworksin which individuals and organizationsinteract with the external environment in theirrespective areas of endeavour.Capacity building can be achieved throughmeans such as training and education, publicinformation, the transfer, provision or access totechnology or other forms of technical assistanceintended to improve institutional efficiency.In the field of disaster risk reduction,the concept can also relate to the formulation ofan appropriate policy framework such as in theInstitutional initiatives to develop capabilities inhazard and risk reduction have been particularlyevident in Latin America and the Caribbean formany years. The Organization of American Statesand the Pan American Health Organization(PAHO) have sought to relate their particulartechnical abilities and practical experience throughexpanded opportunities for education. PAHO'spublication, Catalogue of Disaster Publicationsand Information Resources, contains a detaileddescription of all PAHO disaster training materials(books, CD-ROMs, slides and videos) andother sources of information, including the VirtualHealth Library for Disasters and principal websites that contain PAHO content. The catalogueis available on the Internet at www.paho.org/disasters/publications,and print copies are available onrequest to disaster-publications@paho.org/crid@crid.org183

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives184A comprehensive Inter-American Strategy waslaunched in 1999 to reduce the education sector'svulnerability to hazards by initiative of theUnit for Sustainable Development and Environmentof the Organization of AmericanStates (USDE/OAS), working with PAHOand ISDR. Known as EDUPLANhemisferico,the program seeks to engage public andprivate institutions, national and internationalagencies, NGOs and private individuals toencourage member states to adopt the ActionPlan for Reducing the Vulnerability of theEducation Sector to Disasters through a varietyof international forums. With a TechnicalSecretariat for General Coordination located atPeru's National University at Trujillo, EDU-PLAN works through eight technical focalpoints located in Argentina, Costa Rica,Trinidad and Tobago, the United States, andVenezuela to conduct activities at a number oflocal, national and regional locations. Work isdivided into three areas: academic improvement,citizen participation, and physical infrastructureprotection. There is a commitment toimprove the curriculum with the addition ofmore elements pertaining to risk reduction inprimary, secondary and higher education sothat individuals and groups of various professionalinterests are prepared to work togetherfor disaster reduction.In another sector in Latin America, progress inrisk management in the public health serviceswould not have been possible without buildingadditional professional capacities. Independentconsultants and local professionals have agreedthat a low-cost, culturally sensitive strategy isthe most effective way to contribute to theLÍDERES is a vulnerability reduction course in Spanishorganized by PAHO/WHO taught almost exclusively bynational specialists with international reputations with the aimof strengthening the managerial skills required by disaster riskreduction practitioners. The content of the LÍDERES courseis constantly evolving and is revised in response to the needsof its target audience, the Latin American disaster reductioncommunity.A multi-sectoral course programme sponsored byOFDA/USAID in partnership with national governmentsand NGOs has a key advantage that Latin American andCaribbean agencies can hire professionals from neighbouringcountries and benefit from their knowledge about local contextsand cultures, in addition to their local language abilities.reduction of risk. All ministries of health inLatin America and the Caribbean now employat least one official who is in charge of disasters.In many countries there is an entiredepartment or agency devoted to the subject.In Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, new waterand sewage concessions demand that participatingprivate sector companies meet disasterreduction criteria in the construction, operation,and maintenance of water and sanitationsystems. Vulnerability studies have been carriedout in Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador,Peru, and Venezuela to examine water supplyand sewage systems. This has led to anincreased availability of current technical informationand a growing demand for training indisaster reduction in this field.LA RED has developed a methodology fortraining of local authorities in risk management.It has elaborated training modules andsupport material, with important conceptualcontributions in the area of vulnerability reductionand risk management. This methodologyis currently being applied in many countries inthe region and adapted to local conditions.AfricaAs current risk reduction efforts in SouthAfrica require a considerable amount of intersectoralcollaboration, a Training and CapacityBuilding Working Group has been establishedwithin the national Inter-departmental DisasterManagement Committee to form one bodythat can monitor disaster management trainingand research throughout the country. Theworking group is compiling a comprehensiveframework for all types of formal and non-formaldisaster management training and othercapacity building programs. It is also in theprocess of establishing a body to set standardsfor disaster management training consistentwith the accreditation requirements of theNational Qualifications Framework and theSouth African Qualifications Authority.Schools for community outreach play a vitalrole in the community. A proper educationthrough the schools not only teaches the childrenbut also reaches deep into the communitythrough the parents and teachers. It isobserved from past experience that the basicproblems related to disaster mitigation and

preparedness are frequently attributed to lack of training,awareness, education, and self-reliance within thecommunities. An appropriately educated and trainedcommunity is much more capable to cope successfullywith natural hazards and to reduce their impacts.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingparticularly at furthering disaster management inschools, such as by demonstrating a model earthquakeevacuation drill. Following this training, it is expectedthat disaster preparedness will be reflected in moreschool curricula across Asia.4Asia and the PacificThe School Earthquake Safety Initiative is beingimplemented by the UN Center for Regional Development/DisasterManagement Planning HyogoOffice (UNCRD, Hyogo Office) in Kobe, Japan, inassociation with the Earthquake Disaster MitigationResearch Center (EDM) in Miki, Japan. It focuseson five cities in four countries in Asia: Bandung andBengkulu, Indonesia; Chamoli, India; Kathmandu,Nepal; and Tashkent, Uzbekistan.The objective of the initiative is to develop disasterresilientcommunities through self-help, cooperationand education. The initiative also aims to promote disastereducation among children, teachers and parents.This approach to public education also encourageswidespread involvement in the realization of safer constructionpractices through retrofitting of schoolbuildings with the involvement of the local communities,local governments and NGOs. As a visible andhighly considered community asset, a safer school canserve as a valuable example of practices that can savethe lives of children and serve for relief activities aswell. It can be used as a temporary shelter after anearthquake, and can also promote the culture of preventionand mitigation through ongoing communityactivities.Thus, the importance of schools in every aspect of thedisaster cycle from pre-disaster mitigation to post-disasterrehabilitation can be recognised. Significant successhas been achieved and many important lessonshave been learned, which can and should be applied todifferent hazard-prone cities and countries.In December 2001, the Philippine Institute for Volcanologyand Seismology (PHIVOLCS) and theAsia/Pacific Cultural Center for UNESCO jointlyheld a training course in collaboration with the PhilippineCommission on Higher Education (CHED),United Nations University (UNU) and the AsianDisaster Reduction Center (ADRC). ADRC encouragedparticipation from its member country networkand personnel responsible for education about disastermanagement from 11 Asian countries. The programfor these school commissioners, government educationofficials, and NGO officials included training aimedThe United Nations Disaster Management TrainingProgram (DMTP) has been a major international initiativeto develop training in disaster management.Originally launched by UNDP and UNDRO (nowOCHA) in cooperation with a core group of UNagencies in 1990. DMTP, currently administrated byUNDP, supports ongoing capacity-building efforts ofthe UN system, international organizations and individualdisaster-prone countries. Workshops have promotedthe establishment of national or regional centresand strengthened their capacities to study technologicaland environmental hazards, seismic protection, crisisprevention and preparedness.DMPT has conducted more than 70 workshopsinvolving 6,000 participants in Africa, Latin Americaand the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific, the MiddleEast and the Commonwealth of Independent States.Training materials include 22 training modules, 27country case studies, simulation exercises, trainers'guidelines, and videos that have been created to implementDMTP's goals. They encompass a wide rangeof topics including learning about emergencies anddisasters, techniques of disaster assessment or riskreduction, links between crisis and development. Thetraining modules have been written in English, Frenchand Spanish, with selected modules translated also intoArabic, Bahasa Indonesian, Chinese, Portuguese,Russian, and Vietnamese. To improve informationexchange and access to all learning resources DMTPestablished a web site at www.undmtp.org.In recognition of the importance of education in disaster reduction,the International Federation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties has devoted significant energy to this area, withactivities including:training geography and social studies teachersas was done in the Caribbean through the Community BasedDisaster Preparedness Programme, so that they may include thetopics in their own classroom plans;• working with tertiary institutions in Pacific island states toincorporate disaster management topics in their curricula;• developing games and drama exercises as a means ofimparting disaster preparedness information to children inthe Pacific;• preparing disaster preparedness manuals for school children,as was done in Vietnam; and• using television cartoons to convey messages to adults andchildren in Central Asian countries.185

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesIn formal education programs and professionaltraining activities, the shift from hazardfocussedto a broader integration of risk awareness,analysis and management has only justbegun. Major disaster events in recent yearssuch as hurricane Mitch in Central America,the Gujarat earthquake in India, or the widespreadfloods of Southern Africa have eachdramatically increased both the public and officialrecognition that risk education is lacking.More sustained focus on informal training andcommunit based capacity building is encouraged.Thefollowing priorities must be integratedif disaster risk reduction is to become morefully incorporated in routine education andtraining programs:• Proceeding beyond emergency response• Incorporation of risk in sustainablenational development• Educating about the social dimensions ofrisk• Institutional basis to transmit experience• A sustained commitment to risk reductionin the futureProceeding beyond emergency responseThere has been a progressive acceptance of thedistinction between emergency servicesrequired to respond to disaster and the longertermand much more diverse responsibilitiesrelated to risk reduction. Both national andinternational commitments are necessary toinvest in human resource development dedicatedto risk reduction, first and foremost tosupport initiatives in the most disaster-pronecountries.A continued expectation, or reliance of externalemergency assistance in response to singulardisastrous events will impede any efforts toeducate and involve future generations morefully in disaster risk management. The significantimbalance in financial allocations andinternational emergency assistance during disasterscompared to the meagre amounts committedto building locally-based risk reductioncapabilities remains a disincentive for developingeffective education and training programsin disaster-prone countries.Incorporation of risk education in sustainablenational developmentRisk is seldom taught in a systematic way on abroad, multidisciplinary basis. A critical challengefor more effective education and trainingabout risk reduction is the need to broaden thebase of association with the subject and themore commonly adopted topics of educationalprograms. The subject of risk needs to becomemore integrated elements of national economicgrowth and development. This implies a closeridentification with both the causes of risk aswell as planning the means by which it may bereduced.Educating about the social dimensionsof riskCurrent views about the relevance of subjectssuch as the socio-economic conditions of vulnerability,matters of social equity related torisk, and the promotion of means to motivatemore popular participation within local communitiesall describe topics yet to be accommodatedsystematically in education programs.An emerging trend of advanced academicstudies that are able to attract both studentsand working professionals from a variety offields, including technical, social and administrativedisciplines should continue to beencouraged and supported.There is considerable scope also to address riskmanagement within educational programs ofpublic administration. By doing so, the continuityand managed integration of responsibilitiesinherent in civil service functions couldprovide a more sustained basis for making riskmanagement an essential element of expectedgovernment practice at all levels. Much morecan be accomplished by introducing riskawareness into secondary and even primaryeducational programs through innovative programsof teaching science, geography, ecology,and civic responsibility.186

Institutional basis to transmit experienceThe managerial and organizational responsibilitiesin identifying, monitoring and managingrisk remain insufficiently represented ineducational and professional contexts. Whilespecific aspects of financial risk managementare routinely included within economics, financialinvestment and insurance curricula, parallelapproaches of risk management within thetechnical, environmental or social contexts of asociety are much less in evidence.Future challenges in education revolve arounddeveloping individual capabilities and the creationof collective institutional capacities. Localcommunities must be aware of the risks towhich they are exposed. They then need toinstitutionalise the technical and managerialabilities to assess and monitor them, and thepolitical and popular structures to managethem.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingSustained commitment to risk reductioneducation and trainingA longer term vision is needed to build educationand training processes that will contributeto culture of prevention. Investment in thedevelopment of human resources can be sustainedonly to the extent that the values of riskmanagement are embedded within the educationand training capabilities of disaster-pronecommunities. There is a pressing need forinnovative means to convey shifting organizationalrelationships and the mosaic of interestsinvolved in shaping people's understandingand developing professional abilities for thefuture, with an increasing expectation of substantiveprivate sector involvement in theirrealization.4187

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives4.3. Public awarenessThe development of increased public awareness about hazards and the understanding of disasterrisks are vital elements in any comprehensive strategy for disaster reduction. Public awarenessshould be conducted through all possible means, including in schools, in particular through themedia and other official, public, professional and commercial means, at all levels of society.There is a responsibility for government direction and civic commitment to lead and encouragethe public awareness of natural hazards and risk on a continuous basis, but the ultimate accomplishmentof creating a culture of prevention rests with the popular understanding and publicparticipation in furthering those values.The importance of public awareness to effective disaster risk reduction cannot be overstated andassumes many different forms. Some of these are presented in the following sections:• Public awareness as a primary element of risk reduction• National public awareness initiatives• Special international events and major activities• The important role of the media• Local community experience promotes public awareness• Local relevance, community experience and traditional knowledge188Public awareness as a primaryelement of risk reductionThe promotion of public awareness about hazardsand the creation of widespread understandingabout disaster reduction have alwaysbeen recognised as a crucial function of disasterrisk management strategies. The YokohamaStrategy and Plan of Action noted in the mid1990s that future strategies needed to developa global culture of prevention as an essentialcomponent of an integrated approach to disasterreduction. It specifically cited the improvementof awareness within vulnerable communitiesthemselves as a primary future requirement.For this reason, increasing public awarenessabout natural and related technological hazardsand the risks they pose to societies andeconomies has become one of the four keyobjectives of the International Strategy for DisasterReduction (ISDR). Even more relevantin practical terms, public awareness serves toconvey knowledge about existing solutions thatcan reduce the vulnerability to hazards in orderto build a global community dedicated to makingrisk and disaster reduction an acceptedpublic value.To ensure political commitment in the planningand implementation of risk reductionmeasures, it is essential for all stakeholders firstto be aware of the hazards they are likely to faceand the importance that risk reduction holdsfor their daily lives. Public awareness, in additionto education, is a process through whichpeople living in hazard-prone areas can realiseand understand that they live in areas of risk,know the specific dangers that they are exposedto, learn the meaning of warnings that areissued and participate in the policy and decisionmaking processes to take appropriateaction to reduce risk. It is even more importantfor them to be motivated to take appropriateprior actions to plan their development andprotect their lives and minimise property damage.There is a basic responsibility of governmentauthorities to inform the public about thenature of prevalent hazards and the changingconditions of risk. However, the routine disseminationof information and the conduct ofactivities to sustain a current sense of awarenessalso must be undertaken by other sectorsof the society. The inclusion of risk informationin all forms of education and professional trainingis crucial and a successful program of pub-

lic information must necessarily include professionaland civic groups and both nationaland local authorities. The media too fulfils therole of informing the public in increasinglyinformation-driven societies. There is a widespreadrecognition that practical tools andguidelines to carry out such programs remaininadequate in part because of the limitedexchange of information about what is beingaccomplished globally in the field.Individual commemorative occasions or oneoff public displays that are not associated withdaily livelihoods and social responsibilities ofthe public are unlikely to have much enduringeffect. They only go so far in arousing publicinterest or motivating widespread popular participation,so more strategic approaches need tobe conceived and supported. By contrast, evenif extreme events may be considered extraordinaryin themselves, they have a great potentialfor dramatically illustrating hazardous conditionselsewhere. In this respect, the prevalenceof risks that display severe consequences nearbyor in similar social settings can provide apowerful impetus for sustained public interest.The timely and widespread circulation of lessonslearned from disasters and the followthrough necessary to apply the practical proceduresthat can reduce risks, can contribute toothers prior to similar losses being sufferedelsewhere.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingDisasters increase public awarenessExperiences demonstrate opportunities tomount programs of public awareness and educationwith practical results following major disasters.The impact of the El Niño event in 1997-98,hurricanes Georges and Mitch (1998), followedby the losses from the earthquakes in El Salvador(2001), had such an enormous impact onpublic understanding that they far exceededwhat any planned publicity program could haveever accomplished in Central America.Before, routine public information disseminatedby disaster management authorities typicallyfocused on emergency preparedness and crisisresponse issues. Since these events, the complexissues of risk have become associated with problemsof poverty, social exclusion, lack of accessto resources and untenable use of land.There is now the recognition that values associatedwith risk reduction must be conveyedthrough wider public exposure and achieved bymaking permanent changes in educational curricula.The successful efforts to teach environmentalconsciousness throughout the formalbasic education system in Costa Rica showswhat can be accomplished with a coherent andsustained strategy.4Having witnessed the damage to public infrastructurein California during the Loma Prietaearthquake in 1989, the authorities in Seattle,Washington used the occasion to create a widerpublic understanding and support for fixingtheir own roads, bridges and other publicworks early in the 1990s. Work continuedthroughout the decade at a cost of more than$150 million. When a magnitude 6.0 earthquakeshook Seattle in 2001, the Mayor ofSeattle observed that the sustained publicawareness and support for their program to reenforcepublic infrastructure was money wellspent. There was only one fatality and the primarycity infrastructure largely survived withonly moderate damage.Public discussion and official assessment of theconsequences of major earthquakes in India inrecent years have resulted in political demandsthat have totally revised outdated state-wideprograms of hazard awareness and disaster riskmanagement. The unprecedented floods experiencedin several Southern African countriesin 2000 resulted in public demands and politicalexpectations for a wider regional discussionof the risks associated with recurrent naturalhazards. Each of these occasions has resultedin the circulation of more public informationwith a resulting widespread public expectationof improved early warning procedures both toinform the population and to guide moreappropriate disaster management policies.The challenge that remains after an immediatecrisis is to maintain public interest and increaseinvolvement in public awareness programs. Itis during these periods of less immediate threatthat the important work in public awarenessneeds to be accomplished if greater future lossesare to be minimised or avoided. The aim ofpublic awareness programs should not be limitedto conveying an understanding about hazardsand risks to the public but rather it should189

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives190motivate and enable people to become involvedin activities that can reduce risks to which theyare exposed. Public awareness programsshould have the long-term objective of creatingnew attitudes and changing behaviour. Therefore,information needs to be consistent, withprinciple components repeated over a period oftime.Extended involvement with public awarenesscan take many forms. A long-term commitmentto risk reduction is best achieved byincorporating the subject throughout society,where people live and work, and by includingit as a part of their daily livelihood experienceor professional interest.The enhancement of the appropriate valuesrequire recognition and direction from officialauthorities best realised by encouragement andsupport for public information activities implementedat local levels. Rather than focussingon specific hazards alone, some communitiesare turning their attention to the broader conceptsof risk, by identifying, assessing and evaluatingthe various risks that threaten them.Formal education and professional trainingdiscussed in another section is the most feasiblemechanism to increase additional understandingabout risks and to change public attitudesamong different generations. By reaching intothe past and drawing on earlier examples oflocal experience and traditional knowledge,Basic principles of public awarenessprograms:¨They should be designed and implemented with aclear understanding of local perspectives andrequirements with all materials reflecting local conditions.They should target all sections of society, includingdecision-makers, educators, professionals, membersof the public and individuals living in threatenedcommunities.Different types of messages, locations and deliverysystems are necessary to reach the various targetaudiences.Sustained efforts are crucial to success, although singleactivities such as commemorative disaster reductionevents and special issue campaigns can be usefulif they are part of a larger, consistent programme.communities can identify additional measuresto promote a wider public appreciation of hazardsor local capabilities to manage risks.Knowledge of the immediate local environment,and particularly traditional practicesassociated with the management and sustaineduse of natural resources provide additionaltypes of information that can be employed toreduce risks.National public awareness initiativesMost countries that have an active and wellsupportednational disaster risk managementauthority express a commitment to increasedpublic awareness about hazards, risk and disasterreduction practices. They usually proceedbeyond occasional commemorative events orthe provision of posters, public announcementsor handbooks, and have national platforms orcommittees bringing together representativesfrom various stakeholder sectors.The Government of Australia conceived andsustained an excellent public awareness programthroughout the 1990s that encompassedall aspects of the country's efforts to increasethe awareness of hazards and reduce the risk ofdisasters. Examples of many of the informativemanuals, posters, pamphlets, community hazardmaps, and descriptions of related activitiesare included in a comprehensive review, theFinal Report of Australia's Co-ordinationCommittee for IDNDR - 1990-2000 (EMA,1999).The Government of South Africa made use ofits Green Paper and community meetings todevelop a greater familiarity about local hazardsand community risk issues prior to thepublication of a White Paper on national policyand the drafting of a new national disastermanagement bill.The National Disaster Management Office ofBotswana conducted a survey and policyreview late in 2001 to help in the developmentof a national public awareness strategy intendedto relate hazard and risk reduction andnational development objectives.In recent years, the United States FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA)(www.fema.gov) has provided extensive public

information including links to many organizationsengaged in disaster reduction activities.In Mozambique, the National Disaster ManagementAuthority (INGC) uses disaster simulationsas well as a variety of public forums toconduct awareness-raising programs under thetheme Towards a Culture of Prevention. A differentlocation is chosen each year, usually apotentially vulnerable area near a provincialcapital, and national leaders are invited to participate.Televised panel discussions, publicexhibitions, university seminars and presentationsin schools are also conducted. At a morepractical level and with a longer-term perspective,projects such as tree planting or the distributionof drought-resistant crops, have beeninitiated during the event. The timing of theseactivities also serve to highlight meteorologicalforecasts for the imminent rainy season andannouncements are made about emergencycontingency plans.These outreach campaigns have put the issueof disaster management on the public agendabut the message has been directed largely tourban populations. While a principal objectivein most of these activities has been to influencepolicy-makers and other significant stakeholdersat the national level, a challenge remains toinstil a culture of prevention among pooreerrural communities, those most likely to sufferduring a disaster.China has made widespread use of publications,media and other forms of publicity to raise thepublic consciousness about the importance ofdisaster reduction. In the past decade, morethan 300 books have been published about thesubject, and more than 20 different newspapersand periodicals have been created to spreadknowledge about disaster reduction throughoutthe many different sectors of Chinese society. Inaddition, numerous international publicationsand documents dealing with disaster risk issueshave been translated into Chinese or adapted toChinese conditions, and distributed widely.Future plans of the China National Committeefor Natural Disaster Reduction (CNCIDR) toimprove their public awareness program includegreater use of television, broadcasting, video,and electronic means.There are additional plans for CNCIDR to coordinatewith educational departments to addBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingnew content on hazards and disaster risk tocurricula in schools, enabling youth to understandtheir own roles in reducing disasters.Similarly, professional organizations run disasterreduction training courses according totheir own specific circumstances. The ChinaAssociation for Science and Technology hasmobilised scientific and technical personnel tocontribute to the decision-making processesand has organized consulting services in disasterreduction for specific problems.Special events and major activitiesEvery year since the early 1990s the UN hasorganized a World Disaster Reduction Campaignwith the objective of raising awarenessabout disaster reduction through thematicallyrelated activities. This public awareness strategycalls on Governments and local communitiesto mobilise, for example, by developingrisk maps and early warning systems. It urgesGovernments to develop and enforce buildingcodes and to exploit scientific and technicalknowledge for minimising the exposure to therisk of natural disasters. Other UN agenciesand their program partners are also committedto carrying out this strategy by bringing peopleand expertise together in the search for solutions.The campaigns are based on a differenttheme every year. In 2001, the theme wasCountering Disasters, Targeting Vulnerability.The 2002 campaign is mentioned below.The theme of the 2002 World Disaster ReductionCampaign, is Disaster Reduction for SustainableMountain Development, chosen toparallel the world-wide celebration of theInternational Year of Mountains. Through aseries of activities and special programs inmany countries, the campaign will highlightincreasing global awareness of mountain hazardsand successful disaster reduction effortsundertaken in mountain areas. The primarymessage is that disaster reduction as an essentialpart of sustainable development planningcan benefit mountain communities world-wideby avoiding the devastating set backs that naturaldisasters can cause. The annual campaignculminates on the International Day for NaturalDisaster Reduction on the second Wednesdayof October with activities to showcaseexamples of successful accomplishments in disasterreduction.1914

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives192Case BoliviaThe lasting effects of these mechanisms can beillustrated by the experience of Bolivia. Since1998, disaster reduction has been promoted inBolivia through two programs. One programhas focussed on supporting the national systemfor civil defence the other has emphasisedmeasures that could prevent avoidable risksand increase the public awareness about disasters.While several projects had been undertaken toinvolve more people in managing risks andusing the information materials that had beendeveloped, a new campaign, Risk Management:A new vision on disasters, was launchedin 2001, to further the objectives of the ISDR.A workshop was organized in July 2001 by theUniversidad Nacional Siglo XX de Llallaguato promote the campaign with financing providedby ACRA, an Italian NGO, with thetechnical support of a national specialist fromUNDP.Another workshop was held in August in thecity of Santa Cruz on community-based disastermanagement, conducted within the frameworkof a pilot project of the Association of theMunicipality of Santa Cruz and the GermanAgency for Technical Co-operation (GTZ).Later in the year, one of the most importantachievements was the approval of a new lawdirected towards improving risk reduction anddisaster awareness. The law encourages theidentification of key measures relating to disasterreduction that can be employed in thecourse of implementing projects that furthersustainable development principles. To supportthis process, manuals have been prepared toguide people in local communities to assessrisks, formulate practical policies, and then toapply risk management measures that can beincorporated in local development programs.These manuals will be tested in selectedmunicipalities and then will be evaluated afterwards.Case: JamaicaA variety of local activities were conducted inJamaica in June 2001, the country's official disasterpreparedness month. A national churchservice was held to launch the month, broadcastlive on television and radio. The followingday, a press conference was held to introducethe public to the themes of disaster preparednessmonth, which were then emphasised inpublic information campaigns the rest of theyear. Specific issues were also presented concerninglocal planning.• An evacuation sign was introduced, sponsoredby Medigrace Jamaica, which couldbe used to guide people out of the Portmorearea in the event of an emergencyevacuation.• The use and application of the Office ofDisaster Preparedness and EmergencyManagement's (ODPEM) GeographicInformation System was explained andhighlighted. The use of computer technologyin the National Emergency OperationsCenter was also highlighted.• ODPEM highlighted their initiative toinclude elements of popular culture inconveying disaster preparedness messageseffectively to the public. This included theparticipation of several popular musicdisc-jockeys and the promotion of commercialsponsorship to broadcast thesemessages.• Two new brochures were launched forpublic information: ODPEM, who weare and what we do, and, EarthquakeAwareness for Businesses.One day during the month was disaster preparednessday in schools. The ministry of educationcalled for an island-wide observance ofthe subject. Many schools participated in disasterrelated activities. A hurricane preparednessday for businesses was also held duringthe month with widespread support from thebusiness community. Several companies organizedexhibitions, conducted drills and invitedspeakers from safety-related organizations.A major exhibition was held in the PortmoreShopping Mall in which about twenty organizationspresented exhibits that displayed theirproducts and services. ODPEM also displayedemergency supplies that people shoulduse in the event of a hurricane. Finally, a seminaron contingency planning directed to businessorganizations was held at the conclusionof the month. With the objective to raiseawareness about disaster planning and pre-

Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharing4Sasakawa Award Winners - 2001To promote additional public awareness about disaster risk reduction, every year the UNSasakawa Award for Disaster Reduction is awarded during the International Day for DisasterReduction. This international honour is given to an individual or organization for their outstandingcontributions to the prevention of disasters and the reduction of vulnerability, consistentwith the aims and objectives of the ISDR. The laureates and finalists of the award for thepast two years are listed below. Further information about their activities and procedures forfuture nominations can be found on the ISDR website at www.unisdr.orgLaureate: Global Fire Monitoring Centre, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry at Freiburg University,Freiburg, GermanyFor its long-term commitment to disaster reduction and continued research activities for the reduction of wildlandfires world-wide, as well as for its multiple co-operation projects in developing countries, involving local communities.Certificates of Distinction:Philippines Institute of Volcanology, Manila PhilippinesFor its long-term commitment to disaster reduction and its leading role in disaster reduction activities in CentralAsia, in particular with regard to earthquakes and volcanoes, with the involvement of local communities, and itsimpressive amount and high-quality supporting documentation on their many activities and projects.Mr. Brian Ward, Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, Bangkok, ThailandFor being the initiator and founding father of the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, now recognised as the leadinginstitution for disaster reduction projects, training activities and educational projects in Southeast Asia.Professor Isaac Nyambok, Department of Geology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, KenyaFor his personal commitment to disaster reduction, and for establishing a postgraduate disaster management course indisaster reduction in Africa at the University of Nairobi that is accessible to all professional interests, including those ofhigh-level government officials.Certificates of Merit:National Society of Earthquake Technology, Katmandu, NepalFor its noteworthy awareness-raising and educational programs in disaster reduction, particularly in the field ofseismic risk reduction, for the benefit and with the involvement of the local communities and decision-makers inNepal, with a strong potential for implementation and for replicability for other kinds of natural hazards.Oficina Nacional de Emergencia, Ministerio de Interno, Santiago de Chile, ChileFor its significant educational activities and awareness-raising programs about disaster reduction, in particular bythe inclusion of communication strategies related to school security within its mandate in civil protection, as wellas its strong presence and impact among national decision-makers throughout the Latin American and Caribbeanareas.Comisión Permanente de Contingencias, Tegucigalpa, HondurasFor its significant initiatives in the field of promotion and awareness-raising about disaster reduction, especiallyrelated to forest fires, as well as by working in close co-operation with the population to implement initiatives thatrealise local communities' vulnerability and specific requirements, and by placing emphasis on the development ofcommunication strategies accessible to all segments of the population.Nyos-Monoun Degassing Program Advisory Committee, Yaoundé, CameroonFor the innovative design and implementation of the lake degassing initiative, applied in a developing country andwith the involvement of local communities, and by serving as an example to refining the project further and extendingits replication to reduce similar risks elsewhere in the region.193

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSasakawa Award Winners - 2000Laureate: The Fondo para la Reconstruccion y el Desarrollo Social del Eje Cafetero,Manizales, ColombiaIn recognition of its major achievements in disaster preventionin the Coffee region following the severe earthquake of 1999,by integrating basic elements of prevention such as land-useplanning, hazard mapping, respect for seismic-resistant buildingcodes into long-term reconstruction and rehabilitation programs.FOREC has contributed significantly to the sustainabledevelopment of the coffee region by restoring communicationslinks and economic infrastructure, by promoting civilsociety and the involvement of local communities in the decision-makingprocess and implementing decision-making at thelocal level.Certificates of Distinction:Dr. Roberto Aguiar Falconi, Center of Scientific Research, Army Polytechnic School, Quito, EcuadorFor his high-level experience and expertise in the prevention of seismic hazards disaster prevention and his contribution toscientific research in this domain.National Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission, Addis Ababa, EthiopiaFor efforts in addressing the root causes of disasters and communities' vulnerability to disasters, and the Commission's inclusionof disaster prevention activities in the development process.The Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control, Hanoi, VietnamFor its significant efforts in the field of disaster prevention, despite scarce national resources and limited capacities, in particularfor its implementation of flood control programs and flood early-warning systems, awareness-raising initiatives andtraining activities carried out at the national level.Certificates of Merit:General Directorate of Civil Protection, Governorate of Grand Alger, Algiers, AlgeriaFor efforts in introducing elements of prevention in rescue programs, in particular the sustained efforts in carrying out trainingactivities for disaster prevention including participation and organization of international forums on the subject.National Directorate General for Disaster Management, Budapest, HungaryFor its significant experience in the field of disaster preparedness, in particular in information sharing, initiatives in the fieldof flood control and the prevention of water contamination as preventative measures contributing to sustainable development.paredness, participants came from many differentbusiness sectors to learn about topics suchas establishing a planning team for risk reductionand conducting vulnerability analysis.Case: Costa RicaOn International Day for Disaster Reduction,Costa Rica's National Risk Prevention andEmergency Response Commission (CNE), thecountry's focal point for disaster reduction,organized a community exercise in disasterpreparedness. It involved an evacuation drillbased on the likelihood of a local river floodingand then causing mudslides affecting fourcommunities near the old Costa Rican capitalof Cartago.A massive public awareness campaign aboutearthquakes was also launched with media support,supplemented by a poster designed byCNE to inform people about the importance ofpreventive measures that would reduce theimpact of an earthquake. The Inter-institutionalEmergency Commission of the University ofCosta Rica organized a forum on the role of themedia in disseminating information on disasters.In Uruguay, the Ministry of Education'sEmergency and Disaster Commission organ-194

ized a workshop with the support of theOFDA/USAID, the National EmergencySystem, and the local government.The National Red Cross Society ofUruguay attended the International Dayfor Disaster Reduction, as well as localrepresentatives of civilian, political, andmilitary organizations, school children,and the media. The objective was tostrengthen local communities by creatingawareness of social responsibility, identificationof hazards, prevention and risk,especially directed at children. One focusof the workshop was for the participants tocompose risk and vulnerability maps relevantto their surroundings. Another meetingwas held three weeks later for the participantsto share their information andexperiences about the presentation andcomposition of their various risk maps.Many countries use the occurranc of amajor national disaster in the past to commemoratethis day (or week) from year toyear in a public awareness day for disasterpreparedness and risk reduction. This isthe case in Colombia, where the devastatingvolcanic eruption of Nevado de Ruizon November 13, 1985, swept awaywhole villages and left more than 25.000people dead. National exercises, schooland media activities take place each year tomaintain the awareness of such impacts.The same happens in Peru, where theearthquake and avalanche in Cajon deHuaylas on May 5, 1970, killed morethan 67.000 persons.The important role of the mediaIn terms of media involvement, there ismuch that needs to be done. The prevailingmedia coverage about hazards and riskremains overwhelmingly related to disasterevents and the immediate dramaticaftermath of surveying damage or the provisionof emergency assistance to survivors.With a few noteworthy examples,widespread coverage about potential orrecurrent hazards which affect a specificarea or reporting about existing disasterrisk management practices are much lessin evidence.Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingA professional's viewpoint: What the media says,and why.The media tends to reflect the mood of the communityit serves. If there is already debate about theexposure to natural hazards or concern about disasterawareness, then journalists are likely to amplifyand focus this concern. If there is no local interest inthe subject, then a local newspaper, television orradio program is unlikely to launch and sustain thediscussion. There is, however, a moment to triggersuch attention and to inspire media professionals totake an intelligent interest in wider disaster subjects.This moment is in the immediate aftermath of anearthquake, flood, forest fire, landslide, hurricaneor tsunami.Paradoxically, such moments also underscore hugecultural gaps that exist between journalists and theengineers, scientists, health teams and administratorswho want to promote wider public understandingabout risk. The issue is a simple one. News peoplewant the story. In the first bewildering hoursafter a catastrophe, there is often no direct news atall. There is instead silence. Roads are cut, communicationsare severed, water and power supplies areinterrupted and the civic authorities and hospitalsthat should be the source of information are themselvespart of the disaster. At such moments,reporters phone frantically to find university or government-basedspecialists who might be prepared tospeculate on what might have happened, or the possiblereasons for the disaster. When approachedurgently, by often previously unknown questioners,these experts tend to worry about reputations forscholarly accuracy, mature judgement and politicalsoundness. They often shrink from comment,apologetically promising to offer thoughtful analysiswhen firm information becomes available.This is a mistake. News people have no choice.They must report on a disaster that has just happenedeven if they have only the sketchiest details. Ifan informed and thoughtful expert is hesitant tocomment based on limited information, mediareporters will go in search of a less-informed andless-thoughtful commentator who will.It is at such moments that disaster risk managementprofessionals have a golden chance to describe thepattern of loss and destruction. They can drivehome the lessons of risk awareness and known proceduresthat can reduce those risks. They shouldseize on the chance to do this, in vivid, clear and4195

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeseven chilling language, at every moment forthe next 24 hours. They should do this because- since the media reflects the community itserves - if the media is listening, then the peopleare listening.Once television cameras get to the disasterzone, as images of crushed children and weepingrelatives and toiling rescuers begin to floodthe public, the imagery and the grim statisticsof suffering will dominate the news. And thenwho will want to hear somebody talking in academicterms, about monitoring hazards or mitigatingfuture risks ?"Professional newspapermen love disaster - it is their business - butdon't rely on them to be very different from the rest of the community.The independent commercial media survives and thrives by reflectingthe community it serves. If a community is complacent, then there is afair chance that its journalists too will take the placid line… If peopledon't die in thousands, it is not a disaster, and therefore not news.The preparedness message gets only a limited airing."T. Radford, The Guardian, 1999There are, however, some signs of change.Public reporting of disasters has begun toinclude references to human actions that havecontributed to the severity of an event, particularlyas they may relate to the loss of life andproperty. Increasingly, questions are beingraised about the responsibility of public officialsin either contributing to, or tolerating hazardousconditions. Media reporting was outspokenabout the inadequate quality of constructionand placement of many houses thatwere destroyed by the Turkish earthquake inIzmit, in 1999.Reporting about the extensive losses sufferedin the Venezuelan mudslides in 1999 queriedwhy the informal settlements had been constructedin such potentially hazardous conditionsand questioned whether extensive deforestationhad contributed the disaster.The extraordinary floods that raged throughAlgiers in 2001 were reported as having beencaused, in part, by unserviceable drainage systems.So far, such inquiry happens after theconsequence of an unmitigated hazardbecomes a political or newsworthy event.In a more far-sighted outlook, some nationalofficials seek to relate distant events to theirown more immediate conditions. The responseto the ISDR questionnaire of Western Samoanoted that one of the most important issues tobe addressed in Western Samoa was for themedia to be committed to providing coverageof major world disasters and catastrophes.Journalists were encouraged to describe reliefresponses in both the short and long term, sothat the full coverage and not just dramatichighlights would influence their audiences toact with greater attention to disaster preparedness.The National Red Cross Society in WesternSamoa also made radio broadcasts on disasterpreparedness with disaster-related discussionsabout such topics as public health, housing,warnings, food, community participation,and first aid.Mozambique is a country where an importantobjective of public awareness campaigns hasbeen to develop the media as a better source ofpublic information about hazards. TheNational Disaster Management Authority(INGC) has made media relations a priorityfor improving public awareness as the need formore accurate reporting was a recurrent themeexpressed by journalists, district administrators,and other local authorities. Now, disastermanagement officials are working togetherwith technical specialists in the national weatherservice and professional journalists toinvolve the media more effectively as a meansto issue early warning and hazard alerts.The media has played an increasingly valuablerole in disaster management from the time of theexceptional floods in 2000 when it served as animportant catalyst for emergency action by theinternational community. Subsequently in October2001, the National Meteorological Serviceprovided an incentive by inaugurating their ownnew television studio supplied with professionalmedia equipment provided through Finnishdevelopment assistance. In this way, the countrywas able to increase its own capacity to providebetter public information and education aboutthe routine weather as well as potential hazardsthat may threaten the country.Despite the expanded coverage in the country,the most important medium for social commu-196

nication remains the local language radio networkof Radio Mozambique. This servicebroadcasts information regularly about preventionand disaster risk reduction measures, aswell as communicating warning alerts at thetime of imminent hazards. INGC has alsoworked with the World Food Program to conducttraining seminars for journalists in orderto improve the quality of reporting, and anannual prize has been proposed for the bestdisaster reporting.Local community experiencepromotes public awarenessSome of the most effective means of publicawareness can take place at the local communitylevel with the added advantage of involvingthe participation of a cross-section of the localpopulation.The Community Action Group for Floodwaterin the Old Community of Rodenkirchen(Bürgerinitiative Hochwasser, AltgemeindeRodenkirchen) is a non-profit associationfounded in a district of Cologne, Germany,after the severe flooding of the Rhine River in1993 and 1995. This group advocates theinterests of more than 4,000 residents in mattersof local flood protection. In 2001, the communityaction group sailed the boat Pegellatte("Water Depth Gauge") up the Rhine fromCologne to Basle, Switzerland staging eventsand conducting discussions in 18 towns andcities together with other community actiongroups and representatives of local authorities.In 2002 the group will take their floodwatercampaign boat downstream from Cologne tothe Rhine delta. The overall promotionalefforts of the campaign for greater awarenessabout flood issues is not limited to Germanyalone, as the Group's trips also go throughparts of France, Switzerland and the Netherlands.As a Burgerinitiative Hochwasserspokesman says emphatically, "The aim is towin over the solidarity of ALL Rhine Riverresidents, because we can only combat floodingtogether". In fulfilling their own vow, the communityaction group cooperates closely withthe German Committee for Disaster Reduction(Deutsches Komitee für Katastrophenvorsorge)and the Rhine Emergency FloodwaterOrganisation (HochwassernotgemeinschaftRhein).Building understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingA number of public awareness projects are currentlyunderway in South Africa covering avariety of communities at risk. Ukuvuka:Operation Firestop aims to reduce the riskfrom wildfires in the Cape Peninsula. Thecampaign was launched in the Western CapeProvince in February 2000 after fires thatburned land along Table Mountain behindCape Town. The Ukuvuka Campaign has afour-year mandate to achieve its goals of transferringlessons learned about effective conservationmeasures and biodiversity linked tosocial engagement, and how those methods canbe passed on to other communities.In Operation Firestop, the primary objective isto protect the land and vegetation by controllingalien plant species and by rehabilitatingthe fire-damaged areas they often inhabit. Arelated aim is to help people and their communitiescreate employment through training andpoverty relief for disadvantaged people by protectingthe most vulnerable communities fromfire and promoting co-operation and socialcohesion among them. A third goal is to assistin the implementation of integrated fire managementplans, particularly in areas close tourban centres.Elsewhere in South Africa, other public awarenesscampaigns about disasters are also underway.The Tshwane Metropolitan Councilembarked on a campaign within urban communitieson a variety of local risks includinginformal settlement fires, the spread of diseases,floods, extreme weather conditions, pollutionand HIV/AIDS.The Western and Eastern Cape Provincesjointly implemented an innovative I-SPYawareness campaign. This program involvedthe distribution of information boxes, whichwere small cubes with circular magnifyinglenses placed in two of the sides. Informationabout community hazards and means to reducerisks could be seen by peering through theglass that enlarged the information printed onthe inside of the box. As the information wasdepicted in pictures, the messages were able tocross language barriers.The disastrous events of recent years haveshown that a large part of the Latin Americanand the Caribbean population, particularlypeople living in rural areas, remain largely1974

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesTo know what to do-Tsunami in Papua New GuineaPapua New Guinea (PNG) is highly susceptible to tsunamisbecause of its topographical conditions and the frequency ofearthquakes and volcanic activity in the surrounding seas. In1998, an earthquake measuring seven on the Richter Scaleoccurred with the epicentre only 30 kilometres from the coast ofnorth-western PNG. The resulting massive tsunami struckcoastal villages of the Aitape region almost immediately, claimingmore than 2,200 lives. While the country had experiencedmany tsunamis, previous experience was not passed on to newgenerations, so people knew little about the imminent threat oftsunami hazards.Many residents who felt the earthquake did not seek refuge fromtsunamis immediately and this contributed to the many casualties.At the request of PNG authorities, the Asian Disaster ReductionCenter (ADRC) in Kobe, Japan decided to transfer the benefits of Japanese experience to local communities inPNG. ADRC produced posters and pamphlets in both English and local languages, also including many picturesand illustrations, and distributed them to residents and school children living in coastal areas. The informationwas also used and distributed further by the PNG National Red Cross Society. So the lesson to bewareof tsunamis when an earthquakes occurs and to seek refuge on higher ground has spread to more people in thecountry.A short time later, a submarine earthquake measuring eight on the Richter Scale affected a wide area northeastof PNG in November 2000. However, while it created a tsunami that destroyed thousands of houses,there were no deaths. The fact that this time nobody stood on the beach to watch the sea after the earthquake,as happened in the Aitape tsunami in 1998, can be attributed to the joint efforts of the PNG Governmentand ADRC in creating better tsunami disaster awareness. ADRC continues to work in this area following itscommitment to provide guidance to neighbouring countries with similar problems.Source: ADRC, 2001unfamiliar with basic aspects of disaster preparednessand risk reduction practices. Asreducing the impact of disasters requires thatpeople improve their knowledge and replacepassive and sometimes destructive behaviour"Before the 1993 tsunami occurred in the Sea of Japan, residents ofthe fishing village at Aonae had taken three steps. They hadproduced a tsunami hazard map to identify areas susceptible totsunami flooding; implemented and maintained an awareness/education program on tsunami dangers; developed an earlywarning system to alert coastal residents that danger is imminent.About 1,400 people were at risk of dying from the one-hourtsunami on 12 July 1993, that flooded the village within 15minutes of the earthquake. Upon feeling the earthquake shaking,most villagers immediately evacuated to higher ground. This actionsaved the lives of 85 per cent of the 'at-risk' population."Eddie Bernard, 1999with active and constructive approaches, someorganizations have sought an imaginative wayto reach this widely dispersed audience.Nepal is one of the most disaster prone countriesof the world with floods, landslides, fires,earthquakes, windstorm, hailstorm, lightening,glacial lake outburst floods or avalanches happeningevery year. As both access and communicationsare difficult in much of the countrybecause of its extreme geographical features,information from the central governmentabout hazards and disaster risks is often difficultto convey. People in remote areas are noteasily provided with sufficient knowledge toreduce their immediate risks.Under such conditions, the Government ofNepal has sought to disseminate disaster managementinformation by training local leaders.198

In 2001, government officials, ADRC andlocal NGOs conducted training courses forlocal village chiefs, teachers, scouts and womenleaders from 30 villages in 10 of the most disaster-pronedistricts of the country. The coursesdealt with the national disaster managementsystem, knowledge about hazard-prone areasand possible countermeasures to reduce theBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingpotential risks. The participants had an opportunityto learn about the causes, consequencesand possible countermeasures of natural disasters,such as the relationships betweenincreased deforestation and floods. A radiobroadcast service was utilised for the first timeto disseminate disaster preparedness information.4Soap operas for disaster reduction - radio and TVPAHO, the International Organization for Migration(IOM), UK/DFID, the NGO Voces Nuestras,CEPREDENAC and the ISDR secretariat haveteamed up to produce and broadcast a radio soapopera, called "Tiempos de Huracanes" (HurricaneSeason), about disaster management and risk reductionin Latin American and Caribbean countries. Thestory takes place in a rural farming community inwhich experiences of the characters are used toinstruct listeners about measures that can reduce theimpact of floods, earthquakes, hurricanes and otherhazards that can affect their own livelihoods. The dialoguefocuses on everyday issues close to listeners' ownexperiences.The program consists of 20 episodes that are broadcast annually, before and during the heavy rainfalland hurricane season. The pilot program is also available on a CD-ROM from the sponsoringorganizations and a Memorandum of Understanding is planned with Radio Netherlands for reproductionand widespread distribution of the soap opera.199

Riskland- a fun way to learn how to prevent disasters is an educational board-game, developed by UNICEF and the ISDRSecretariat in Spanish and English. The game conveys messages that help children understand how some actions canreduce the impact of natural or human-induced disasters, while others can increase their vulnerability.See: www.eird.org

challengesFuture challenges and prioritiesEffective public awareness to increase theunderstanding about hazards and risks, andmost importantly to motivate a collective commitmentto establish a culture of prevention,requires sustained activities in several complimentaryareas, even though the time immediatelyafter a major disaster is ideal to strengthenthese awareness activities. These include thefollowing priorities for future attention:• Official policies that promote the value ofdisaster risk reduction• Public education and professional trainingas primary tools• Developing an expanded role for themedia• Increasing the value of public events• Using multiple interests to publicise riskissuesOfficial policies that promote the value of disasterrisk reductionUnder all forms of government, officialauthorities and local leaders have a responsibilityto provide information and the means toensure public security. In this respect, there isconsiderable scope to inform and advise thepublic about natural and related hazards, andthe risks they pose. The direction, encouragementand material support to establish thevalue of disaster risk reduction is most productivewhen they originate from the leadershipwithin the community. The creation of broadand non-partisan political support is equallyimportant if sustained financial and budgetaryallocations are to be ensured for increased publicawareness leading to the creation of a cultureof prevention.While the variety of activities which motivatepublic safety are essentially educational innature, they are dependent upon the consistentuse of information across different segments ofa society. To become more effective, theyshould continue to take account of the specificneeds and localised concerns of differentgroups of people. Conscientious programs ofBuilding understanding: development of knowledge and information sharingpublic awareness need to be continuous, andpart of the public discourse into the varioussectors of Government policies. Public awarenessand understanding cannot happen bychance, nor result from exposure to a singlecampaign, although devastating catastropheshave frequently provided opportunities forlaunching public awareness campaigns.Professional training and formal education asprimary toolsAs there are few specialised courses currentlydevoted to disaster risk alone, there is a challengefor educational authorities as well as professionaltraining institutions to develop theseprograms. As has become more evident in someareas, there are already efforts being made tointroduce more risk issues into the training ofprofessionals such as engineers, meteorologists,urban planners, and many types of physical scientists.There are many additional areas ofinstruction such as environmental management,public administration, geography, and most ofthe social sciences which have not typicallyregarded risk awareness as part of the syllabus.Creating familiarity about natural hazardsneeds to start in primary and secondary school.As important institutions in most local communities,schools and educators can serve animportant role in motivating students tobecome involved in exercises, public discussions,and other activities that promote disasterreduction among family and community membersoutside the classroom. Schools canbecome the centres for development of communityknowledge and skills for disaster riskreduction (see chapter 4.2 on education).Developing an expanded role for the mediaThere is a need for more frequent and betterinformedmedia coverage about risk reductionbefore a disaster occurs. However, if the communityitself was more interested in this subject,the chances are that the media wouldreflect this interest. Risk reduction programscan all be improved by including media representativesthat are well informed about theissues, themselves.4201

4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesIncreasing the value of public eventsSpecial or periodic commemorative eventshave demonstrated that they serve a useful rolein raising the public visibility of natural hazardsor by reflecting on the consequences ofearlier unmitigated disasters. But they are nosubstitute for longer term and more substantivecommitments to foster continuous publicexposure to the subject. Public or special eventscan be useful to illustrate that while there is nopossibility to be safe from all risks, there aregraduated steps that can be taken within acommunity to minimise existing hazards or todevelop an improved state of resilience to managefuture risks better. It is important thatadditional activities be conceived on an ongoingbasis, so that public interest does not fadeafter the special event.Using multiple interests to publicise risk issuesOne of the biggest challenges for governmentofficials and interested professionals in promotingrisk awareness is to remove the subject fromthe sense of crisis or trauma that ordinarilyaccompanies it. Disaster risk reduction is not anemergency service awaiting the time of need.Rather, the subject can be placed in the midst ofdaily concerns of people where they live andwork, among the people and property whichthey value. Hazards need not become disasterswith the widespread suffering and loss whichthey suggest, if people are sufficiently conversantwith the nature of the risks involved, andwhat they can do to reduce their own exposurebeforehand. This involves the full participationof the people most exposed to risks. Publicawareness strategies can motivate people to collaboratein different enterprises, supported bytheir various talents and multiple resources.202

Chapter5A selection of disasterreduction applicationsThis chapter discusses different applications of disaster risk reduction, as outlined inthe graphic representation presented in chapter 1. These efforts become possible afterprevious activities to identify and assess risks and institutional capabilities are in place.The selection of disaster reduction applications discussed in this chapter is not exhaustive,it serves to illustrate the scope of activities and applications in the field and in certaincases, assess their strengths and weaknesses. The chapter begins with environmentalmanagement - an area often neglected by traditional disaster managers - and concludeswith early warning systems - a crucial link to effective preparedness andresponse activities.5.1 Environmental management5.2 Land use planning5.3 Protection of critical facilities5.4 Networking and partnerships5.5 Financial and economic tools5.6 Early warning systems203

A selection of disaster reduction applications55.1 Environmental managementA healthy environment enhances the capacity of societies to reduce the impact of natural andhuman induced disasters, a fact largely underestimated. As disasters undermine both socio-economicdevelopment and environmental management efforts, there is a compelling need toexplore how environmental mismanagement changes hazard and vulnerability patterns.The use of environmental management and knowledge tools as a strategy for reducing vulnerabilityto risk should be promoted. Environmental actions that reduce vulnerability need to beidentified and applied by disaster reduction practitioners. Quantitative measurement of theseactions will determine their acceptance and application in political and economics arenas. Platformsfor integrating environmental management within existing policy frameworks and internationalstrategies on disaster reduction, sustainable development and poverty reduction will builda safer world. National and regional governing institutions can best increase societies’ resilienceto disasters as part of a global environmental management effort. Instilling disaster thinking intoenvironmental performance is a win-win proposition.This chapter begins with a description of some of the links between disaster reduction and environmentalmanagement. The following environmental management tools are then described andquestions about their relevance and application in disaster risk reduction strategies considered.• Environmental legislation• Environmental policies and planning• Institutional arrangements• Environmental impact assessments• Reporting on the state of the environment• Ecological/environmental economics• Environmental codes and standards.Applications of these tools will be illustrated through examples pertaining to wetlands, forests,fisheries and agricultural systems, barrier reefs and islands, mangroves, coastal areas, watershedsand river basins, freshwater, mountains, as well as to environmental issues such as biodiversity,climate change, desertification/land degradation.Environmental management as a tool toreduce disaster riskEnvironment and disasters are inherentlylinked. Environmental degradation exacerbatesthe impact of natural disasters. It affectsnatural processes, alters humanity’s resourcebase and increases vulnerability. The degree towhich environment can absorb impacts,increase overall resilience and provide effectiveand economical solutions to reduce disasterrisks is therefore jeopardized. Furthermore,societies’ traditional coping strategies are challenged.Practices that protect the integrity and diversityof nature and ensure a wise use of naturalresources provide solutions to reduce vulnerabilityfrom which both the environmental anddisaster communities will benefit. Althoughthe inherent links between disaster reductionand environmental management are recognised,little research and policy work has beenundertaken on the subject. The intriguing conceptof using environmental tools for disasterreduction has not yet been widely applied bymany practitioners. Hurricane Mitch highlightedin dramatic fashion the indispensablerole of sound environmental management insustainable development and natural disastermitigation. Therefore, environmental managementtools that have the potential to make asubstantial and cost-effective contribution toreducing the vulnerability to natural hazards205

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives206should be identified, adapted and adopted. Inthis regard, a crucial element to enhance theconservation of nature to reduce vulnerabilityto disasters will be a true valuation of the ecologicalbalance.Environmental actions that reduce the vulnerabilityto disasters are seldom promoted in disasterreduction strategies and usually appearonly as a beneficial but unplanned side effect.But these activities will add to the options fordisaster reduction. Widely disseminatingexamples of their application to relevant actorswill encourage their use. Links between thedisaster and environment communities willbenefit from efforts made to use similar languageand approaches. Once tools and policiesare developed, capacities will need to be builtlocally in vulnerable regions to assess andrespond to environmental sources of vulnerabilityand use environmental tools to reducedisaster impacts. The World Conservation Union(IUCN) and the International Institute for SustainableDevelopment (IISD) have launched aninitiative to promote the use of environmentalmanagement to reduce the vulnerability ofcommunities to the growing threat of climatechange and climate-related disasters. TheStockholm Environmental Institute (SEI) wasalso involved. It serves as an important step totranslate the intuitive recognition of the protectivefunction of natural systems into usefulproducts for practitioners.Ecosystems are interdependent networks of organisms of anaturally defined eco-zone that function as a unit. Examples includenatural forests, wetlands, deserts, lakes and mountain regions. Theecosystem approach is a strategy for the integrated management ofland, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainableuse in an viable way. Thus, the application of the ecosystemapproach will help to reach abalance of the three main objectives of sustainabledevelopment: conservation, sustainable use and the fair and equitablesharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of resources.At present, environmental management toolsdo not systematically integrate trends in hazardsoccurrence and vulnerability. Similarly,disaster reduction practitioners do not systematicallyexplore the advantages of using environmentalmanagement tools and approaches.Some benefit might be drawn from the fact thatenvironmental tools were essentially developedLessons learnt from Hurricane Mitch“So far, relatively little is being channelledto attack the root causes of vulnerability,or to contribute to the nonstructuralmitigation of disastersthrough sound environmental management,integrating regional and integratedterritorial planning at a scale thatgoes beyond individual plots or localcommunities...For these issues to be addressed, there isa need to integrate risk managementinto environmental policy. How dohealthy ecosystem contribute to abatingrisk? What has been the environmentalimpact of land concentration, misuse ofwetlands and massive deforestation? …Finally, the long term environmentalsecurity of Central American societieswill depend to a significant degree tothe capacity for adaptive and cross-scaleIn Situ management of key bufferingecosystem functions. More appliedresearch is needed on the linkagesbetween local forest management practicesand their effect on hazard mitigation.There are encouraging initiatives whichseek to contribute to more securehuman livelihoods through empoweringlocal communities to manage risk locally.There is a growing interest in therestoration of key forest ecosystems,geared to providing local communitieswith more adapted livelihoods and asecure environment. Mitigation is bestapplied locally, but require adequatelinkages into the policy sphere to guaranteethe long term governance of theregion.The new quadrennial programme proposedby the IUCN, provides a keyframework in which to apply these ideasto the Central American context. Thepost disaster context is ripe for proposinginnovative approaches to disasterprevention and mitigation.”Source: P.Girot,IUCN/CEESP Mesoamerica, 2001

A selection of disaster reduction applications5The World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)have joined forces to promote the use of environmental management and policy tools to reduce vulnerabilityof communities, especially the poor and marginalized, to the growing threat of climate change andclimate-related disasters. The project seeks to:• identify environmental actions that reduce the vulnerability of social and economic systems;• enhance the role of these activities by offering a tool kit of options with detailed examples of theirapplication to relevant actors in research, advocacy, policy-making and industry;• build the capacity of local institutions in regions and countries vulnerable to climate-related disastersto assess and respond to the environmental sources of vulnerability;• create a platform for integrating environmental management measures that reduce community vulnerabilityinto existing policy frameworks and international strategies on disasters mitigation, climatechange adaptation, biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation.The initiative is guided by a task force on climate change, vulnerable communities and adaptation composedof a multidisciplinary group of experts from the fields of climate change, disaster reduction, sustainablelivelihoods and environmental management and policy. Working from different points of departure,members will explore how natural resource mismanagement contributes to the vulnerability ofhuman systems, and how enhanced management can provide tools for vulnerability reduction.It will produce the following:• case studies that improve the understanding of environmental factors which shape vulnerability toclimate-related disasters, and the options for adaptation within policy frameworks;• guidelines for reducing vulnerability to climate change and climate-related disasters using environmentalmanagement tools;• a network of institutions at the regional and national level with the capacity to assess and addressvulnerability to climate-related disasters.from a risk management approach, environmental/socialimpact assessment processesbeing traditionally geared towards identifyingrisks as early as possible and then addressingthem in the design phase of plans or projects.Furthermore, synergies might exist betweenresearch work on disaster reduction and on theintegration of environmental concerns intodecision-making and development planning.The IDNDR conclusion that “environmentalprotection, as a component of sustainabledevelopment and consistent with poverty alleviation,is imperative in the prevention andmitigation of natural disasters” needs to be putinto practice.Environmental management can become a costeffectivetool for disaster reduction while servingmany other objectives including conservation ofbiodiversity, mitigation of adverse global environmentalchanges and poverty alleviation.The protective role of some ecosystems aremore recognised than others and are begin-ning to be better documented. For example,important wetland functions include waterstorage, storm protection, flood mitigation,shoreline stabilization and erosion control.These functions are also essential for sustainabledevelopment. The value of these functionsare considerable as technical alternativesare often more expensive. However,benefits from wetlands are under threat fromnatural disasters including storms, droughtand floods which will be further exacerbatedby climate change.Wetlands also suffer from increased demandon agricultural land associated with populationgrowth, infrastructure development andriver flow regulations, invasion of alienspecies and pollution. The relationshipsbetween climate change and wetlandsdeserves more attention by policy makers.Adaptive capacities of ecosystems to absorbsudden shifts in climatic, geological or biologicalcomponents is a key feature increasingdisaster resilience. In this regard, traditional207

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesGlobal environmental issues and disaster reductionClimate changeConsequences: extreme weather events, changes in boundaries, structure and functioning of ecological systems(forests), food security, water availability, sea level riseSolutions: reforestation, adaptation programmes, including early warning, disaster preparednessLoss of biological diversityConsequences: loss of natural resources and diversity interfering with essential biological functions such as regulationof water runoff, control of soil erosion, loss of resilience to disturbances and environmental changeSolutions: conservation/restoration (forestry, agriculture, coastal zone management)Freshwater degradationConsequences: water quality and scarcity, droughts, health risks, economic impact of land degradation on waterresources, increase in floods due to poor land use that pollutes waterSolutions: water resources management, land use managementDesertification and land degradationConsequences: improper resource use, food security, loss of ecosystem productivitySolutions: alternative livelihood programmes, sustainable land and natural resources use programmes, naturalenvironment and development planningEnvironmental systems contribute to disaster reduction and securityMaintaining and rehabilitating resilient environmental and social systems form key building blocks for disasterreduction and security. The fire and smoke episode of 1997-98 in Southeast Asia, Russia, the Americas and theMediterranean helped focus attention on an increasing problem. The application of fire in land-use systems andforest conversion was associated with the extreme drought caused by the El Niño southern oscillation event whichcreated conditions for the escape and spread of uncontrollable wildfires. While some fires were deliberately set tocover up illegal logging, most of them were intended to convert forest to other land uses. Small farmers, plantationand timber companies, government settlement schemes and subsidy policies were responsible for damages.Better knowledge and monitoring is necessary to distinguish well-balanced natural fires beneficial in maintainingland-use systems from those fires which destruct societies and environment. Basic structural improvements,accompanied with improved legislative, economic and technical basis are needed to make physical infrastructure,natural and human systems and water management more resilient.208societies have great adaptation capacities tocycles of environmental change. It is knownthat living with floods strategies are costeffective,relatively easy to implement andmore compatible with the environment, andcan more easily be incorporated in long-termdevelopment planning at little extra cost.Forests play an important role in protectingagainst landslides, erosion, floods and avalanches.They also safeguard against drought. Asshown in Switzerland, continuous care broughtto forests including rejuvenation, careful diversificationof species and structural stability ensurean optimal protective role and save money fromdisruptions caused by natural hazards.The Yangtze river floods in 1998 showed theconsequences of the loss of healthy ecosystems.As a consequence, the Chinese governmentbanned logging in the upper watershed andincreased reforestation efforts, and prohibitedadditional land reclamation projects. Chinacarries out flood prevention and waterresources protection as a means to lessen theimpact of landslides and floods. Barrier reefs,barrier islands and mangroves contribute significantlyto the mitigation of hurricane risk,storms and tidal surges.Sound watershed management that combinesparks protection, reforestation, sustainableforestry and agricultural practices is critical toprotect downstream communities, livelihoods,agricultural lands and economic infrastructuresuch as roads, ports, hydroelectric dams, andirrigation systems. The crucial environmentalservices provided by integrated watershedmanagement must be recognised when makingpolicy and investment decisions. This becomeseven more important in light of the internationalor inter-provincial nature of river basins.

A selection of disaster reduction applications5Environmental legislationAgenda 21 (see chapter 6.1) notes that “lawsand regulations suited to country-specificconditions are among the most importantinstruments for transforming environmentand development into action.” Legislativeresponses to environmental problems testifyof countries’ appreciation of the adverseimpacts of environmental degradation onsocio-economic systems. Many developingcountries have by now adopted legislationdealing with a broad range of issues includingprotection of water resources or biodiversityconservation.Framework environmental legislation mostlydeals with cross-sectoral issues includingestablishment of environmental standardsand norms, the use of economic instrumentsfor environmental management, environmentalimpact assessment procedures, institutionalsettings and coordination at the nationaland local levels, dispute settlement, information,education and public participation.Framework environmental statutes and basicenvironmental laws helped overcome theorganizationally fragmented and uncoordinatedapproach to environmental management.More than 65 developing countrieshave adopted such legislation since the1970’s. A continuing process of legal andinstitutional innovation shows a commitmenttowards sustainable development. It also providesa vehicle for disaster reduction strategies.Italso provides a vehicle for disasterreduction strategies.National environmental laws provide somebasis and direction for the implementation ofenvironmentally sound disaster reductionplanning. Ways to ensure that environmentallaws and disaster reduction strategies aremutually supportive, consistent and in compliancewith each other should be explored.Disaster reduction specialists should be encouragedto anticipate environmental requirementsunder applicable laws and design projects toaddress these requirements, avoid problemareas, gather necessary information and coordinateclosely with environmental institutions.Also, the objective of environmental laws couldexplicitly address the requirements of disasterreduction by reinforcing the protection of thosenatural ecosystems that have a protective function.In this spirit, Bolivia is harmonizing itsEnvironmental Act with its Risk Reduction andDisaster Response Act.The existing body of multilateral environmentalagreements also provides a good basisto enhance options for disaster reduction.Among these are the Ramsar Convention onWetland Preservation, the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC), the United Nations Conventionto Combat Desertification (UNCCD),and the United Nations Convention on BiologicalDiversity (CBD). These legal instrumentsare negotiated at the international levelMost common environmental laws andinstitutional arrangements• Constitutions (environmental component)• Institutions (national and sectoral)• Environment Action Plans: national (NEAP),local (Local Agenda 21), sectoral (biodiversity,desertification, climate, etc.), specific national goalsand targets (where available)• Legislation - including environmental acts/laws onenvironmental impact assessment (EIA)• Command and control measures (standards,bans/limits, permits)• Mechanism for monitoring and enforcing legislation• Non-binding guidelines, voluntary codes of conduct(ISO 9000 and 14000)• Greening operations at governmental level• Environment litigation and judicial interventions(court cases)• Mechanisms for tracking impact and progress(environment performance)• Bilateral and multilateral agreements (e.g.Mekong River Commission, SADC Protocolshared waters, CBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD)• Ratification/implementation of international agreements• Regional environment/sustainable developmentbodies and organisations (e.g. South PacificRegional Environmental Programme (SPREP),Caribbean Conservation Authority (CCA)• Financial mechanisms• Transboundary environment laws (e.g. concerninginternational waterways, UN Law of the Sea)• Trade policies (e.g. trade agreements, WTO policiesand regulations on the sustainability ofresource use209

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe themes of concern to many multilateral United Nations environmental conventions are of greatimportance in Central America. These issues are the increasing occurrence of drought and desertification,protecting biodiversity, preservation or re-establishment of wetlands and the anticipation of thesocio-economic consequences of global climate change. Basically, as all of these concerns have crucialrelationships with risk and disaster reduction concepts, the synergy between them is of growing importancein the region. Potential changes in rainfall patterns, increased hurricane incidence and strength,the loss of ecological resilience and natural ecosystem protection, rising sea levels, coastal degradationand the loss of mangrove swamps, presage new risk conditions in the future, and the need for newadaptive, mitigation and prevention schemes, implemented on an incremental basis.IUCN has worked throughout Central America to broaden its role in risk reduction and to coordinatewith risk specialists in promoting project activities. The promotion of synergies between multilateral environmentalconventions has led to more appreciation of the close relationships that exist between efforts topromote community adaptation and resilience to the natural environment and to reduce the risks of disasters.A forum organized by the Ministry of the Environment in El Salvador in October 2001 was builtaround these concepts and it sought to achieve more common understanding and to explore opportunitiesby which adaptation practices could be applied in different zones of the country.but are implemented through national policies,strategies, action plans and laws. Moredetails on some of these instruments can befound in chapter six.Existing legal instruments and ongoing workon sustainable mountain development are alsopertinent to disaster reduction. For example,the Alpine Convention of 1989 places someemphasis on natural hazards and addressesland use planning, soil and landscape conservation,water management, forests and farming.Specific obligations to reduce the impactsof natural and manmade disasters, includingland use planning, watershed management,Klang River (Malaysia) Flood Mitigationand Environmental Management ProjectFunded by the Asian Development Bank and undertaken underCBD, the project objectives are to improve environmental conditions,including those that worsen flooding, through an integratedriver basin approach that addresses environmental and economicdevelopment needs, and reduce the adverse socio-economic andenvironmental impacts of flooding in the Klang river basin. Someof the considerations affecting environmental management andflood mitigation are integrated river basin management, solidwaste management, sediment trapping, tributary corridorimprovement and flood forecasting and warning systems.and early warning, are foreseen in futureregional mountain ecosystem agreements.These issues will be dealt with throughout2002, as mountains are the theme of the 2002ISDR campaign.Disaster reduction goals can also be integratedinto non-binding instruments such as regionalstrategies for biodiversity or the implementationof Agenda 21. In this regard, the NewPartnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD),an initiative to promote the socio-economicLegislation dealing with wetland protectionThe purpose of wetland protection legislation isusually to minimize the degradation of wetlandsand to preserve the beneficial values of wetlands.This means that for development activities, alternativesto wetland sites or limiting wetland damagemust be considered. Such provisions usuallyapply to acquisition, management, and dispositionof land and facilities, construction andimprovement projects, activities and programsaffecting land use, including water and relatedland resources planning, regulation, and licensingactivities. Valuable information producedincludes detailed wetland maps, studies andreports on wetland characteristics, documentationof compliance and consistency with floodplainmanagement programs.The China National Wetlands ConservationAction Plan finalized in 2000 is an example of aspecific environmental legislation supporting disasterreduction.210

development of Africa, deserves attention. Itsdraft programme of action includes six priorityareas: land degradation, desertification anddrought, wetlands, climate change and crossborderconservation and management of naturalresources.Environmental policies and planningAs in the case of environmental legislation,environmental and disaster reduction policiesneed to be mutually supportive as part of thesustainable development agenda. The criticalgap between macro economic policy-makingand environmental hazard considerationsneeds to be addressed. Sustainability and longtermbenefits will result from integrating hazardthinking into decision-making relating toenvironmental practices.Designing a national environmental actionplan (NEAP) is a formal standardised processthat is widely used. Characteristics of disasterreduction and environmental policies are similar.Both are meant to meet local need and sustainabledevelopment requirements, producemultiple benefits, rest on extensive participationof the public and all relevant sectoral anddisciplinary stakeholders. Socio-economicgoals, including poverty reduction, expansionof food security, improvement of human settlementsconditions, maintenance of resourcebase for future generations will be met if environmentalproblems and risk are reduced.Some of the features of integrated environmental/disasterreduction policies include:• Assessment of environmental forces ofhazards occurrence and vulnerability• Assessment of environmental actions thatreduce vulnerability• Assessment of environmental consequencesof disaster reduction actions• Consideration of environmental servicesin decision making processes• Broad-based and interdisciplinaryapproach that will ensure the integrateduse of natural and social sciences in disasterreduction planning and decision making• Partnerships and regional approaches toland use and nature conservation• Reasonable alternatives to conflicts concerningalternative uses of resourcesA selection of disaster reduction applications• Advice and information to involved actorsin enhancing the quality of the environmentWater policies (water pricing and hydropowerregulation) offer an example of environmentalpolicies with a beneficial impact on disasterreduction. They can be designed to promotesustainable use of water and allow adjustmentsdepending on seasonal forecasts to avoidfloods. Water policies guarantee that work onwetlands, floodplains and open spaces to storeand cleanup runoff is undertaken. Furthermore,flood and drought risk management areincreasingly looked at in the context of waterresources and therefore depend on effectiveinternational water management.World Bank integrating environmentalmanagement and hazard reductionThe Dominican Republic - National Environmental PolicyReform. While not explicitly addressing natural hazard vulnerability,the project perfectly matches hazard mitigationconcerns as its objectives include curbing deforestation anddegradation of watersheds and coastal zones. Its developmentobjective is to establish the basis for improved environmentalmanagement by defining environmental policyreforms and elaborating a national environmental managementprogramme.St. Lucia - Integrated Watershed Management Project.The project was initiated in 1994 in response to damagesresulting from floods and landslides related to tropicalstorm Debbie. Apart from structural rehabilitation, it alsosupported the formulation of a Watershed ManagementPlan, which would serve as the basis for more integratedand sustainable development of key watersheds andstrengthen the Government’s capacity in environmentalmanagement and flood preparedness.Similarly, policies promoting sustainable managementof fuel wood and development ofalternative sources of energy will reduce deforestationand contribute to flood, avalanche andlandslide control. Programmes undertaken as aresult of commitments under the biodiversity,climate change and desertification conventionswill also reduce vulnerability throughenhanced natural resource management. Therelationships between market prices, trade policiesand environment are complex and sensitive.Trade policies based on sound environ-2115

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesmental consideration also contribute to reducingdisaster impacts.While most regions try to strengthen regulations,there is also a shift towards deregulation,increased use of economic instruments andsubsidy reform, reliance on voluntary action bythe private sector and more NGO participation.National environmental policies thatencourage voluntary agreements as a tool toconserve natural engineering solutions willBangladesh Coastal Greenbelt Project: a project servingenvironment and disaster reductionUndertaken by the Department of Forest, under the Ministryof Environment and Forest, the project’s main objectivesare to:• Prevent loss of life and damage to property by cyclone,storms and associated tidal surges• Protect and improve the coastal environment throughincreased vegetation• Help alleviate poverty by generating income throughincreased tree cover and derived products• Increase forest resources• Increase coastal embankment stability• Establish industries based on forest plantation• Increase multiple use for land• Create popular awareness on sustainable forest management.From Bangladesh State of the Environment Report, 2001increase disaster resilience. Even though notbinding and in many cases restricting longtermplanning, they have some interestingpotential. Donations compensated by tax benefits,leases, covenants controlling land use,charitable deductions are examples of suchtools.Several countries and regions in the worldinclude natural disaster reduction in nationalenvironmental action plans.One of the ten programmes of the NationalEnvironmental Action Plan of Haiti deals withnatural disaster management; it is based on adecentralized and participatory planningapproach including NGOs, the private sectorand bilateral and multilateral donors.Jamaica gives very high priority to climatechange/sea level rise and natural and environmentaldisasters in the implementation of theSmall Islands Developing States (SIDS) Programmeof action.The Caribbean Planning for Adaptation to GlobalClimate Change (CPACC), funded by the GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF) and executed bythe Organisation of American States (OAS), isone of the most important initiatives in copingwith global climate change in the Caribbean. Itsupports the development of a policy frameworkfor integrated planning and managementfor cost-effective response and adaptation tothe impacts of global climate change. It incorporatesspecific tools such as disaster contingencyplanning.In 1999, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO) developed a Draft Plan of Actionaimed at helping SIDS countries meet thechallenges of economic change, environmentaldegradation and natural disasters. The programsfocus on agricultural trade, intensificationand diversification of agriculture, fisheries,sustainable management of land, waterand forestry resources, and environmental protectionand strengthening national institutions.The Plan would improve disaster preparednessby promoting measures to reduce the impact ofhurricanes and cyclones on agriculture andcoastal fisheries. The Plan would assist thecountries to assess their national meteorologicaland hydrological services and support earlywarning systems at national and regional levels.The South Pacific Regional Environment Programme(SPREP) has, for many years, incorporatedmany disaster-related activities intoits program as part of its mandate to managethe shared environment of the Pacific region.While these activities are spread throughoutSPREP’s programs, most have been part ofthe Regional Climate Change Work Programwhich emphasises the impact of extremeweather in the Pacific region and the relationshipsbetween climate change and naturaldisasters. SPREP is also implementing PIC-CAP which will focus on vulnerability assessmentand adaptation options.Another pertinent SPREP activity is a projecton Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the212

A selection of disaster reduction applications5Case study: Watershed management for natural disaster vulnerability reductionWatersheds are necessary for agricultural, environmental, and socio-economic development.Watershed physical and biological resources provide goods and services to humanpopulations, including water protection, attenuation of natural disasters by regulatingrunoff, protection of coastal resources and fisheries, protection of the environment, andprotection of productive lowlands. The economic benefit of upper watershed protection isnot easily estimated nor is it required to appreciate the key contribution of well-managedupper watersheds to downstream beneficiaries. Watershed management programs need tobuild on existing environmental initiatives. The following elements are required for successfulwatershed management:• No permanent structures in floodplains• All watercourses having buffer strips• Intensive agricultural activity not permitted on slopes greater than a set percentagereflecting land capacity• Clear cutting of forests limited, with forest conservation and sustainable forest managementstressed• Institutional body formally established to link and address conflicts• Public participation of both men and women in management decisions• Effective management plans and enforcement of environmental and zoning regulation• Regional environmental impact assessments to ensure that cumulative impacts ofeconomic activities are sustainableImpediments to comprehensive watershed management include:• Inadequate economic valuation of environmental services• Inadequate institutional structure and appropriate land use practices• Inattention to socio-economic issues contributing to poverty, a degraded environmentand natural disaster vulnerability• Actions to implement watershed management activities:• Strengthen municipal authorities and their capacity to address land use and watershedmanagement issues• Establish a macro national management strategy• Support sound land use planning, ensuring public participation in watershed planningand ecosystems protection , including gender concerns• Support policies and market-based incentives that favour reforestation and sustainableforestry on steep upper watersheds, promote participation of private sectorthrough the climate change Clean Development Mechanism• Require downstream beneficiaries to pay for watershed services• Support critical watershed protection and restoration of key ecological systems tomitigate disaster impacts• Support local NGOs to clarify land tenure issues and facilitate access by rural farmersto formal land markets• Establish international watershed management frameworks• Pursue a research agenda incorporating economic valuation of environmental services,innovative financing, analysis of the relationship between land use/environmentalmanagement and the magnitude of losses from natural disasters.From Watershed management for hurricane reconstruction and natural disaster vulnerabilityreduction, USAID, 1999213

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPacific Islands. Coastal hazard management is amajor component of the project as it includeshazard mapping and the development of disasterreduction strategies for coastal areas. Inorder to realise the full potential of theresources in the region, SPREP collaborateswith other organisations to expand its role inassisting Pacific small island developing statesto integrate disaster management, sustainabledevelopment and sound environmental practicesinto national planning strategies.Institutional arrangementsEnvironmental legislation and policies requireco-ordinated organizational structures to supporttheir implementation. The creation of newministries responsible for the environment andof high level inter-ministerial and interdisciplinarypolicy advisory councils is still recentstarted after the Stockholm conference in1972. Environmental ministries exist nowadaysin some 23 African countries and 11Asian countries.Environmental functions can sometimes beperformed by parastatal agencies integrated inother ministries such as housing, planning,construction, land use, agriculture and forestry.Co-ordinated organizational arrangementsrationalise environmental protection and minimisefragmented sectoral approaches diffusedthroughout numerous government departmentsand local authorities that do not correspondto interactions inherent to ecosystems.Disaster reduction concerns have a place inspecific environmental legislative and institutionalmeans that promote coherent implementationof sustainable development policies. Forexample, almost all Caribbean countries havestrengthened their environmental administrativecapacities to integrate environmental considerationsinto physical planning.Environmental management requires co-operativesolutions, cutting across many disciplinesand sectors, involving community groups,NGOs, the private sector, governmental institutions,the scientific community, and internationalorganizations. So does disaster manage-Involvement of the El Salvador Ministry of the Environment in risk and disaster mattersThe impact of Hurricane Mitch in 1998, and the earthquakes in El Salvador in 2001, led to an increased awarenessat the Ministry of the Environment in El Salvador about the relationship between development, the environmentand disasters. Recent favourable experience collaborating with local community associations and NGOsin the Lower Lempa Valley Risk Reduction Project provided organizational precedents for more direct involvementby the ministry in risk and disaster matters. Following the 2001 earthquakes, the Minister of the Environmentconvened a committee of national and international experts to consider the creation of a new technicalagency to deal with risk management issues. An executive paper created the National Service for TerritorialStudies (SNET), in the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources in October 2001. SNET is anautonomous government agency with annual budget of about US$ 2 million.SNET has four divisions, three of which relate to monitoring the country’s geology, hydrology and meteorology.This is the first time that these disciplines have been housed in the same institution in El Salvador. The fourthdivision deals with integrated risk management issues and develops vulnerability and risk scenarios.Consideration also is being given to the formulation of a national risk reduction plan that would prioritize, guideand orient future risk management activities in the country and establish a basis for coordinating the many professionalinterests and different actors in the field.SNET breaks with the tradition of adding risk reduction issues onto already established emergency disasterresponse or civil defence plans. By expanding on the prior experience of The National Institute for Territorial Studiesin Nicaragua SNET may be a first step towards establishing a comprehensive risk management system in thecountry. It may well serve as a model for other countries, as Guatemala has recently requested a feasibility studyto be conducted for a similar approach. Another project financed by the IADB in the Dominican Republic iscurrently evaluating a far greater role for the Ministry of the Environment, which already has legal authority toact in the area of land use and disaster reduction.214

ment. Therefore organizational frameworks inplace for environmental issues can be expandedto serve the needs of disaster risk reductionas part of sustainable development planning.Many public agencies are experiencing cutbacks.Therefore, asking environmental agenciesto integrate environmental considerationsin other policy domains would save resources.This will require linking work in science, policy,environment and vulnerability reduction.Implementation of sustainable hazard reductionmeasures will need an appropriate macroplanning organizational framework organizationalframework establishing the critical linkbetween policy objectives and field performance.Multi-stakeholder processes (MSP) are one of therecent innovations to promote dialogue toachieve sustainable development. This dialoguemodel was initiated in 1998 by the UNCommission on Sustainable Development (CSD)and has since been adopted by other internationalforums. MSPs aim at bringing togetherall major stakeholders (non-state and governmentactors) in a new form of communication,decision finding (and possibly decision-making)on a particular issue.MSP are based on equity and accountability incommunication and representation betweenstakeholders. They are also based on principlesof transparency and participation, and aim todevelop partnerships and strengthen networksbetween stakeholders. MSP cover a wide spectrumof structures and levels of engagement.They are suitable for those situations wheredialogue is possible, where listening, reconcilinginterests, and integrating views into jointsolution strategies seems appropriate and withinreach. Each situation, issue or problemprompts the need for participants to design aprocess specifically suited to their abilities, circumstances,and needs. MSPs have emergedbecause there is a perceived need for a moreinclusive, effective manner for addressingurgent sustainability issues.During the preparations of the World Summitfor Sustainable Development (WSSD), stakeholdershave come together to work out how todo their part to implement the sustainabledevelopment agenda. Major inputs to the discussionon disaster reduction and sustainableA selection of disaster reduction applicationsdevelopment that fed into one of the ISDRbackground papers was drafted through multistakeholderelectronic forums. The addedvalue of a multi-stakeholder approach, namelyincreased quality, credibility and outreach,ensures an increased sense of ownership andcommitment for collaborative actions plans.Search conferences are also participativeprocesses that raise commitment for action andare applicable to collectively design disasterreduction plans.Environmental impact assessmentsLegislative and regulatory frameworks forEnvironmental Impact Assessments (EIA) alreadyexist and require strong institutional support,the commitment of governments, aid agenciesand civil society, as well as a monitoringprocesses.Risk reduction considerations could be furtherThe Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a policy makingtool that serves to provide evidence and analysis of environmentalimpacts of activities from conception to decision-making.An EIA must include a detailed risk assessment and providealternatives solutions. It must be thorough and well documentedand must provide the public an opportunity to participatein accordance with the law. The EIA report usuallyprovides a detailed and rigorous analysis on which the authoritycan decide whether to approve a proposal and under whichterms and conditions. Once a particular project is selected, itis monitored to ensure that conditions for approval areadhered to and that the benefits from the EIA are achieved.Monitoring, implementing and auditing within the EIAprocess provides feedback to further improve it.assimilated into the requirements for EIA. Amore comprehensive EIA could evolvetowards a periodic vulnerability assessment totake into account the dynamic nature of vulnerability.An expanded EIA process couldprovide a basis to ensure that proposed initiativeswould include considerations of both disasterreduction along with lessening environmentalimpact. Further it would allow for anassessment of potential problems as well asbenefits of disaster risk reduction activities.Additionally, disaster reduction specialistscould use the EIA model as an example toincrease comprehension of disaster impactassessments and to reorient it to become a plan-2155

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives216ning tool. Fundamentally, a post event impactassessment is a reactive assessment of damagealready occurred and not part of the planningprocess, although results can feed into futureplanning.Further cross-fertilization between disasterreduction practitioners and environmentalmanagers will generate better EIA techniquesand practices for use in disaster reduction.Investment in mitigation measures does notnecessarily reduce vulnerability and the socioeconomicand environmental consequences ofsuch measures need to be assessed. A welldesigned EIA process incorporating disasterrisk will be key in encouraging the private sectorand individuals to consider how their ownactions impact vulnerability factors. To end ona cautious note indicating that there is still along way to go until EIA’s potential is realized,a study carried out in MERCOSUR on theuse of EIA showed that even though all countrieshad adopted EIA as a preventive environmentalmanagement tool, only Brazil had significantexperience in this area. It is intriguingto note that emergency actions and actions thatrestore facilities to pre-disaster conditions areusually exempted from environmental impactassessment and documentation.Examples of the integration of disaster reductionconcerns into EIA are scarce. Through itsEIA, the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB)is asking its borrowing member countries toinclude disaster mitigation measures that canserve to reduce the risk associated with investmentsin their development projects proposals.In India, the regulation on environmentalclearances for port projects requests an EIAreport, an environment management plan, arisk analysis study an disaster managementplan. The regulation specifies that the disastermanagement plan should be prepared on thebasis of the risk analysis considering worst casescenarios with respect to specific cases such asoil/chemical spillage, fire, explosions, sabotageand floods. It encourages green buffer zoneswhenever possible.In Viet Nam, an environmental sustainabilityprogram in the framework of Partnerships toMitigate Natural Disasters (NDM), providestechnical assistance for integrating environ-mental considerations into natural disaster mitigationplans. The relationship between naturaldisasters and environmental degradation willbe studied and guidelines for the environmentalimplications of disaster mitigation projectsproduced.Reporting on the state of the environmentGiven the importance of natural resources asenduring ways to reduce disaster risk, it is vital tohave a regularly updated picture of their healthand ability to fulfil their buffering task. Some ofthe most relevant reporting agencies include:• UNEP State of the Environment (SoE)reporting undertaken in the context ofperiodic Global Environmental Outlooks(GEO)• IUCN environment profiles• SoE reports for projects financed by theWorld Bank and GEF, as well as otherfunding agencies• OECD environmental performance reviews• UN CSD national reporting on implementationof Agenda 21, national assessmentreports and country profiles• National communications required by theConference of the Parties of the climatechange, biodiversity and desertificationconventions.The objective of these reporting systems is toassess the present and future situation of naturalresources and the environment, includingemerging issues on environmental managementand legislation and development issues.The objective of these reporting systems is toassess the present and future situation of naturalresources and the environment, includingemerging issues and recommendations onenvironmental management and legislationand development issues. They also inform onimplementations means.Reporting is a qualitative assessment tool and aframework for policy analysis and decisionmaking.Finally, reporting facilitates the measurementof progress towards sustainable development.Efforts of countries to meet their environmentaland sustainable development goalsare scrutinized in order to improve their performancein environmental management and

A selection of disaster reduction applications5The Bangladesh 2001 SoE report prepared under the aegis of UNEP for GEO 2002 has a welldeveloped and detailed section on natural disasters, which includes:• General introduction on the types of disasters affecting the country• Pressures on the environment that exacerbate natural disasters including geographical settings,physiography, hydrology and environmental pressures• State of natural disasters: floods, cyclones, droughts, abnormal rainfall, hailstorms, lightening,tornadoes, earthquakes and erosion• Impact of natural disasters: climate change, agriculture, salinity intrusion, fisheries, ecosystemsand biodiversity• Structural and non-structural responses• Suggested options as future measures• ConclusionThe report describes in detail the disaster management bodies and their main functions and responsibilities.Excerpts from a table in the Bangladesh SoE reportIssuePressure/CauseImpactsResponsesFloodExcess flow in monsoonImproper infrastructure development92% of total catchmentarea across borderDrainage congestion due to riverbed siltationDeforestation in upper catchmentareaDisruption of communicationsand livelihoodssystemsLoss of agricultural productionDisruption of essentialservicesNational economic lossLoss of human lives andbiodiversityCDMP (ComprehensiveDisaster ManagementPlan)FAP (Flood Action Plan)National Water PolicyFlood forecast and inundationmodellingDredging of river bedConstruction of embankmentswith sluice gates217

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives218develop principles, guidelines and effectivestrategies to better set their priorities.Natural disaster concerns are more or lessidentifiable in the above mentioned reportingsystems, links between environmental managementand flood damage (e.g. lack of integrationbetween water management, transport policyand nature conservation objectives) beingmost frequently described. However, they canproduce essential baseline and vulnerabilityinformation on which to develop disasterreduction policies (see boxexample fromBangladesh).Economic incentives/disincentives for disaster reductioninclude:• Tax incentives, subsidies and loans to compensatelandowners or discourage certain land uses• User charges: fees for downstream beneficiaries(domestic water use, agriculture, hydropower, fishery,recreation)• Transfer of development rights to avoid undesirabledevelopment• Easements: legal agreement to restrict type and amountof development taking place on a property• Land purchase/property rights: usually restricted forexceptional lands (restricted land leases)• Fines/liability system for damages caused to human settlementsor environmental services• Pricing structures to discourage unsound use ofresourcesExisting reporting guidelines could easily beupdated to include a requirement to systematicallyreport on the environmental features andresource necessary to prevent environmentaldegradation that will lead to an increase in disasterrisks. The process of environmentalreporting could also be designed to contributeto the record of ways in which societies mitigaterisk by cultural adaptation and theirappraisal of natural resources.Environmental mapping, in which communitymembers are asked to locate relevant environmentalfeatures and resources on a self-createdmap of their territory, could be used for riskmapping. Maps representing physical features,such as roads, houses, soil types and vegetation,could include social and risk phenomena,e.g., access to resources by specific groups orhousehold wealth. Community involvement inmap building provides an occasion to discussresource management issues.Ecological and environmental economicsIt is essential to obtain an accurate picture oftrue health and wealth of the socio-economicand socio-ecological situation of a nation inassessing progress towards sustainable development.Of the three interactive spheres ofsustainable development – social, economicand environmental/ecological – economic considerations,in many ways remains dominant,both in influence and in its measurement.Proving that disaster reduction integratingsound environmental management makes economicsense is a major challenge when confrontingdecision-makers.Environmental economics, also referred to asecological economics, provides a visible way tolink environmental management and disasterrisk reduction in sustainable development. Itutilizes the tools and mechanisms of economicsto measure in currency terms, the value andcosts regarding various aspects of the environmentsuch as well-functioning ecosystems,prisitne environments, biodiversity and thecosts associated with resource and ecosystemdepletion.In conventional economic frameworks, naturalresources, in terms of their worth for humanuse, have been considered. Beginning in the1970s, economic mechanisms began to beadapted in order to measure more accurate representationof the socio-ecological aspects ofthe community.Until quite recently, the study of environmentaleconomics has been predominantly in academia,related research institutions, in multilateraland bilateral organization and in thelarge international environmentally-orientedNGOs. As environmental issues becomeincreasingly everyday news, decision makersworld-wide have started to examine ways inwhich socio-ecological values and costs can bemeasured and incorporated into economic andpolitical discourse. There are numerousnational models, including the older forms ofNational Resource Accounts (NRA), NationalSystems for Environmental Accounting

(NSA) and the System for EnvironmentalEconomic Accounting (SEEA). These toolswork to reduce fragmentation and overlap ofactivities that have often resulted in confusedpolicies towards agriculture, tourism and environmentalmanagement. Additionally, theypose a unique opportunity to develop morerobust indicators of sustainable development.Quantifying aspects of socio-ecological considerationsare a huge challenge for risk reductionand environmental management practitionersalike, as is advancing these concerns from theback burners of economically oriented politicalagendas.From a practical point of view, grants, funds,loan guarantees, investment partnerships, andenvironmental incentives are some of the toolscountries can use to promote water management,hazard mitigation, environmental conservation,coastal zone management etc., thatserve both environmental and disaster reductiongoals. Money generated by trust funds forecoservices envisaged under multilateral agreementscan be injected in disaster reductionactivities. The potential to use creative environmentaldebt reduction strategies can also beexplored. Debt-for-nature swaps are used toprotect crucial natural services and implicitlycontribute to disaster reduction. Innovativethinking to combine debt-for-disaster reductionswaps and debt-for-nature swaps could beinitiated. This would help the poorest countriesimplement disaster reduction activities as partof their poverty alleviation strategy.To maximize the protection of environmentalservices for disaster reduction, the current situationof remedial payment, where environmentalservices are compensated for, should bechanged to a system where such services arepaid for. In Costa Rica, Colombia, Ecuador,Guatemala and El Salvador, projects financedby the World Bank introduce the concept ofpayments to obtain a variety of environmentalservices, including sustainable natural resourcemanagement, watershed and forests protection,conservation of biodiversity, reduced vulnerabilityto floods, improved water quality andreduced sedimentation.A selection of disaster reduction applicationsEnviromental codes and standardsCoping with environmental and natural hazardrisks will require better environmental and disasterrisk management. Avoiding economiclosses through improved proactive environmentalmanagement and performance is possiblewith the implementation of EnvironmentalManagement Systems (EMS) following proceduressuch as the ISO 14000 family of standards.The International Organization for Standardization(ISO) develops voluntary technicalstandards which add value to all types of business,administrations and public utilities operations.ISO 14000 is a set of generic tools fordeveloping, implementing, maintaining andevaluating environmental policies and objectivesThey contribute to making the development,manufacturing and supply of productsand services more efficient, safer and cleaner.Organizations establish their policies, objectivesand levels of ambition. These quality standardsconstitute a responsible care approach,which combines safety and prevention of technologicaldisasters.If upgraded to include disaster resistance, standardsfor EMS, including environmentalauditing, life cycle assessment, environmentallabelling and environmental performance evaluationcould reinforce business imperatives,proving the case for applying ISO 14000 todisaster reduction.ISO certification also provides an importantbasis for communication with businesses, government,financial organizations and environmentalgroups. We should add people at riskand the disaster community to this list. If thecertificate provides information about the capabilityof the organization to achieve its statedenvironmental objectives, it has the potential toprovide information on its capability to reducevulnerability to disaster risk and achieve itsstated disaster reduction objectives. Anotherbenefit of certification is the scope for marketing.In the same way that we see green or environmentallabelling, we could see disasterresilience labelling. Relevant work in this areahas started in Australia, for example.5219

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesFrom the issues described in this chapter, themain areas for action that stand out are:• Exploration of the links between environmentaldegradation and changing hazardoccurrence and vulnerability patterns.• Identification and description of environmentalknowledge and tools that can beapplied to reduce vulnerability to risk.• Economic valuation of environmentalactions.The identified knowledge and tools could thenundergo modification and testing to be welladapted to case specific situations. Disaster andenvironment practitioners could apply the toolswhich would result in a greater sense of ownershipand commitment. Capacities for use andregular improvement of these tools would alsobe developed. To achieve this objective, developmentof a common language and exchangeof practices and experience among experts indisaster risk management, environmental management,sustainable development and economicsshould be encouraged. In this regard,innovative forms of communication should beexplored.Some adjustments in policy frameworks toreflect this new approach to disaster reductionmight be necessary. As would be closecollaboration with institutions working onclimate change adaptation, biodiversity conservation,land degradation, wetlands management,sustainable development andpoverty alleviation. Finally, integrating riskmanagement into environmental policy andvice-versa will require full community participation.220

Selected application of disaster reduction measures55.2. Land use planningThere is a fundamental need in disaster risk management to recognise the relationships betweenpopulation growth, the physical demands of human settlement, short and longer term economictrade-offs and the most appropriate use of available land. While the application of informed andconsistent planning practices are crucial to minimise the potential loss of physical assets or environmentalcapital, a greater principle lies in treating the landscape itself as a valued resource tomanage risk. Failure to act on this basis is to invite disaster.Both the opportunities and the difficulties of employing land use and planning practicesfor disaster risk reduction are reviewed in the following section:• The importance and difficulty of land use planning• A delicate balance and measured benefits• Principles regarding land use management and urban planning• Case examplesThe importance and difficultyof land use planningLand use planning that is carefully designed andrigorously implemented is the most usefulapproach to managing urban or populationgrowth and minimising associated risks. It is alsoone of the most challenging to implementbecause of the often conflicting values about landheld by different segments of the population.In many societies, cultural, social or economicattributes associated with land can form thebasis of some of the most contentious issuesamong people, particularly at local levels. Referencehas already been made in the preface tothe economic attractions which flood plains orvolcanic slopes hold for inhabitants. In othercountries wetlands are drained to becomeindustrial parks or housing estates.The determination and wide acceptance of themost suited use of land, whether it is privatelyor publicly held, is demanding enough. Itbecomes even more daunting if there are variouslyheld views about the role that land can, orshould play in terms of reducing collectiveexposure to risk. Questions invariably revolvearound whose land, whose risk and who is tobenefit. Too often, the desire for short-termgains are prone to override anticipated benefitsthat stretch further into the future.For these reasons, land use management andthe related aspects of regional or territorialplanning, have to be considered as naturalextensions of conducting hazard assessmentsand risk mapping. They essentially must takeaccount of the spatial parameters of physicalvulnerability considered in accordance with thebroader social and economic requirements of asociety. Such forms of planning used to be consideredas a largely technical exercise, but plannersand local political authorities are increasinglyrealising that members of affected communitieshave to be consulted and involvedthroughout the process.Account also needs to be taken of neighbouringor adjacent communities which are notalways of the same country, kinship or socioeconomicstanding. Actions taken in their owninterest by one group of people living along ariver can easily have a significant bearing ondiminishing the fortunes or increasing the risksof others who live downstream or on the oppositeshore.Government authorities need to play an essentialrole in the judicious assessment of such relativemerits, but there is equally a requirementfor popular involvement in determining thebasic parameters of what should constituteacceptable levels of risk. The informed participationof the public is also essential in thedevelopment of municipal or territorial standardsand the acceptance of regulatory practicesif otherwise seemingly intractable social,environmental and economic challenges are tobe addressed successfully.221

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives222A failure on the part of government to implementeffective land use and planning practicesis to invite disaster. As one commentator hasobserved, while long a function of local governments,land use planning regrettably hasoften been done with little reference to exposureto risk. Consequently, inadequate, illinformedor non-existent land use planning cancontribute to increasing the vulnerability ofcommunities exposed to hazards. Landslidesthat destroyed a housing development in thecity of Santa Tecla, El Salvador following theJanuary 2001 earthquake represent one suchexample. Most likely, there are hundreds moreexamples in all countries.A delicate balance and measured benefitsThe conscious recognition of the role of landuse management and planning practices asviable means to reduce disaster risks are part oflarger risk scenarios, best considered in localcommunity contexts.Regulatory approaches which emphasise landuse planning to reduce future flood disastershave proved effective in some countries withadvanced economies, but evaluations revealthat they too are being weakened in numerousways. This in turn is leading to calls for refinementsin regulatory strategies. Unfortunately,regulatory approaches are much less applicableto developing countries with the burgeoning ofmegacities, inadequate housing and basic servicesfor large percentages of the population, arising tide of migrants and unmanaged, informaleconomies. Unfortunately, it is in suchplaces where the need for planning is greatest.Some hazard specific examples with regards toland use planning are briefly presented.Earthquakes, volcanic eruptionsand avalanchesSeismic microzonation allows for identificationof earthquake prone areas at a local scale. Thiscan be used to maintain low levels of buildingdensity or directly avoid the development insuch areas. Microzoning has proved to be particularlyeffective for the establishment of setbackdistances from active fault-lines, withinwhich building is not permitted (see Box).Land use in California, U.S.In many counties and cities of California,setback ordinances are a major device that isapplied to enforce seismic safety. Thus,building and stability slope setbacks can berecommended where proposed developmentcrosses known or inferred faults, as well aswhere unrepaired active landslides - or oldlandslide deposits- have been identified. Setbackscan also be used to impose the appropriateseparation of buildings from eachother to reduce pounding effects. This phenomenonis most common in urban areaswhere structures of different heights, resultingfrom different constructions methods,are combined in close proximity. Anothertype of setback regulates the distance frombuildings to sidewalks or other areas that areheavily used by pedestrians. The main purposeof such setbacks is to reduce the loss oflife and injury arising from collapsing buildingsduring an earthquake.Source: adapted from K.Smith, 1997Risk arising from volcanic eruptions can also besubstantially reduced by means of limiting thedevelopment in hazardous areas. In that sense,volcanic hazard mapping provides the basis forland use regulations, as well as critical informationfor developing effective evacuation plans.Some countries have well established zoningmethodologies for mass movement related hazards,such as landslides and avalanches. That isthe case for Switzerland, where a three colourcodedzoning system guides the developmentof both public and private buildings.The Swiss code has been applied in many partsof the world. The map on next page showing alandslide-prone area in the zone of Paccha, insouthern Ecuador, illustrates the use of hazardmaps with the aforementioned three colors code.This map is one of the results of a large researchproject on natural hazards in this region ofEcuador, PRECUPA, sponsored by the SwissHumanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief Unit(SDR) between 1994 and 1998. Based on thefindings of this project, a new ordinance for theuse and occupation of the urban land has beenpromulgated, allowing a safer expansion of thisarea.

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Land use in SwitzerlandBased on hazard maps, charts of degrees of danger are developed in order to guarantee a homogenousand uniform means of assessment of the different kinds of natural hazards affecting Switzerland (floods,snow, avalanches, landslides, etc.). Two major parameters are used to classify the danger: the intensityand the probability (frequency or return period). Three degrees of danger are defined and are representedby the colors red, blue and yellow. The estimated degrees of danger have implications for land use.They indicate the level of danger to people and to animals, as well as to property. A description of themagnitude of damage which could be caused by an event is based on the identification of threshold valuesfor degrees of danger, according to possible damage to property. The danger zones can be delineatedon the local plan, together with areas suitable for construction or zones where additional protection isrequired. The degrees of danger are initially assigned according to their consequences for constructionactivity: areas where buildings are not allowed (red: high hazard); areas where building must follow safetyrequirements (blue: potential hazard); and areas without building restrictions (yellow/white).According to Art. 6 of the Federal Law for Land-use-Planning, the cantons must identify in their MasterPlan all areas that are threatened by natural hazards. The Master Plan is a basic document for landuseplanning, infrastructure coordination and accident prevention, that allows for early detection of conflictsbetween land-use, development and natural hazards.Source: Olivier Lateltin and H. Raetzo, 2001FloodsFlood management strategies are constantlybeing rethought. One approach draws uponobservations of flood adaptation in traditionalsocieties in which communities learned toreduced their exposure and vulnerability tofloods through a variety of techniques. Theseinclude building modifications such as the stilthouses of Malaysia, or effective social measureslike the mutual aid that is often evident instrong and supportive kinship relationshipswithin local communities.Therefore, modern strategies need to adopt asustainability perspective and emphasise thewiser use of flood plains and coastal floodzones. Such an outlook is grounded in antici-Central Committee for Floods and Storm Control(CCFSC), Hanoi, Vietnam, 2000.223

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPrinciples regarding land use management and urban planning for risk reductionThe following principles apply not only to land use management plans, but in particular in the context of risk reductionstrategies.1. Land use management plans form a shared basis for sustainable development and risk reduction strategies.• As the physical and spatial projection of the social, economic, environmental and cultural policies of a country, landuse management includes various planning tools and management mechanisms. They are necessary for a productivebut sustainable use of the national territory and provide for the successful regulation of the economiclife of a country.2. Land use management operates at different geographical scales which require different ranges of management toolsand operational mechanisms.• At the national level, sectoral economic policies are tied into the administrative framework of provincial or territorialjurisdictions.• At the metropolitan level, strategic plans are formulated for sustainable urban development.• At the municipal level, municipal ordinances and regulatory plans define local land use management practices.• At the local or community level, management plans encourage participatory management for community worksand urban projects.3. Land use management involves legal, technical, and social dimensions.• The legal and regulatory dimension includes laws, decrees, ordinances and other regulations adopted by nationaland local governments.• The technical and instrumental dimension includes planning tools and instruments that regulate uses of land andstrive for the best balance between private interests and the public good.• The social and institutional dimension includes those mechanisms which include citizen participation in land usemanagement practices, such as consultations, public hearings, open municipal sessions and plebiscites.4. Land use management encompasses integral services and individual sectoral interests.• Integral or dominant issues revolve around the provision of essential services or related infrastructure, such aswater, energy, transportation, communications – and as now recognised, risk management.• Individual sectoral issues include housing, health, education, agriculture, natural resources, the economy andtrade.5. The practice of land use management proceeds through three stages.• Strategic planning• Administration and fiscal control• Follow-up and monitoring6. Successful land use management plans will confront challenges.• Tensions or vested interests, that can occur between government and private interests, national and local interests,or instruments of the state and the population.• Dynamic factors, such as population growth, migration, conflicts over the use, demand for, or supply ofservices.• Factors specific to risk management, including the changing extent or nature of vulnerability, major fluctuations inland values, urban services and environmental services.7. Successful strategic land use management requires essential resources.• A clear legal and regulatory framework defines the competencies of the various stakeholders and the “rules of thegame”, including the role of each actor in the various stages of planning.• Access to information on regulatory plans, land and property markets, public and private investment projects iscrucial for ensuring effective citizen participation in decision-making.• A decentralised fiscal policy strengthens the capacity of local governments to raise revenue and to consolidate theirfinances in the interest of effective local administration.Adapted from CERCA, UN-HABITAT, Central America, 2000224

patory approaches: empowering local communitiesto make choices, promoting disasterresilience, improving local and socio-economicadaptive capacities, and ensuring intra- andinter-generation equity. These strategiesembrace retreat from flood zones, by means ofboth accommodation and protective approachesas illustrated below. Previously heraldedengineering remedies or hard defences, areincreasingly being replaced by environmentalconsiderations such as mangrove swamps orwetlands which can act as soft defences.Successful communities or nations seek tostrike a balance in which flood disaster potentialis weighed against other socio-economicgoals and benefits. They recognise that landuse change in any part of a river catchmentmay adversely affect flood flows and are preparedto address source controls. They makeincreasingly informed decisions based uponsound, high quality information and stakeholderparticipation, and they frequently reassessflood risks. They seek to foster flood-resistantdesigns in physical, economic and social structures,partly through encouraging self-helpand self-reliance. They equally value traditionalor new and emerging technologies that mayhelp increase resilience.Case: CubaIn Cuba, national land use planning and managementare truly integrated into risk reductionconsiderations. For over forty years, the Institutefor Physical and Spatial Planning, has been theresponsible body for the implementation ofphysical planning in the country. Their planningsystem integrates all scales of political andadministrative jurisdictions, from municipal toprovincial and national levels, in addressing awide range of land use-related issues. Theseinclude the management of natural resources,decisions about human settlements and the environment,hazards, vulnerability and risk.The institute defines regulations and providesmethodologies pertaining to risk reduction thatinclude building codes and risk zoning toreduce the physical vulnerability of householdsand critical infrastructure, especially in floodproneareas. These and related tools for implementingland use controls across the countrySelected application of disaster reduction measuresare supported by well-integrated conceptual,methodological and legal frameworks tied intothe sustainable development processes of thecountry. In addition to the institute, the nationalcivil defence authority and the hydro-meteorologicalservice, are other key organizationsin these strategies.Primarily, two main mechanisms are used toimplement land use policies. The first is planningtools that include land-use schemesapplied at the national, provincial and supramunicipallevels, Plans for territorial andurban planning are implemented by provincialand municipal authorities. Once approved,these tools become legal instruments that regulateland use for public and private land holders.They are supplemented by feasibility orlocation studies, or other forms of detailedstudies conducted to meet specific requirements.The second type of mechanism employed consistsof regulations and management practices.These include directives for the spatial allocationof investments that provide guidance forlocating building projects according to landuse criteria by the spatial location of buildingprojects prior to their financial approval. Theconsideration of physical vulnerability includedin the land use criteria of these directives, aswell as environmental impact assessments, aretherefore incorporated at this stage in land useplanning.As in other island states, coastal areas constitutethe most fragile and complex ecosystemsfound in Cuba. Their increasing vulnerabilityto the impact of natural disasters has motivatedthe government to support studies on land usemanagement. Schemes define guidelines forthe use of coastal areas at the national level,identifying priority scenarios, where higherresolution studies need to be conducted. Ahazard map for storm surges considered at thenational scale, plus additional vulnerabilitymaps, have been produced. The combined useof these maps allows relative levels of risk to beidentified for settlements located in coastalareas. Several land use regulations have resultedfrom this study, including specific recommendationsfor retrofitting, resettlement andurban growth regulations for 107 coastal settlements.5225

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives226A comprehensive study has been conducted inHavana Province, following analysis conductedin 1998 which revealed deficiencies in landuse management. By working with the government,UNESCO contributed to develop thisstudy. The reduction of vulnerability to disastershas been included as one of the main goalsof this initiative. The implementation of measureswill be undertaken over time, with financialcommitments from both the governmentand the local population. The communitieshave participated in different stages of the project,becoming more familiar with the issues ofvulnerability and principles of disaster reduction.In order to reduce disaster risk for coastalsettlements in this area, the following recommendationshave been issued:Direct measures:• Prohibit the construction of vacationhouses in existing settlements.• Relocate the population vulnerable to disasters.• Regulate and supervise the constructionof new homes in the settlements.• Retrofit and build homes adapted to floodconditions.• Improve the drainage systems in andaround the settlements.• Improve the adequacy of potable watersupplies and sanitation systems.• Improve health and transportation services.• Create employment opportunities.Indirect measures:• Improve the natural resilience of beaches.• Improve the water irrigation systems nearthe coast.• Rehabilitate the wetlands.The city of Havana provides an example ofurban planning in a coastal zone. The city hasa conspicuous breaker wall or malecon, stretching7 km along the sea, to reduce the impact ofstorm surges that periodically strike the city’scoast. Inappropriate urban growth is reflectedby the private houses and installations thathave been located in the vicinity which is athigh risk. A plan approved by the AdministrationCouncil of Havana in 1995, is nowapplied to all urban planning projects in theseseaside areas. Thanks to the vulnerability zoningimplemented through this plan, codes andstandards for construction have been renewedwith the aim to improve the organizational pro-cedures, engage more effective means of construction,and promote sound rehabilitation inthe area. Basements have been rebuilt, theheights of buildings regulated, and new landscapedesigns for public areas adopted.In conclusion, land use management andurban planning in Cuba constitute economicallyand technically feasible tools for disasterreduction. Initiatives in land use managementand urban planning have involved communitiesin the identification of local problems, inthe planning process and in implementing thedecisions taken about land use management.Revised legislation on disaster reduction basedupon new methodologies has been applied,contributing to more effective implementationof disaster reduction activities. Moreover, themultidisciplinary and inter-institutional natureof the work undertaken in land use planningand management has helped to established aconceptual and more methodological basis foreffective disaster risk reduction. As the responsiblebody for disaster mitigation and reliefactivities in Cuba, the Civil Defence Service,has benefited greatly by a broader understandingof land use tools and their role in disasterrisk reduction.Case: NicaraguaIn Nicaragua in 2001-2002, more than 20municipalities have been provided with toolsfor risk management, with a special emphasison land use planning. These include the preparationof hazard maps, land use zoning proposalsand municipal disaster reduction plans.They also include specific measures to reducethe risk of communities, considered by bothlocal and national authorities. National profes-Workshops with the participationof local actors in their own communities.

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5General methodology used for municipality studies227

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives228sionals, who received special training developedthese tools by working in a participatorymanner. Illustrations below show the processbeing used and examples of the resultsobtained in the project developed in the countrywith the support of the Swiss Agency forDevelopment and Corporation (SDC).The diagram on the previous page below illustratesthe methodology used to produce amunicipal study by the national professionals.The basis is a thorough, scientific, multiplehazardand multiple-risk analysis of the wholestudy area, taking account of local knowledgeand specialised information (steps 1 to 3). Thecore of the study is the elaboration of themunicipal disaster reduction plan, whichinvolves the production of the different riskmanagement tools illustrated in the next figures.Case: FranceThe Plan for the Prevention against natural Risks(PPR) is the main tool in the overall Frenchstrategy of natural disaster risk reduction. Itaims at controlling the use of natural and ruralspaces and expresses the responsibility toinform citizens about the risks they may beexposed to, as required under Article 21, of1987. Citizens are able to familiarise themselveswith the importance of risks, take measuresto protect their housing and join authoritiesin establishing relief and evacuation plans.The primary objective of the PPR process is toanalyse the risks of a particular territory inorder to establish hazardous areas. The plansare then able to introduce appropriate measuresof urban planning and construction thattake account of effective risk managementpractices. Zoning is one of the most commonmeans undertaken following the evaluation ofthe degree of predictable hazards. Resultingrisk maps form the basis of considerationwhich leads to the implementation of PPR andrelated legislation. The PPR is elaborated bystate agencies and is implemented under theauthority of the prefect of each departmentwho approves it with regard to the needs ofindividual communities. The PPR is formulatedfor application to all citizens, enterprisesand instruments of the government. It is aunique procedure which takes account of riskanalysis for land use planning. Presently, 2,350communities are covered by a PPR. It is anticipatedthat by 2005, 5,000 communities will becovered.An additional Plan for the Soil Occupancy (POS)also takes due consideration of natural hazardsas outlined in the French Urban Code. ThePPR is then annexed to the POS of the community.It complements other instrumentswhich highlight the potential risks in varioustypes of land use, natural resource protection,construction activities, and the administrativemanagement of territories.The French Ministry of Land Use Planning andof the Environment (MATE) has established anational list of communities at risk, which isupdated twice a year from information suppliedby prefectures. MATE has publishedthese risk maps on the Internet for easy accessby the inhabitants of communities, but also tounderline their ready availability for use bydecision-makers, notaries and insurance interests.Known as Corinte for Communes à risquesnaturels et technologiques, it is a database providinginformation on major risks by department,types of risk, individual risk analysis, land useplanning (PPR), departmental consolidatedfiles (DCS) and listings of prevention measuresundertaken. This public service of theprefectures is available at www.environnement.gouv.frand www.prim.net and it isregularly updated by MATE.Case: IndiaIn keeping with the objectives with the YokohamaStrategy, a Vulnrability Atlas of India wasdeveloped and ready in 1997. It has proved tobe an innovative tool for assessing district-widevulnerability and risk levels of existing buildingstock. The atlas has helped state governmentsand local authorities to strengthen regulatoryframeworks by amending the buildingby-laws, regulations, masterplans and land-useplanning regulations for promoting disasterresistant design and planning processes. Thedocuments and methodologies for vulnerabilityand risk assessment, along with technicalguidelines for disaster resistant constructions,have shown high potential for transfer, adaptationand replication. After the Gujarat earthquakein 2001 the relevance of the Atlas have

een highlighted and additionalassessments in a moredetailed scale is now beingdeveloped. Indian programmeshave met with successin modifying land use byseeking to address communityrequirements so as to gaintheir commitment in usheringland use changes. A nationalpolicy backed by local effort iscrucial to the success of theseprogrammes.Indian state governments areresponsible for developmentplans, in particular those thatcontribute to natural hazardsmanagement, agriculture andland management. The firstmajor initiative for preventingflood hazards in the Gangeticplains was in 1960-61 in theform of a soil conservationscheme in the catchment areasof the River Valley Projects asrecommended by the NationalFlood Commission. TheNational Watershed DevelopmentProject for RainfedAreas also aimed at promotingappropriate land use and thedevelopment of farming systemson watershed basis. ANational Land Use PolicyOutline adopted by the government of Indiapresents a cohesive and coordinated strategy ofschemes by various government agencies andothers to ensure the optimal use of land. In thisconnection, a National Land Use and ConservationBoard and State Land Use Boards havebeen established.Indian experience has shown that measures toprevent disasters like drought and floods suc-Selected application of disaster reduction measuresceed to the extent that they focus on resourceregeneration of the community living on thelands concerned. The approach has to be holisticand needs to address both spatial and temporaldimensions of land use. Sustainabilityand effectiveness of interventions depend onengendering appropriate land usage, for whichpeoples’ participation in the planning and decision-makingis an obvious requirement.5229

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesLand use management and planning are practisedin many countries. However, as wasmentioned at the beginning of this section,well-considered land use planning carriedthrough to the successful accomplishment ofreducing risks remains extremely challengingfor a number of reasons. Competing interestsor values associated with the various possibleuses of land almost always become an overridingissue that can only be resolved from somecommon understanding being reached, eitherunder law, official instruction, or through acommon appreciation of relative risks.There are an additional number of practicallimitations to address to enhance land useplanning as a tool for risk reduction, whichinclude the following:• The lack of current information aboutpotential hazards affecting a specific location,and the nature and relative magnitudesof their possible impacts within aspecific area.• The high costs and protracted nature ofmultidisciplinary involvement associatedwith the technical aspects of hazard mappingor vulnerability and risk assessmentactivities.• An inability to predict hazard events or forthe community concerned to fully appreciatethe possibility of risk.• Hesitancy to commit funds for seeminglyintangible benefits at a possible unspecifiedtime in the future, overshadowed byclear and immediate opportunities forshort-term gains.• Local political or community resistance toaccept the rationale for land controls, oftencompounded by weak or marginal interestin their enforcement. Licensing proceduresare noticeably corrupt in many countries.There are many links to the challenges describedin chapter two related to risk assessments.230

Selected application of disaster reduction measures55.3. Protection of critical facilities“The reality thatsomewhere between75 and 90 percentof all earthquakefatalities resultfrom building failures,highlights theimportance ofimplementing mitigationmeasuresspecifically associatedwith buildingdesign and construction.”Professor IanDavisAll societies need to be highly selective in the identification and protection of theirkey resources and service facilities. These lifeline elements need enhanced protectionfrom hazard impact so they can remain functional at the time of crisis or followinga major disaster. Typical critical facilities and infrastructure include:• Key infrastructure and utilities, such as communications, water, electricity and fuelsupplies.• Primary transportation links, such as main roads, rail links, harbours and airports.• Public administration facilities, government offices, police, fire and emergencyservice facilities.• Medical facilities performing critical public health and life saving functions.• Schools and buildings with social value, important for public assembly or localidentity.• Key economic assets related to finance, commerce and manufacturing.• Cultural monuments, museums and historic structures.The discussion and examples shown in this section will focus on:• The role of engineering and technical abilities in protecting critical facilities• Protection of urban infrastructure• Structural means, disaster-resistant construction• Codes, policies and procedures• Government examples, public demonstration of best practices• Development of appropriate methodologiesThe role of engineering and technical abilitiesin protecting critical facilitiesBuildings, critical facilities and infrastructureare necessary for the effective functioning andwell being of any society. It is therefore necessaryto consider what has to be done to promotethe development and application of appropriatestandards of design and construction withinwhat is often called the built environment.In technical terms, the expertise and methodologiesare available within the scientific andtechnical communities to generate appropriatestandards of design and construction for damageresistant structures and critical facilities.The fact that they are spread across countriesand individual fields of experience limits theiruse.In many developing countries, people with theright training, skills and motivation are in shortsupply. At the same time, professional structuresmay be weak so that nationally recognisedstandards of professional qualification and conductare lacking.Many countries have adopted building codesrequiring disaster-resistant design and construction.Their provisions and adequacy vary,but where they are rigorously applied theresultant buildings are more disaster-resistantthan they might otherwise be. The problem isnot so much that codes are inadequate but thatthey are not enforced effectively. Equallyimportant but much more difficult and expensiveto do, there is a need in particularly threatenedareas or badly exposed critical facilities tostrengthen, or retrofit, older buildings wherepractical.The pressures of growing population andpoverty, finance, corruption, inadequate skillsand weak administration often combine to producewoefully inadequate standards of buildingcontrol. There are other problematic areas,as well, in translating current knowledge intopractice. Buildings erected by incoming ormigrant segments of the population are usuallyconstructed without specific permission andare not regulated by any building control procedures.Public authorities are hard pressedenough to provide basic water and drainage231

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesVulnerable building stocksFollowing the earthquakes in Turkey in 1999, earthquake specialists from Istanbul’s Bogazici Universityin Istanbul, summarized the reasons why the building stock of Turkey proved to be so vulnerable:• Rampant code violations that led to disastrous results.• The system was conducive to poor construction.• High inflation meant very limited mortgage and insurance, an impediment to large-scale development,limited industrialization of residential construction.• High rate of industrialization and urbanization lead to a need for inexpensive housing.• No professional qualification of engineers.• Ineffective control/supervision of design and construction.• Corruption.• Regulations with limited enforcement and no accountability.• Ignorance and indifference.• Government was a free insurer of earthquake risk.232services to serve the new population, much lessto attend to how they house themselves.The construction industry world-wide also hasspecial characteristics, many of which militateagainst the achievement of high quality in thebuilt environment. Contributing factorsinclude the high proportion of small localfirms, the one-off or unsupervised nature ofmuch of the work, the risks in relation to therewards, the ability to cut corners by coveringup bad work and the lack of adequate training.Where the prevailing culture is lax or corrupt,local contractors will usually reflect it.Local people can do something to protectthemselves from the possible effects of disastersif simple advice is given and heeded. Theextent to which this advice is provided is oftenlimited and too often the professional communitiesthemselves are not directly involved. Thelessons based on experience, are clear. Engi-Lack of rewards for mitigation measuresA glaring omission in the newly crafted system inTurkey is, of course, the fact that no rewards have beenworked out for mitigation measures. If homeownersdecide to upgrade their buildings, this is currently notrecognised in reduced [insurance] premiums, orincreased benefits. … too much emphasis has beenplaced on the purely technical measures of earthquakeprotection, but this has occurred at the expense ofimproved settlement and spatial planning policies.Source: Gulkan, P., 2000neering studies of disaster damage are regularlyundertaken and constitute a vital element inthe design process. Codes and standards arereviewed in the light of such studies and havegained much from them, particularly whenthey have been undertaken in the early stagesof post-disaster activity.Aside from the common disregard for prevailingconditions of risk, improper design, poorconstruction and inadequate maintenance figureagain and again as major causes of buildingfailure and loss of life. Poor engineering, ineffectivebuilding control by officials and badbuilding practices within construction concernsproduce a grim harvest, long after thosepeople responsible have moved on to otherprojects. Much of the older building stock mayhave been constructed before the adoption ofmodern construction standards, but thereshould be no excuse for the failure of modernbuildings.Where they exist, national engineering institutionsare committed to maintaining appropriatestandards of professional ethics and competenceamong their members and to disciplinethose who deliberately break professional codesof conduct. By virtue of their national standing,they have contacts at senior levels of governmentand international engineering organizations.They are thus in a strong position to promotethe importance of technical integrity,learning the lessons of disasters, identifying andassessing risks and employing disaster-resistantdesign and construction practices. They arealso in a position to work for a better trainedand more risk-conscious construction industry.

Ways to achieve a safer built environmentneed to be:• Ambitious, grasping unique post-disasterpossibilities to improve building.• Stimulated by a range of incentives.• Inclusive, with the attention of engineersbeing devoted to the creation of bothsafe engineered as well as safe non-engineeredbuildings.• Focused on lifeline buildings and infrastructure,rather than on unrealistic projectionsaddressed to all structures withinall settlements.Many national institutions maintain high standardsof professional competence, but theextent to which those standards are reflected inpressure on government to improve theenforcement of building regulations, or in theprofessional supervision of engineers on theSelected application of disaster reduction measuresground is not necessarily so evident. Theysometimes use the situation to their advantageand do little to encourage better standards.However, national engineering institutions areimportant agents for a safer built environmentand high professional integrity, and this positionmust be maintained over the long term.Again, encouragement for the development ofmore effective national professional institutionsand their increased influence in civic expressionsof disaster risk management couldbecome a more common area of interest amonginternational agencies concerned with development.Protection of urban infrastructureMost cities experience natural hazards such asearthquakes, volcanic eruptions, floods,cyclones, and tidal waves, on a relatively infrequentbasis. Yet, mounting losses to life andproperty, point to the fact that determining therisk to natural disasters is a dynamic process. It5What about non-engineered buildings?“It remains something of a paradox that the failures of non-engineered buildings that kill most people inearthquakes attract the least attention from the engineering profession. At least two explanations for theneglect have been offered. One leading earthquake engineer explained that while the failure of non-engineeredbuilding construction was certainly a major problem, it should not be regarded as a problem forengineers. He believed that by definition, ‘non-engineered building is outside the engineer’s scope or mandate’.The obvious follow-up question: “therefore, in such a situation, whose responsibility is it to devise ways to createsafer vernacular buildings to protect their occupants from earthquakes?” remained unanswered, other than avague suggestion that this problem was probably - ‘the province of local builders’.Comments from another experienced earthquake engineer, this time in Japan, indicated a similar withdrawalfrom the subject. The engineer deeply regretted the serious problem associated with the poor performanceof non-engineered buildings in earthquakes in Japan, and at a global level that certainly neededthe attention of his profession. However, he believed that there was regrettably no money in Japan tofund the necessary research or implementation of improved structural measures for such low-cost structures.A rather sad case of ‘no money on the table, - no action on the ground’”“Fortunately there are notable, yet isolated exceptions to such negative attitudes or approaches includingimportant work in Peru (Giesecke, 1999), Colombia, China and Bangladesh (Hodgson, Seraj, andChoudhury, 1999). One key center for research and development is the Central Building Research Institute,and the Department for Earthquake Engineering at the University of Roorkee in the State of Uttar Pradesh,India led by the pioneering work of Professor A.S. Arya on the strengthening of non-engineered construction.The groundbreaking World Bank-supported programme to retrofit village housing in Maharashtra,India following the Latur earthquake is an example of a programme that secured the technicalsupport of Roorkee. (Government of Maharashtra, 1998).”Source: I.Davis, 2002233

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeswill not be long before 50 per cent of theworld’s population is located in urban areas,with many people living in vast cities at risk ofnatural hazards. This is an inevitable developmentand the implications are profound. Thelevel of risk depends not only on the nature ofthe hazard and the vulnerability of the elementsit affects, but also upon the economic value ofthose elements. As communities grow larger,are more established and become more complex,the level of risk they face also increases.Rapid urbanization in developing countriesparticularly, has led to the exponential growthof non-regulated housing. Population growthalong coastal areas is exposing a greater numberof people to the effects of severe weather.While these risks may be considered moderatein and of themselves, the rapid growth in population,investment and increasingly complexinfrastructure associated with cities is thrustingan ever-greater number of urban citizens intohigher categories of risk. With per capita cityproduct exceeding 10 to 30 per cent of GNP,the challenge of making cities safer can nolonger be regarded as merely a local or altruisticconcern.Disasters are only one of the many risks thaturban dwellers face. Naturally occurring hazardsare commingled with other equally pressingurban issues, such as decaying infrastructure,poor housing, homelessness, hazardousindustries, inadequate services, unaffordableand poor transport links, pollution, crime,insecurity, and conflict. The built environmentis deteriorating at a rate that most cities cannotafford to address. Vulnerability of the buildingstock to earthquake damage in one large centrehas been estimated at 170,000 older poorlymaintained buildings, 320,000 non-engineeredbuildings and 400,000 newer buildings withinadequate lateral resistance.There are examples that illustrate both a growingawareness to these issues in cities and communitiesalike and what is necessary to protecttheir essential services and related infrastruc-Building MeasuresThere is a need to recognize the three distinctive contexts for the introduction of physical risk reduction measuresinto buildings or infrastructure, (each possessing different levels of opportunities for application):• Reconstructing new buildings or through the repair of buildings• Constructing new buildings, in normal circumstances• Retrofitting existing building stock through strengthening programmes.The order of opportunities to address each context is as follows:Good Opportunity:Reconstruction, with the introduction of mitigation measures, is always likely to be possible, even in countries withresource limitations. This is on account of high levels of political will and public demand for enhanced safety inimmediate post-disaster contexts. Therefore, officials need to be sensitive to the excellent opportunities posed byreconstruction to introduce mitigation measures.Moderate Opportunity:Introducing mitigation into new construction is certainly attainable, if there are the additional funds available topay for the improvements and if codes are in place with adequate enforcement. However, the introduction of mitigationmeasures into non-engineered buildings is surrounded by social, economic and cultural obstacles andthus remains an unsolved global challenge of major proportions.Limited Opportunity:The introduction of retrofitting for existing buildings will always be the most difficult context given the scale ofbuilding stock in any urban areas. For example, in the USA, the average turnover in the Nation’s building stockis only 1 to 2 percent a year. Thus there is a vast potential cost associated with implementation in terms of securingthe necessary finance as well as the cost of social and economic disruption.Source: I. Davis, 2002234

ture. The following cases demonstrate thatwhile each involves technical and specialistinputs, a major key to the success has to be agreater degree of official interest and widerpublic participation if the commitment is toproceed beyond the stages of initial conception.An additional point that should not be overlookedis that there are often vital roles thatneed to be played by international organizationsor development agencies in stimulating orsupporting such initiatives.Case: Disaster risk reduction in health facilities,water and sanitation systems in Latin America andthe Caribbean.PAHO started to work with vulnerability anddisaster reduction for health facilities in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, with an emphasison hospitals after the earthquake in MexicoCity in 1985. This experience made it clear thatit was not sufficient for medical and supportstaff alone to be prepared to attend to emergencysituations, as had been the primaryemphasis for preparedness planning prior tothe earthquake, but that it was equally importantfor the political establishment and the publicto undertake mitigation measures to reducethe vulnerability of the infrastructure.During the past 15 years of work on this subject,a growing number of professionals andSelected application of disaster reduction measuresacademics have participated in the compilationof technical manuals about disaster reductionmeasures that should be applied in the construction,maintenance and retrofitting ofhealth facilities. Additional work has beenundertaken to conduct vulnerability studiesand to elaborate the retrofitting of several hospitalsto withstand earthquakes.While a particular emphasis had already beenplaced on the development of disaster preventioninitiatives for large health centres from theeffect of earthquakes and hurricanes, subsequentevents of the El Niño phenomenon in1997-1998, as well as the floods in Venezuelashowed an increased necessity to analyse waterrelateddisasters and their impact on the healthsector facilities.The impact of disasters on infrastructure hasconsiderable environmental and health consequences,in particular given the very specificvulnerability of domestic water supplies andthe physical infrastructure necessary for sanitation.Health risks related to the disruption ofwater distribution and sewage systems in theaftermath of disasters, and particularly duringfloods, contribute greatly to related mortality.There is also now growing appreciation of theimportance of ensuring proper maintenanceand protection of systems for industrial waterand wastes, so that they do not result in toxic orchemical pollution of water bodies.5Retrofitted hospitalPhoto: Osorio, PAHO235

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesGuiding vulnerabilty studies and mitigation measures in the the health sectorIn order to ensure that technical knowledge is passed to other countries, PAHO will continue to promotean exchange of ideas between professionals and governments in order to advance the idea of preventingavoidable losses in the health sector from natural disasters. Despite technical advances that have beenavailable to support health sector initiatives against natural disasters, many have not been implemented innew or existing health facilities. This has been due to either the lack of planning, insufficient resources orsimply the lack of apparent interest on the part of government authorities or potential financial supporters.Unfortunately, many of these projects have failed, more from a lack of interest to do things responsiblythan from a lack of resources.This topic has provoked considerable interest in Latin America and the Caribbean. Although nothinghas changed drastically from these efforts, an attempt has been made to move the agenda of disasterreduction forward by the publication and distribution of relevant information by PAHO and other institutions.Moreover, many hospitals have decided to reinforce their facilities in light of the risks of disasters.In order to further develop this successful approach of disaster risk reduction, there is a need to continuethe promotion and organization of studies about vulnerability of the built environment and facilitiesessential to public health with the joint participation of the academic, private and health sectors.Source: PAHO, 2002236PAHO has promoted this topic since thebeginning of the 1990’s in Latin America andthe Caribbean. Nevertheless, vulnerabilityreduction in the services for water and sanitationsystems yet has a long way to go. They sofar have concentrated mainly on the immediateneeds of the population without encouraging awider analysis and application of disaster preventioninitiatives. This is due to several reasons,with some related to the considerablenumber of institutions involved with water andsanitation and the absence of leadership atnational or local level. It is also partially a resultof the great geographical extent of these servicesand the complexity of the technical solutionsinvolved.Photo: Osorio, PAHOAdvances have been made in the developmentof technical manuals for disaster preventionand in the capacity to reduce the vulnerabilityof water treatment facilities against natural disasters,based on the experiences of individualcountries. On the other hand, technical publicationsthat fully list criteria for building orprotecting critical facilities from damage bynatural disasters have not yet been developed.A list of such criteria is vital for the construction,as most of those considerations are onlyavailable in the literature for building methodsbut they are not more widely elaborated forgeneral awareness or utilization.The result of these initiatives has been to familiarizecertain organizations such as the Pan-American Engineering Association for the PublicHealth and Environment – la Asociación Interamericanade Ingeniería sanitaria y Ambiental(AIDIS) with prevention issues. In the sameway, improvements have been made in the promotionof the topic in different sectors such asin the management of water facilities. This hasallowed the topic of disaster risk reduction tobe included in the legislative measures relatedto disaster management issues.Some countries like Peru have established legalguidelines for the health sector to encouragethe inclusion of disaster reduction activities inits action plans. However, there has been verylittle elaboration on the technical knowledge to

carry out these guidelines. For the future, it isvital that the universities, academic institutionsand professionals assume the responsibility topromote the spread of this technical knowledgein order for these obstacles to be overcome.With the exception of Costa Rica and Ecuador,there are presently very few countries that canshow the execution of special projects to reducethe vulnerability of facilities against naturaldisasters. For instance, water purification facilitiesand related systems generally remainexposed to different types of hazards, eventhough many of these facilities supposedly havebeen upgraded to withstand their damagingeffects. Only water treatment facilities havebeen improved to some extent, as the publicavailability of clean drinking water has been atop priority for disaster management emphasisin the wake of disasters.Case: CanadaCanada’s new Office of Critical InfrastructureProtection and Emergency Preparedness(OCIPEP) was established to enhance the protectionof critical infrastructure from disruptionor destruction, and to act as the government’sprimary agency for ensuring nationalcivil emergency preparedness. This underlinedthe importance of critical infrastructure such asenergy and utilities, communications, services,cybernetic systems, transportation, safety andgovernment comprise as the backbone of thenation’s economy.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresThe engineering standards of buildings, lifelines,and housing are determined by thedegree to which technical decisions are made,and followed through in practice, by constructionprofessionals. It is they who must determinehow effective a particular engineeringsolution will be in respect to an expecteddegree of stress or hazard.However, much less attention is given to theequally important roles of investors, localpolitical authorities and community leaders tofulfil their own professional and civic responsibilities.Together they have important rolesto play in assuring expected compliance ofstandards implied by their investment,enforcement of legislation, or adherence tolocal procedures, regulations and standards.Even when assuming that codes have beenbased on current knowledge and developedexperience, they ultimately are only as good asthe extent to which they are employed andenforced. The state of Florida was regarded ashaving one of the most rigorous buildingcodes in the US until Hurricane Andrewstripped away all pretences of compliance.Similar disclosures have arisen with unerringfrequency after disasters have occurred,whether they happened in Japan, Turkey, Taiwanor India.“In Turkey, the building construction supervision scheme isdirected mostly to checking designs, when in fact violationsoccur at the construction site.”Gulkan, P.5Structural means, disaster-resistantconstructionThe design and construction of hazard-resistantstructures constitute some of the mostcost-effective means of reducing risks. Thetechnical design and authoritative enforcementof building codes and related standardsof construction are essential to protect the builtenvironment from unnecessary loss or damagefrom natural hazards. Urban planners, architects,engineers, construction contractors andbuilding inspectors all have important responsibilitiesto ensure that the physical aspects ofplanning and construction are technicallysound and are suited to the circumstances ofpotential hazards in a specific location.In an effort to address some of these issues, theEarthquake Engineering Research Institute(EERI), a non-profit professional associationheadquartered in Oakland, US, is conductinga joint project with the International Associationof Earthquake Engineering (IAEE) located inTokyo, Japan. Together they are building aninteractive, dynamic, Internet-based encyclopaediaof housing construction used in all seismically-activeareas of the world. The endeavourlinks more than 160 volunteer engineersand architects from over 45 countries,enabling them to consolidate and share data,as well as to access tools that can reduce thevulnerability of housing in earthquakes. Thegoal is to create a professional resource that is237

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesuseful not only for design and constructionprofessionals but also for housing authorities,community planners, or other agencies concernedwith hazard reduction and sustainabledevelopment.Initial efforts of the project are devoted tocompiling relevant information about allaspects of housing construction in seismicareas. These include architectural features,structural details, strengths and deficienciesunder seismic loads, performance of materialsin previous earthquakes, local constructionpractices, and common building materialsused. Data is also compiled about the availabilityand use of insurance or other associatedfactors. An important feature of the database isthat it accommodates information about constructionfeatures ranging from the basicaspects of non-engineered rural housingthrough all other ranges of intermediate technicalconsideration up to the sophisticatedengineering practices employed in urban highriseconstruction.As the information is placed on the Internet,users can search the database by various criteria.In addition to basic country profiles, informationcan be retrieved on the basis of specifictypes of urban or rural construction practices,seismic hazards, building functions, typeof building materials or structural systemsemployed. The information also relates to ratingsof seismic vulnerability and evendescribes economic levels of inhabitants. Itwill be possible to compare the strengths andweaknesses of various construction techniquesand strengthening technologies that have beentried in different countries. Likewise, comparisonscan be displayed with the various typesof building materials used, as well as indicatingeach country’s perception about the performanceof different types of construction.The encyclopaedia will also include countryspecificinformation, including backgroundinformation about seismic hazards, codes andbuilding standards, the size and rate of changein urban and rural housing, relative densitiesof urban and rural housing, general weatherpatterns and specific information about housinglosses in past earthquakes. Users will beable to generate graphs, tables and presentations,view photos and drawings, and printeither short or long descriptions from any ofthis information.Another institution addresses some of thesame issues but with an emphasis devoted toinfrastructure and their related components.The overall goal of the Multi-disciplinary Centerfor Earthquake Engineering Research(MCEER), State University of New York atBuffalo, USA, is to enhance the seismicresilience of communities, through improvedengineering and management tools for criticalinfrastructure systems, such as those related towater supply, electrical utilities, hospitals, andtransportation systems.MCEER works toward its goal by conductingintegrated research, outreach, and educationactivities in partnership with the users of thecentre’s products. MCEER unites a group ofleading researchers from numerous disciplinesand institutions throughout the USA to integrateknowledge, expertise, and interdisciplinaryperspective with state-of-the-art facilitiesin the field of earthquake engineering andsocio-economic studies. The result is a systematicprogramme of basic and appliedresearch that produces solutions and strategiesto reduce the structural and socio-economicimpacts of earthquakes.Codes, policies & proceduresThe development and enforcement of standardsand codes to protect public safety is anexpected responsibility of government. Codesshould exist and apply to new construction aswell as for retrofitting existing structures. Surprisingly,given the large number of towns andcities within reach of volcanic eruptions, fewefforts have been made to develop buildingcodes which increase the resilience of buildingsto ash fall, the most widespread of all volcanichazards.Development of standards is easy but implementationis difficult because it requires prudentdecisions and the accepted confidence in238

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Different perspectives of hazard-resistant building codes(only slightly exaggerated)A seismologist usually criticizes the stipulations of existing building codes that were preparedseveral years before because there is later evidence, which suggests redefinition of the earthquakehazard.Engineers want to incorporate their recent research findings and press for stricter buildingcodes. They are less concerned with stronger buildings themselves than with the adoption oftheir professional endeavours.An investor or owner of a building does not want to spend the additional 2-5 per cent of thebuilding cost to provide additional hazard risk protection for an extreme event that “probablywill not happen, anyway”.Contractors cannot be bothered with extraneous regulations and troublesome buildinginspectors, especially if their demands are going to reduce the profit margin of the construction.The government has not been able to implement even the existing building code because ofthe lack of suitable implementation mechanisms, including building inspectors.Decision-makers are afraid that the implementation of building codes may result in costincreases. They do not press implementation of building codes even for public construction.Public administrators are preoccupied with other pressing or important matters.Politicians do not risk diminishing their popularity, as the enforcement of codes is consideredto be an unpopular and restrictive process of control. Besides, there are other importantaspects of the construction industry to attend to, like contracts.The community does not understand the process and is confused, especially after a disaster.The media recognizes a controversial topic when it sees one, particularly if people have beenkilled as a result.None of the primary stakeholders seems to be discussing the problem in any common forum.So, more vulnerable buildings continue to be built…What is required to break this cycle ?Courtesy of the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, Bangkok, Thailand.“In Turkey, it is the national authorities that enact legal frameworks for disaster reduction. Inthe area of land-use planning and building code enforcement, responsibility lies with the localgovernments. Many deficiencies exist in both because local governments lack the necessarytechnical manpower for effective enforcement, and short-term populist tendencies are strongat that level. Unfortunately, the university curricula in these disciplines does not make explicitreference to disaster reducing concepts and measures.”Turkey response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001239

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives“Yes, we have building codes and related regulations, but …”“The Federated States of Micronesia have passed building code laws and regulations but have not fullyimplemented the codes due to difficulties in meeting the financial requirements called for in the building codelaws.”Micronesia response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001“One of the most important issues to be addressed in Zimbabwe is the enforcement of laws and regulationsthat relate to building by-laws and the conservation of natural resources, such as stream bank cultivation,deforestation etc., causing the siltation of rivers and dams.”Zimbabwe response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001“One of the most important issues to be addressed in India is the strict implementation of laws includingbuilding codes.”India response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001“Building codes and other regulations are in existence, however the issue is enforcement. The matter is underdiscussion at various forums within Bangladesh, and the government is actively considering this issue.”Bangladesh response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001“The Cook Islands Building Control Unit has been stepped up to improve compliance with building codesand enforcement procedures by the introduction of experienced personnel drawn from commercial buildingconstruction.”Cook Islands response to ISDR questionnaire, 2001their applicability and affordability. Land use,planning and construction standards are mostoften decided upon and enforced at the locallevel. Promoting a culture of prevention withinlocal authorities and communities must thereforebe the central focus of any national disasterrisk management strategy. The applicationof mechanisms and tools for enforcing existingbuilding codes and zoning by-laws must becentral to this effort.For some years, South Africa has enforced legislationpertaining to building codes and constructionwithin vulnerable areas, such as thosebased on a 50-year flood line. Recently theCouncil for Scientific and Industrial Research(CSIR) published the Red Book, which stipulatesguidelines for the planning and design ofhuman settlements. The planning and managementof informal settlements are receivingincreased attention from all levels of governmentas well as a greater focus in the offeringsof tertiary educational qualifications. Theestablishment of economically, physically, environmentallyand socially integrated and sustainablebuilt environments is one of the mostimportant factors which will contribute to harnessingthe full development potential of SouthAfrica and addressing the needs of its growingpopulation.Experience demonstrates that there is a need toestablish a system of planning controls andbuilding by-laws that are:Realistic, given economic, environmentalor technological constraints.Relevant to current building practice andtechnology.Regularly updated in the light of developmentsin current knowledge.Fully understood and accepted by the professionalinterests that relate to the legislation.Enforced, to avoid the legislative systembeing ignored or falling into disrepute.Adhered to, with laws and controls basedmore on a system of incentives rather thanon punishment.Fully integrated in a legal system thatoperates without conflict between the differentlevels of administration and government.240

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Hong KongPhoto: Munich Re241

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives242Government examples, publicdemonstration of best practicesGovernments can set examples by insisting onthe adherence to codes and by-laws in all publicbuildings. Similarly, government authorities canbe required to build earthquake-resistant officesin seismic zones and locate other facilities inaccordance with the best land use practices to seta public example of investing in risk reductionpractices. The importance of such official leadershipwas emphasized in an international seminaron Disaster Management and the Protection ofEducational Facilities, organized by the OECDin conjunction with the Greek ministry of educationand the Greek School Building Organization(SBO), in November 2001.Development of appropriatemethodologiesThere are a number of initiatives and professionalcoalitions, which have been, developed toencourage greater national or technical capacitybuilding to protect critical infrastructure.Because of the strong engineering componentsinvolved, much, but not all of the motivation hascome from seismic experiences and earthquakeengineering fields. The success of the exampleselaborated below can serve as guidance for thefurther development of similar initiatives thatrelate to different types of hazards. A similarapproach towards addressing floods and urbaninfrastructure is a suggested consideration forthe future. One example, already described inchapter two (p. XX) is the RADIUS methodologydeveloped during IDNDR to assess urbanseismic risk.The World Seismic Safety Initiative (WSSI) beganin 1992 as an informal initiative of members ofthe International Institute of Earthquake Engineering(IIEE), and later became an IDNDRDemonstration Project active throughout thedecade. It has since proceeded to become amodel of dedicated professionals workingtogether with minimal organizational structureto stimulate seismic risk reduction programmesin developing countries in Asia, the Pacific andAfrica. Throughout its existence, WSSI has hadfour goals:• Disseminate state-of-the-art earthquakeengineering information globally.• Incorporate experience and apply researchfindings in standards and codes.• Advance engineering research by concentratingon problem-focused needs.• Motivate governments and financial institutionsto establish policies that anticipateand prepare for probable future earthquakes.During its initial activities in Asia and the Pacific,WSSI emphasized better public awarenessand government attention for earthquake safety,and sought to develop information networksthat could serve as catalysts for action in earthquakeawareness, education and risk management.An element of WSSI’s success has been tofocus on well-defined and modest regionallybasedprojects, including Nepal’s National Societyof Earthquake Technology (NSET), Uganda’sSeismic Safety Association (USSA), and the GlobalDisaster Information Network (GLO-DISNET).By means of its extended technical membership,WSSI was also instrumental in the establishmentof the Earthquake and Megacities Initiative(EMI) and worked together with the InternationalAssociation of Seismology and Physics of theEarth’s Interior (IASPEI) to prepare a globalhazard map. Additionally, WSSI supportedregional and national initiatives in the transferand sharing of technology, extending the applicationof professional engineering practicesrelated to risk reduction and increasing publicknowledge for the improvement of structuralresponse to earthquakes. By focussing on thedemands of the 21st century, this programmeincreasingly seeks to pursue the aim of evaluatingthe effectiveness of mitigation practices in itsarea of concentration.EMI was created as an outcome of the FirstEarthquakes and Megacities Workshop conductedin Seeheim, Germany in 1997. EMI’sscientific agenda promotes multidisciplinaryresearch to evaluate the effects of earthquakes onlarge urban areas and to develop technologiesand methods for the mitigation of those effects.Within its programme, EMI promotes theestablishment of comprehensive city-wide disastermanagement systems, and the developmentof tools for disaster assessment and disastermanagement such as information technologythat enable megacities to understand their riskand take actions to reduce their exposure to disasters.The knowledge of hazards and risks is

intended to build institutional strength, toincrease accountability and to trigger new initiatives.In addition to supporting scientific research,EMI focuses its efforts on specific projectsexpected to have a high impact in acceleratingearthquake preparedness, mitigation and recovery.Its projects constitute mechanisms forknowledge building and information sharingamong scientists, practitioners and targetedend-users. These activities are aimed primarilyat building and sustaining professional andtechnical capacities in the megacities of developingcountries. EMI has focused its capacitybuilding action plan on three main projects. TheCluster Cities Project (CCP) aims to create anetwork of large metropolises exposed to thethreat of earthquakes so that they can share theirexperiences and coordinate their activities. Theoverriding objective is to enable them to increasetheir capacities for disaster preparedness,response and recovery. EMI serves to facilitateexchanges within the network and to coordinatejoint activities in the project. The Regional CentersProject is an extension of the CCP. TheEMI Training and Education Programinvolves the sharing of knowledge and informationacross different professional interest groupsto build local and regional capacities.EMI held three regional workshop in 2001, inconnection with its Cluster Cities Project. At theThird Americas Cluster Project Workshop inEcuador, three areas of cooperation were identified:community-based vulnerability reduction,population needs and health care delivery in disasters,and promoting a culture of prevention.The Oceania Cluster Cities Meeting tookplace in the form of a China-New Zealandworkshop devoted to urban development anddisaster mitigation. It resulted in a cooperationagreement between the cities of Tianjinand Wellington. The Euro-MediterraneanCluster Cities Meeting was part of the 2001Med-Safe Network meeting held in Naples.An ad-hoc coordination group was put inplace in order to develop a framework for furtherEuro-Mediterranean Cooperationinvolving EMI cities and partners in theregion.EMI is also participating in the developmentof an interdisciplinary research programmeSelected application of disaster reduction measureson hazard reduction and response in metropolitanregions currently being planned by theUniversity Center for International Studies atthe University of Pittsburgh, in the US. Thisprogramme will work closely with the AmericasCluster Cities project and is planned to belaunched during 2002 at the Americas ClusterCities Workshop in Mexico City.The Megacities 2000 Foundation was establishedin December 1994, in the Hague, the Netherlands,following a request by UNESCO to theInternational Academy of Architecture (IAA). Thefoundation collects, processes and disseminatesinformation on the development of big cities. Tothis aim the foundation uses an Internet site,organizes lectures and produces publications.GeoHazards International (GHI), a Californiabasednon-profit organization is dedicated toimproving earthquake safety in developingcountries. Working together with the UNCRD,GHI is pioneering a method to assess andreduce earthquake risk in urban areas. TheGlobal Earthquake Safety Initiative (GESI)method has been applied in 21 urban areasaround the world and plans are under way for itto be extended to 30 cities in India.Following the major earthquake in Gujarat,India in 2001, GHI is working in cooperationwith the Indian NGO, Sustainable Environmentand Ecological Development Society (SEEDS) andthe Gujarat State Disaster ManagementAuthority (GSDMA) to assess earthquake riskand to evaluate the risk management options forthree cities. GHI has also signed an agreementwith the Regional Emergency Office of the Ministryof the Interior in Antofagasta, Chile and the Centerof Scientific Investigation and Higher Education, inEnsenada, Mexico to strengthen their collaborationin similar activities in those seismic-proneareas.The Kathmandu Valley Earthquake Risk ManagementProject (KVERMP) aims to project soundearthquake management policies for the Kathmanduvalley in Nepal, and to begin the processof implementing them. The experiences gainedin this project should be useful for other earthquakethreatened cities in developing countries,and should further establish NSET Nepal as afocal point for earthquake mitigation activitiesin the Kathmandu valley.5243

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesThe primary challenge for enhancing riskmanagement practices with respect to criticalfacilities is to place the value of the infrastructurein a broad context of sustainable development.Only then can the relative priorities beconsidered to provide an acceptable degree ofprotection to those assets. It is equally importantthat the full range of technical, social, andpolitical procedures be brought to bearthrough measures of design and construction,land use and siting considerations, and theadherence to standards and regulatory measures.The priority lays in the development and applicationof measures rather than in only understandingwhat should be done. The understandingand acceptance of procedures toencourage or enforce behavior that can providea greater extent of resilience within a community,as well as the application of existingknowledge and techniques, remain a criticalchallenge.Some specific challenges and priorities, whichrequire further attention, include:• How to deal with already existing, vulnerablebuilding stock, which is impossible toimprove or refurbish.• Need to pay particular attention to informalsettlements.• Need for further efforts by training andacademic institutions, supported amongothers by international development agencies,to support and train engineers andother professionals in disaster-pronecountries as a means of enhancing disasterreduction efforts and the broader sustainabledevelopment process.• Development of effective national engineeringinstitutions to accompany governmentalefforts in maintaining and enforcingappropriate standards• Incentives to enforce existing buildingand construction codes and standards, aswell as policies.244

Selected application of disaster reduction measures55.4 Networking and partnershipsObjective of ISDR:To stimulate multidisciplinaryand inter-sectoralpartnerships and expandrisk reduction networks byengaging public participationat all stages of the implementationof the ISDR.Comprehensive disaster risk reduction covers a wide range of disciplines,sectors and institutions, calling for diverse and expandedforms of partnerships. The achievements from networking andresulting partnerships can be far more powerful than the total ofindividual or specialist contributions, alone. Thanks to Internetand global communications, the emergence of networks betweenofficials from government, the general public, private commercialsectors and professional bodies is technically easy. However, theseloose circles based on common interests, can only be successful ifparticipants share the same willingness, motivation, commitmentand desire to openly share information and experiences.Networks and partnerships, ranging from communication exchange networking to full fledgedand funded implementation partnerships, have great potential. This section is limited to describingsome concrete examples of existing ones.• Building links to reduce risk - extendedpartnerships and networking• Cross-sectoral coordination and collaboration• Technical and research networks• Multidisciplinary, networked relationships• Technical support for community partnerships• Commercial sector and partnership interestsPartnerships are formed through cooperation. Cooperationresults from the coordination of resources and abilities broughttogether through mutual respect, understanding and trust.Trust is a product of good working relationships between peopleand organizations. Good relationships and effective endeavoursgrow from time spent together in addressing commoninterests that yield mutual benefits.Building links to reduce risk - extendedpartnerships and networkingThe wide range of actors and diverse community,which deals with different aspects of disasterrisk management, is obvious throughoutthis report. One important challenge whichremains is to stimulate and develop ways onhow to link the various schools of thought,knowledge bases, key actors and stake-holdersrelevant to disaster risk reduction.Multi-disciplinary research, multi-sector policyand planning, multi-stakeholder participationand networking relevant organizations arefundamental, to address the many dimensionsin which risk reduction efforts are actualized.Benefits that accrue from such connectionsinclude improved efficiency and cost-effectiveness,a unified strategic framework for decisionmaking on issues of common concern,lessening duplication of efforts, as well as mandatingan appropriate division of responsibilities.Additionally, cutting edge knowledgefrom academic and research institutions can becross-linked to the practical initiatives undertakenby relevant organizations. Fostering theassociation of community groups with largerscale organizations will work towards ensuringthat a higher resolution of needs, capacities,cultural perceptions and traditional knowledgebecome more integrated in national, regionaland international initiatives.The spectrum of collaboration, processes andactivities goes from various ways of sharinginformation to joint research and integrateddatabases through to participatory strategicplanning and programming. The latter is themore difficult to achieve, but it isalso the moreeffective. Some examples of the ways in whichthis process is realized are:245

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativescommunication networks/forums for dialogue;institutional partnerships vis a vis memorandumsof agreements between agenciesand organizations;formalized joint mandates, legislation,policies and plans within public authorities;multi-sector issue advisory groups;multi-disciplinary research projects;integrated databases;search conferences; andother participatory planning processes.Technical and research networksDisaster reduction and management requirecomprehensive knowledge about hazardousevents, the likelihood of the occurrence and thepossible impacts they can have on societies, aswell as the social, economic and environmentalimplications related to vulnerability. Germanyhas substantial scientific and technical capabilitiesin these areas. Two complementaryresearch networks have developed with the aimof using this experience to advance multi-disciplinaryapproaches to disaster research.In 1999, the German Committee for NaturalDisaster Reduction urged the creation of aCentre for Natural Risks and Development(ZENEB) (Zentrum für Naturrisiken undEntwicklung) to focus attention on sociologicalresearch about disasters in developingcountries. Organized as a network based inthe Universities of Bonn and Bayreuth, ZENEBinvolves people in Germany and from othercountries who share an interest in the relationshipsbetween national developmentissues and natural hazard risks in developingcountries. Within this professional network,general approaches to risk research in thecontext of sustainable development are examinedin depth, and individual investigationsand case studies are conducted in developingcountries. An interesting feature is the developmentof indicators to describe the relativerisks of different countries, where ZENEBhas been collaborating with UNDP. Anotherundertaking is the set up a database of thoseindicators that may be used to frame socio-economic early warning systems (seewww.zeneb.de).Focusing more on natural hazard knowledge inthe disaster equation, the German researchinstitutions have formed the German ResearchNetwork for Natural Disasters (DFNK)(Deutsches Forschungsnetz Naturkatastrophen).The goal of the network is to provide the scientificfundamentals of advanced risk managementassociated with natural hazards and tomake that knowledge more widely available forusers. Realistic scenarios are developed to estimatecurrent levels of risk and the dynamicfeatures of future risk due to global change insuch areas as climate variability, increasingdensity of population and changing land usevalues in endangered areas. This informationcan be used for early warning purposes, in supportof decision-support systems in disastermanagement, and for developing greaterunderstanding of the issues among both politicalauthorities and the public.The 14 partner institutions shown in the figurebelow and the projects of the network aregrouped into five clusters: storm risk assessment,flood risk assessment, earthquake riskassessment, forest fire simulation system, anddatabases and information systems. The jointuser-oriented research requires close collaborationamong the different clusters, which isaided by the information cluster. This providesdata, synthesizes information and applies toolsfor higher-level information systems such asclearing house functions, data warehousingand near-real time transmission.The city of Cologne was chosen as the initialarea of interest for the combined assessment offloods, earthquakes and storms. The respectiveclusters apply extensive data sets, analyticaltechniques and simulation models to risk estimationprocesses so that current risks can bedepicted, future risks detected, and safety recommendationsmade. A second regionalemphasis has been placed on the Brandenburgregion with Berlin as an adjacent focal point.There, the forest fire simulation cluster is monitoringthe hazard, using simulations, anddeveloping an early warning system.246

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Partners within the DFNK.Headed by the Geo-ForschungsZentrum Potsdam,14 organizations (e.g. universities,federal institutes, insuranceindustry) in Germany and Austriaare connected within thenetwork. The work is supportedby users from disaster protection,politics and economics.Source: Bruno Merz; JanaFriedrich, GeoforschungsZentrumPotsdam, 2002Rural networking supportCase: Mozambique – WFP - FAO –NGOs - UniversitiesA different form of partnership is required toaddress the vulnerabilities of rural environmentswhere most Mozambicans live in a precariousbalance between subsistence and desperation.Very small fluctuations in climatic conditions,localized flooding, or the outbreak of disease inneighbouring villages can plunge a normally stablefamily economy into severe difficulty. Toidentify these most vulnerable populations, apartnership has been formed in a VulnerabilityAnalysis Group (VAG). Chaired by the government’sDepartment of Early Warning and FoodSecurity (DAPSA), the programme includes theparticipation of WFP and the Division of Nutritionin the Ministry of Health working togetherwith local communities to conduct research intochronic vulnerability. The joint initiative has providedanalysis of nutritional indicators for theevaluation of chronic vulnerability and has compileddetailed profiles of food security conditionsin virtually all districts of the country.A number of other partners have contributed torelated initiatives in this multi-disciplinary effort.FAO has provided funding to monitor foodstocks in the country. In a complementary initiative,an Agricultural Markets Information System,managed by Michigan State University in theUSA, has been supported by USAID for nearlya decade, to research food security conditions,particularly in relation to rural markets andsmallholder cash crops. This programme is currentlydeveloping provincial price informationsystems that can promote the improved commercialisationof farm products.FEWSNET, an NGO also funded by USAID,works closely with VAG and has conducted severalstudies of local food economies, includingthose areas most affected by flooding in recentyears. The project operates in conjunction withthe University of Eduardo Mondlane in Maputo toproduce a Disaster Atlas for Mozambique that willmake disaster information and maps availableonline. An earlier initiative, AEDES, was originallyan emergency information system createdby Medecins sans Frontieres (MSF) during thedrought in 1992, but it gradually evolved into anational vulnerability information system.Case: Central America – USAID – EU - NGOsThe Central American Mitigation Initiative(CAMI) is an umbrella programme launched in2001 by OFDA/USAID, with US$ 12 millionbeing channeled through NGOs for disasterreduction activities over a three year period.IFRC and Red Cross Societies, the Corporate247

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives248Housing Foundation, CARE, Catholic Relief Services,and other agencies operating in the regionwill concentrate on local levels of involvement,principally in municipalities, to create mechanismsthat can motivate and involve further commitmentfrom national level institutions. Risk reduction isthe primary focus, and while preparedness and disasterresponse problems also are expected to beaddressed, they will be integrated into the overallperspectives of reducing risks.One of the more innovative CAMI projects isconducted by CARE International with partnersin Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Honduras.With an overall budget of more than US$3.5 million and support coming from OFDA, theCanadian International Development Agency(CIDA) and CARE-USA, the project will providetraining and technical support to develop arange of risk reduction activities in core municipalitiesin different high-risk zones of the fourcountries. The project strives to accomplish atrickle down effect among neighbouring communitiesby using people trained in the core municipalities.Benefiting from its association with LARED which provided technical and advisory supportfor the project, CARE expects to fashion itsother development projects in the region withmore attention given to risk reduction.During a recent drought in El Salvador, smallgrants were provided for severely affected populationgroups to develop pilot Integral SustainableProduction Units. These ISP units promote cropdiversification, foster improvements in commercialpractices, and create opportunities for improvedfood storage by utilizing crop techniques that areenvironmentally friendly. Based on the initial experiencewith this project, CARE-France presented aproposal to the EU to finance similar schemes intwo other departments of the country, to improvethe food security of 1,000 extremely poor families.Both projects are based on the participation of thepopulation working through collective schemesusing common lands to minimize their risks. Thisapproach represents an alternative to the relianceon emergency food relief.Networking support for communitypartnershipsIn the beginning of IDNDR a group of socialscientists, NGOs and people interested in thesocial dimensions of risk reduction in LatinAmerica got together in 1992 to constitute LaRed de Estudios Sociales en Prevención de Desastresen América Latina (LA RED – The Latin AmericanNetwork for the Social Study of Disaster Prevention).It was initially conceived as a mechanismto facilitate comparative research of naturaldisasters from a social perspective. It has developedinto the focal point for hundreds of individualsand institutions working in the field ofdisaster and risk management in the differentcountries of Latin America and the Caribbean.Inspired by LA RED, a similar network in SouthAsia has been organized by people committed topromoting alternative perspectives on disaster andvulnerability as a basis for disaster mitigation inthe region. Duryog Nivaran (“disaster mitigation”in Sanskrit) aims to reduce the vulnerability ofcommunities to disasters and conflicts by integratingalternative perspectives in the conceptual, policyand implementation levels of disaster mitigationand development programmes.In 1997, Periperi, a network of “partners enhancingresilience for people exposed to risks”, wasestablished by the Disaster Mitigation for SustainableLivelihoods Programme (DiMP), Universityof Cape Town, with the support ofOFDA/USAID and DFID. Originally composedof 16 different organisations from fiveSouthern African countries, Periperi providesopportunities for a diverse range of organizationsto work together across disciplines and nationalborders, to integrate risk reduction principles andtechnologies into ongoing sustainable developmentpolicy.Case: Guatemala – GermanyThe Peten department of Guatemala contains oneof the largest tropical forest reserves in LatinAmerica. The occurrence of uncontrolled forestfires during the annual dry season endanger thelivelihood of the local population and has lead tolarge-scale impoverishment and destruction offorest ecosystems and biodiversity in northernGuatemala. The government of Guatemala hasembarked on a major programme to promote fireprevention and more effective means to combatthem when they do occur. The programme issupervised by the influential authority of the ExecutiveSecretary of the Presidency and involves theparticipation of several other governmental institutionsusing their own resources.

The PRECLIF Project for the Local Preventionand Control of Forest Fires is a complementaryproject to the government-sponsored programme,which promotes improved preventionand control of forest fires at the local level,employing local techniques in risk management.Project activities train members of the local communitiesto implement measures that can reducethe risk of fires, working closely in conjunctionwith the official municipal committees in chargeof forest fires. The project has also supportedother activities to strengthen community organizationssuch as the establishment of a radio networkthat links six rural communities to theNational Coordinating Agency for Disaster Reductionin Guatemala, (CONRED). A communitynetwork for Central America for risk management(Red Comunitaria para la Gestion de Riesgo)was involved in the implementation at communitylevel.This spirit of cooperation and expanded professionalactivities that have characterized the PRE-CLIF Project have also encouraged new and usefulrelationships between the Global Fire MonitoringCentre at the Max Planck Institute of Chemistry inFreiburg, Germany and the Guatemalan institutionsinvolved with forest fire prevention and control.Professional visits have been exchanged, and asuccessful workshop was held in Peten to shareexperiences on the topics of forest fire prevention,management, and control.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresprotect community water systems. Locally generateddata will be digitised and used to generate hazardand risk maps that can be displayed in the ruralcommunities and thereby contribute to the formulationof emergency plans for local communities.In addition to providing basic early warning equipmentand training local emergency committees in 19communities, PREVOL has been able to assistCIMDEN by improving its methods and abilities toconduct volcanic surveillance. This has included thesupply of additional scientific instrumentation tocomplement efforts already underway by the NationalSeismic, Volcanic, Meteorological and HydrologicalInstitute of Guatemala and academic interests to monitorvolcanic activity at Pacaya volcano.The partnership has emphasized the crucial role oflinking activities in disaster-prone areas with theinterests of the national disaster reduction agency toencourage risk reduction. In this respect, all of theoperations in PREVOL have been conducted bypersonnel from the Risk Management Departmentof CONRED, ranging from the installation ofequipment, local community organization and training,and the design of risk reduction measures. Similarly,with respect to the sustainability of the project,a priority has been placed on developing and supportingthe capabilities of national institutions, inparticular those of the CONRED Risk ManagementDepartment.5There are three active volcanoes in Guatemala,and several communities have established themselveson the slopes of two of them. Project PRE-VOL is an effort to strengthen the disaster reductionactivities conducted by the Risk ManagementDepartment of CONRED, and the national Centrefor Disaster Research and Mitigation (CIMDEN)that works to reduce the risks from volcanic hazards.Both CONRED and CIMDEN have beenimplementing activities to promote preparednessfor possible eruptions of Pacaya and Fuego volcanoes.With the support of the Humanitarian Officeof the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany,PREVOL has sought to expand those activities toimprove the conditions of both disaster preparednessand risk reduction.Resources furthered the assessment of local vulnerabilitiesand the use of locally generated informationto manage risks at the community level.They are being used to increase the resilience ofexisting structures such as hanging bridges and toCross-sectoral coordination andcollaborationA positive example of an implementation partnershipis Project Impact, promoted by the American FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the lateryears of the 1990s. Project Impact was designed tochange the way the U.S. deals with risks before disastersoccur. Each community that participated inthe programme was required to undertake a preliminaryassessment of its natural hazard risks and toprepare a tentative strategy for reducing its long termvulnerability, drawing heavily on both multi-disciplinaryand intersectoral partnership capabilities of thecommunity itself. FEMA then offered technicalexpertise and some financial support as well asinvolving other federal agencies or neighbouringstates in the process.The objective of the programme was to put the latesttechnology and mitigation practices into the hands oflocal communities and to guide these local initiatives249

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives250through a complete risk assessment process. Thisallowed each community to identify and prioritisethose risk reduction initiatives that would have thegreatest benefits to the community. Within a fewyears, more than 250 communities, located in everystate of the country, had benefited from ProjectImpact, involving more than 2,500 businesses in theprocess.In 2001, FEMA’s Mitigation Bureau was mergedwith the national flood insurance programme tobecome a very different department, known as theFederal Insurance and Mitigation Administration.Funding for Project Impact has been withdrawn orotherwise reallocated, and in the later part of 2001the US radically redefined its perceptions of publicrisk.There are other professional partnerships whichremain to reinforce disaster risk reduction activitiesas every state in the USA has an office of emergencyservices. Both the Network of State Hazard MitigationOfficers (NEMO) and a National EmergencyManagement Association (NEMA), which serves as aprofessional association of state emergency managementdirectors, link wide ranging professional interestsand disseminate information across the country.Partnerships between central and local authorities,and public and private sectors are the most effective meansto reduce the impact of hazards.FEMA (US) Basic Principles, 1996.In Gujarat, India, following the earthquake of 2001,other forms of effective partnership emergedthrough the collaboration of NGOs, governmentauthorities, representatives of industry and theaffected communities. One of several examples isthe Gujarat Rehabilitation Project, a partnershipforged between CARE-India, the Federation ofIndian Chambers of Commerce and Industry(FICCI) and the government of Gujarat (GOG).In part, because the local operational environmentwas politically charged, the resulting reconstructionprocess did not conform to previous or traditionalapproaches for organizing large-scale public works.There was also a need to foster the most productiveforms of synergy between national and internationalinterests, as well as promoting joint economic-governmental-communityapproaches for efficientimplementation. There was a conscious effort toinsure that the working partnerships would ensureparticipation by members of the community and thatprocesses would ensure that their priorities wererepresented in a rapidly evolving environment.As a result, emphasis was given to address theacute shelter needs and to rehabilitate basic servicesincluding those related to health and essentialneeds for livelihood activities. The partnershipdemonstrated an opportunity to bring acombination of very highly skilled and valuableprofessional and technical resources to the projectthat would have been highly improbable werethe activity approached solely from the standpointof a governmental or NGO activity alone.This initiative emphasized the values of communityparticipation, developing additional livelihoodopportunities, and incorporating improvedrisk reduction measures to minimize the effectsof future hazards. The primary motivation offorming such a partnership was the shared interestsof the collaborators to motivate a high levelof community participation immediately followingthe disaster and to be responsive to therequirements of sustaining livelihoods in a mannerthat would establish a safe community environment.The fact that all plans for housing and communityfacilities were designed to meet constructionstandards for both earthquake and cyclone resistance,and that they were approved by both thecommunities and the appropriate governmenttechnical departments, illustrate practical measuresthat contribute to the future reduction ofrisks for people who live in a naturally hazardousregion. Additionally, by working during a transitionalperiod between response and rehabilitation,the stakeholders could develop betteropportunities for community mobilization, vocationaltraining, the establishment of temporarycommunity infrastructure, and to restart essentialcommunity activities like schools and markets.Commercial sector and partnershipinterestsIt is not possible to ignore the increasing economicdemands for all businesses to become more efficient,with production schedules tied to smallerinventories and just-in-time deliveries. Elementsof globalisation and far-reaching internationaltrading practices expose businesses to potentialdisruption or loss through natural disasters.

It is because these factors, compounded by severalextraordinarily costly and disruptive natural disastersduring the later years of the 1990 that there has beena growing commercial awareness of a correlationbetween disaster preparedness, risk reduction andthe survival of businesses. More than 60 per cent ofthe businesses affected by the Northridge earthquakein California in 1996 were out of business sixmonths after the quake. Six years after the GreatHanshin earthquake in Kobe, Japan, the heavilydamaged Port of Kobe has not been able to regain itsprevious competitive standing as the third busiestJapanese port.Motivated by a desire to protect their own assets ortheir competitive standing in markets, commercialenterprises have invested heavily in business continuityservices designed to assess and then mitigatephysical or operational risks to their businesses.Local businesses, trade groups, corporate interests,labour organizations, NGOs and community leadersare all trying to find effective means to share theirrespective abilities and resources in the assessment,planning and reduction of the risks they share intheir community. In recent years there have beenimportant initiatives of corporate groups and otherbusiness-community relationships promoting disasterreduction activities in the common interest.Examples include the Business and Industry Councilfor Emergency Planning and Preparedness (BICEPP),Disaster Recovery Business Alliance (DRBA), PublicPrivate Partnership – 2000 (PPP 2000), and theInstitute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS).A recent study conducted by the Benfield GriegHazard Research Centre of the University CollegeLondon for DFID concludes that while in quitespecific circumstances the potential for public-privatepartnerships may offer promise, in almost allcases they are neither easy to establish, nor to sustainwithout a common understanding and commitmentto the values of risk reduction being shared by allparties involved. This can be very difficult to achieveconsidering the different organizational values andmotivations, not to mention expectations, generallyobserved in commercial, government, and publicinterest organizations.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresThe proposed National Disaster Management Policyof Mozambique recognizes that the potentialimpact of disasters on commerce, industry andagribusiness can threaten the national economy ofthe country to an ever-greater degree. It is alsoaware that as the resources available to state structuresrelative to the business community diminishand as business enterprises assume responsibilityfor providing more essential services to the society,the private commercial sector needs to becomea more crucial partner in all aspects of disaster riskmanagement. Accordingly, strategies able to dedicateresources more effectively for preventingrisks become essential, given the rapid expansionof the national economy.With this in mind, the National Office for DisasterManagement- Instituto Nacional de Gestao de Calamadidas(INGC) has made collaboration with theprivate sector a priority, but certain areas of relatedrisk will require much more attention in thefuture. Most significantly, the threat of seriousindustrial accidents or environmental disasters hasincreased with the development of large-scaleindustrial projects such as refineries or constructionsof pipelines. The potential human and economicconsequences of a severe cyclone damagingprincipal urban centres also needs to be fully consideredin collaboration with the private sector’sown economic interests. Such calculations shouldfactor heavily in national economic policies forassured growth, but also to ensure measures thatcan protect related and essential public infrastructure.With the growing economic impact of disasters,the private sector could be encouraged to becomeactive both in their own risk management practices,as well as in the related contingency planningand disaster risk reduction measures of society. Astrong case can be made that by lending theirimportant political and economic influence toadvocate for national strategies that can protectcritical infrastructure and property assets on whichtheir own businesses depend from avoidable losses,they would also be advancing their own strategiccommercial interests.5251

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesFuture challenges and prioritieschallengesThe major challenges are to stimulate networksand partnerships at local, national, regional andinternational levels, with thematic or sharedinterests to work towards the objectives of disasterrisk reduction. A need for coherence andunified criteria to support this in a commonprocess is a challenge to address within theISDR. Related priorities include:• Enhance the critical relationship by linkingactors for risk reduction with those ofecological management, social developmentand economic growth in order toensure sustainable development at international,national and local levels.• Provide incentives for the strengtheningand/or building of national, sub-regional,regional and international coordinationmechanisms and networks for informationexchange, and the promotion of collaborativearrangements that can increase multidisciplinarydisaster reduction capacities.• At national level, encourage the establishmentof national committees or platformsfor disaster reduction, with active communityinvolvement and the participation ofall relevant sectors, should be encouragedto facilitate common approaches, collectionof information, undertaking of riskassessments and support to develop coherentstrategies and action plans.• In academic circles, stimulate cross-disciplinaryefforts, networks and partnershipsfor integrated and applied research in allrelevant areas of risk management,including gender-sensitive studies, culturaland social behaviour and resilience todisasters, early warning systems, hazardand vulnerability analysis, among otherareas. One challenge in this regard is topursue a common and widespread understandingof disaster risk and risk reductionpractices.252

Selected application of disaster reduction measures55.5.- Financial and economic toolsIn view of the exorbitant economic and social costs of recurring disasters, development assistanceand financial tools and instruments for risk-sharing and risk-transfer are important for theapplication of measures for disaster risk reduction. The increasing involvement of internationaldevelopment banks and agencies in this area supports the strengthening of national and corporatecommitment to engage in risk and vulnerability reduction. Insurance and reinsurance areessential instruments for recovering losses and supporting post-disaster recovery. Insuranceschemes need to be complemented by other low-cost risk sharing mechanisms in poorer communities,such as kinship networks, microfinance and public works programmes to increase copingcapacities. Additional tools and financial incentives are necessary to promote proactive disasterrisk reduction investment. It is also important that all development projects include a criticalconsideration of disaster risks and vulnerability, and the policies and programs meant for reducingdisasters risks are included in poverty reduction programs.The first part of this section shows how some of the international development banks havealready adopted policies and instruments to include risk reduction in their normal lending operations.In the subsequent part, a brief overview of specific financial instruments, such as insurance,microfinance and public works programmes , has been provided.Development banks promotinginvestment in disaster risk reductionThe World Bank and regional developmentbanks have emerged as one of the main sourcesof funding for recovery and reconstruction followinga major disaster. A large number ofgovernments in the developing world findthemselves fiscally constrained to reallocatetheir resources for emergent needs following alarge-scale disaster and turn to these financialinstitutions for immediate assistance. All thesebanks have therefore developed a sizeable portfolioof post-disaster recovery and reconstructionprograms over a number of years. TheWorld Bank has provided US$14 billion in thelast two decades for post-disaster recovery andreconstruction. These institutions throughtheir large-scale lending are also in a strongersituation to support sustainable disaster riskreduction strategies. In the last few years, thesefinancial institutions have come to recognizethe strategic importance of these projects forimplementing disaster preparedness, mitigationand emergency response programs.Latin America and the CaribbeanWhile work related to the economic and financialaspects of disaster reduction is proceedingat different paces reflecting different levels ofinterest throughout the world, Latin Americanand Caribbean countries have taken the lead.Disaster vulnerability and economic developmenthave been encouraged by influentialregional institutions such as the UN EconomicCommission for Latin America and the Caribbean(ECLAC), the Central American Bank for EconomicIntegration (CABEI), the CaribbeanDevelopment Bank (CDB), the Andean DevelopmentCorporation (CAF) and the Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank (IADB) as well as by theWorld Bank’s Disaster Management Facility(DMF). These organizations have recognisedthe value of disaster reduction measures inreducing and alleviating serious economic disruptionsand thus in determining a country’spath towards economic growth.IADB is a very active lending institution in thefield of disaster reduction with well-definedpolicies and activities, while other regional andinternational banks are still less focused in thisarea. IADB strategies to incorporate disasterreduction in development are outlined in Facingthe Challenge of Natural Disasters in Latin Americaand the Caribbean: An IADB Action Plan(March 2000).253

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe following table summarises the plan of action and activities that IADB is implementing to fulfil its plan.Instrument/activityPlan of actionExample/descriptionNational systems for disaster prevention and response:Building national legal and regulatory frameworks and programmes that bring together planningagencies, local governments and civil society organizations. Developing national strategies for riskreduction, and assessing intersectoral priorities, backed by separate budgets.Building prevention into the culture: Developing and disseminating risk information and empoweringcitizens and other stakeholders to take risk reduction measures.Reducing the vulnerability of the poor: Supporting poor households and communities in reducing theirvulnerability to natural hazards and recovering from disasters through reconstruction assistance.Involving the private sector: Creating conditions for the development of insurance markets. Encouragingthe use of other risk-spreading financial instruments, and designing economic and regulatoryincentives for risk reduction behaviour.Risk information for decision-making: Evaluating existing risk assessment methodologies. Developingindicators of vulnerability and stimulating wide dissemination of risk information.Fostering leadership and cooperation in the region: Stimulating coordinated actions to mobilise regionalresources for investments in risk mitigation.Sector facility fordisaster prevention(March 2001)Regular loansTechnical cooperationprojectsStudies/papersDisaster focalpoints and trainingRegional policydialogueCooperation withother agenciesPuebla-PanamaPlanStrengthen disaster prevention and risk management systems through vulnerability reduction andimproved preparedness to natural disasters. Help countries meet risk reduction objectives for developmentthrough consensus building on intersectoral priorities, strengthened institutions and launch oflarger scale national programmes. The Dominican Republic and Bolivia are the first countries to benefitfrom the first operations.Finance prevention and mitigation measures, such as through watershed management programmes,urban development projects and social development programmes, especially in hurricane or El Niñopronecountries.Improvement of decision making in risk management (pilot countries are Barbados, Chile, Guatemalaand Mexico). Development of vulnerability assessment methodology and measure performance ofmanagement tools for vulnerability reduction. Study of socio-economic impacts of El Niño. Sharingexperience on climate change and severe weather events in Asia and the Caribbean.Study of financial market aspects of natural catastrophes, viability of new insurance, capital marketand risk management techniques in the global and regional financial markets that may help mitigatethe negative economic effects of natural disasters. A document exploring the variety of financialinstruments and techniques that could be incorporated into the overall IADB strategy for managingrisks associated with natural disasters is awaiting publication.Identified at headquarters and in offices of borrowing countries. Disaster risk management trainingprovided to staff, special briefings for executive directors on instruments for disaster risk mitigation.Established a natural disaster network.First phase of a study on national systems and institutionalmechanisms for the comprehensive management of disaster risk completed. Second phase will concentrateon Bolivia, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and El Salvador.Organization of American States (OAS) Working Group on Financing Within the Inter-American Committeeon Natural Disaster Reduction. Continuous work with ECLAC, ADC, CEPREDENAC, theCaribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency (CDERA), ISDR, UNDP, the WMO and other UNagencies.Develop efficient insurance markets and improve public and private-sector access to insurance andother financial risk transfer instruments.

Combined investment in economic development,environmental management and relatedrisk factors has also been seen in the inaugurationin 2001 of the Regional Corridor Development“Plan Puebla-Panama” (Puebla in northernMexico) and its inclusion by the MexicanPresident, Vicente Fox, in his National DevelopmentPlan, supported by IADB.This initiative seeks to accelerate integrationand development in a region that covers nearly375,000 square miles and counts 64 millioninhabitants in Mexico and all seven countriesin Central America. The principal objective ofthis plan is to overcome the region’s vulnerabilityto natural disasters and address a longstandinginfrastructure deficit that has preventedthe countries from profiting more fromtheir proximity to large foreign markets.The Plan Puebla-Panama will include a projectin the area of natural disaster reduction thatwill upgrade the quality of meteorological andhydrological information available in theregion. The plan will also promote the developmentof a catastrophe insurance market toprovide coverage for public infrastructure suchas highways, bridges, schools and hospitals.This insurance is expected to reduce the needto raise funds for reconstruction and the premiumscould act as an incentive for builders toconstruct public works that are more resistantto natural disasters.CDB has adopted strategic and operationalguidelines for assessing natural disaster managementprogrammes. These initiatives seek toassist member countries in developing disastermanagement capabilities while they make surethat disaster management principles are integratedinto CDB operations. With the supportof OFDA/USAID, CDB is in the process ofestablishing a disaster management facility.ECLAC is working with several other UNagencies on improving a socio-economic damageassessment methodology to promoteinvestment in risk reduction especially focusedon rehabilitation activities following major disastersin Latin America and the Caribbean.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresAsiaThe World Bank and Asian DevelopmentBank (ADB) have supported a large numberof projects for disaster recovery andreconstruction in Asia. These projects relateto emergency financial assistance, earthquakereconstruction, flood recovery andrestoration, and cyclone reconstruction.There are a large number of post-disasterrecovery and reconstruction programs inIran, India, China, Bangladesh, Cambodia,and other countries in the region. Mostrecently, the World Bank supported a largeearthquake reconstruction program inGujarat, India.The ADB has also supported a number ofTechnical Assistance projects for capacitybuildingin many countries. In India, ADBhas initiated a programme, which goesbeyond its traditional role of extendingreconstruction loans after disasters to supportlong-term risk management. The ADB currentlyis supporting a technical assistanceprogramme implemented by the ADPC intwo Indian states, Uttar Pradesh andUttaranchal. The project was formulatedafter the 1999 Chamoli earthquake and isfocused on advising the two state governmentsin their review and efforts to strengthenexisting institutional arrangements for disastermanagement.Activities include the creation of state, districtand village disaster management andmitigation plans, the development of communityawareness videos and publications,and the establishment of a state-wide disastermanagement information system. Theproject is a pioneering initiative undertakenby the ADB to promote disaster reductionmeasures more proactively in the anticipationof future crises. It also represents anexemplary outlook in which disaster reconstructionprogrammes go beyond interventionsto satisfy only immediate needs andaim at longer-term vulnerability reduction.5255

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe World Bank and disaster reductionThe World Bank and borrowers today aredeveloping a greater awareness of the need tomitigate or reduce the adverse effects of naturaldisasters before they strike (see more chaptersix). A review of the Bank’s disaster-relatedprojects since 1980 recognised that in most ofthe projects, the full loan amount is not dedicatedto mitigation and prevention measures,but rather includes one or more componentsdedicated to these objectives. Four countriesalone – Bangladesh, Brazil, China and India –accounted for 40 per cent of the mitigationportfolio. Moreover, it is a concern that half ofthe top client countries for reconstruction projectsdo not appear among the main borrowersfor these mitigation projects. There is scope forgreater bank mitigation assistance to thesecountries that may help reduce demand forreconstruction. There is a trend of increasedbank approval of mitigation projects over time,with 55 approved in the 1990s against only 40in the 1980s.The bank is reviewing its operational policiesto respond, among other things, to the conclusionsof its review of disaster-related projectssince 1980 and to incorporate more considerationson disaster and vulnerability reductionactivities in its lending operations.The World Bank is supporting projects inHonduras and Nicaragua with more than US$14 million committed to each country toimprove municipal capabilities in risk management.Activities will focus on improving landuseand planning procedures based on hazardanalysis and strengthening national risk anddisaster management systems. The schemeworks through umbrella municipal organizations,national disaster organizations and scientificand technical institutions such as theNicaraguan Institute of Territorial Studies(INETER). The World Bank is developinganother programme with the Organization ofEastern Caribbean States (OECS) that will offerrisk reduction loans to five countries to supportcapacity building, institutional strengthening,community preparedness and greater protectionfor key infrastructure.Financial instruments addressing disasterrisk reductionRisk-sharing and risk transfer at national(macro), community (meso), and household(micro) levels cut down losses, improveresilience, and contribute to expeditious recovery.The efficiency of risk-sharing and risktransfer, however, depends upon the size of therisk pool and availability of financial instrumentsand services. In developed countries,governments, corporate entities and individualsengage in risk-sharing, which increases thesize of risk pool, thus improving insurability ofproperties and assets, whereas in developingcountries, the size of the risk pool is smaller,resulting into inadequate insurance coverageand pay off. A related requirement is the commercialapplication of specific instruments andservices for risk-sharing at different levels.Insurance, microfinance and public works programmesare examples of financial instrumentsand programs that can potentially be used forInsurance in the CaribbeanUnited Insurance Company Limited, providesinsurance services to several islands inthe region, and offers 25 per cent discounton premiums for clients who have hazardresistant structures. They have also publishedtwo handbooks entitled ProfessionalGuide to Performance-Based Design Upgradefor the purpose of Achieving Hurricane-ResistantConstruction and Guide to Making YourHome Hurricane Resistant and have promotedtheir use to design professionals andhouseholders.Working Party on Insurance and Reinsurance:Whilst not an institution, this working partywas developed as a CARICOM initiative.It seeks to minimise the overall economiccosts and social effects of natural hazards inthe CARICOM countries based on anincreased emphasis on vulnerability reductionand a strengthened insurance industry– including increased self-insurance.256

mitigation, recovery and reconstruction at differentlevels. Insurance can be used at thenational, community and household levels,while microfinance services are provided at thecommunity and household levels. Public worksprogram have their own specific context, and itcould undertaken to provide relief to householdsand communities struck by situations in whichthere are no income-earning opportunities.These could be great deal of variation in theirforms and applications. It is also likely that in agiven situation a combination of these instrumentsmay be required.At the national level, improvement in the regulatoryframeworks of disaster reduction includingdisaster-related insurance, building codesand land use planning will help ensure thatinfrastructure is properly sited and built to minimisedamages as well as to reduce the costs ofrepair. This involves public insurance policy,market and regulatory incentives for risk andvulnerability reduction, protection against fluctuationsin insurance/reinsurance prices, augmentationof insurance coverage at reasonablecost and backstop financial mechanisms.One of the limitations of hazard mitigationinsurance is that it is primarily a mechanism thatwill help after the disaster occurs. While somegroup-based insurance policies are linked toimprovement in physical surroundings, thereare not many examples of built-in incentives ininsurance policies, which motivate householdsto invest in mitigation. On the contrary, availibilityof insurance may discourage investment inmitigation, as household may tolerate riskierpractices after purchasing insurance policies.Well-designed insurance schemes may encourageappropriate risk management by loweringpremiums if compliance with building codesand land use regulations are observed. Oneexample where the insurance coverage has beenused as an incentive to undertake disaster mitigationor protection measures is the case ofFlorida in the USA after hurricane Andrew in1992. In this case, the insurance industry promotedlower deductibles to wind storm insuranceif building code compliance was achieved.The problem with this kind of incentives, however,is the certification process. Another limitationof insurance coverage is that the market forinsurance is largely underdeveloped in poorcountries.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresRisk sharing and transfer: protecting investments andsharing the costsThe private insurance sector contributes importantfunding for reconstruction after disaster impact indeveloping countries, but it has made fewer inroads indeveloping country markets. In emerging economies,the state and the individual carry much of the cost ofdisasters. As a result, ad hoc funds transfers to respondto disaster emergencies disrupt planned developmentactivities. Tools have to be developed to assist the verypoor to more effectively manage disaster risk. Thisincludes microfinance mechanisms that can deal withrisks such as disasters and that build social capital andencourage risk mitigation for the very poor. In additionto that, measures may include safety nets and calamityfunds, and informal mechanisms.Source: DMF, 2001Insurance policies should not be seen as a panaceato achieve disaster reduction. If losses from recurringdisasters are too high, the availability of insurancecoverage will be reduced and reinsurancecosts will increase, which has happened in manyparts of the world, for example in the Caribbean.Property insurance for reducing economic riskfrom catastrophes might no longer be available atreasonable prices in the future. In this regard,potential socio-economic impacts related to globalenvironmental and climate changes need to becarefully assessed to anticipate and adapt to theirconsequences. The present retrospective claim calculationwill no longer be commensurate to suchchanges. Therefore, a prospective underwritingapproach is needed by the insurance industry.Other financial mechanisms to promotedisaster risk reduction and safety netsAn effort to explore additional and relevant privatesector engagements and alternative financialinstruments, both to serve as incentives for disasterreduction and as safety nets for recovery, is anongoing interest. For example, guarantee programmesenable governments to mobilise largeramounts of financing with a given amount of supportfrom the private sector. This mechanism hasnot been used for disaster reduction projects yet.However, it offers the potential to catalyse privatefinancing either for public borrowers or privateprojects in developing countries. Private debtfunds could play an important role in financingisaster recovery and prevention projects.2575

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives258Corporate social responsibilityThe research project, Corporate Social Responsibilityand Disaster Reduction, conducted by the BenfieldGreig Hazard Research Centre (BGHRC), is looking atprivate-sector involvement in natural disaster reductionthrough social responsibility and philanthropicprogrammes, especially in developing countries.Available at: www.bghrc.comMicrofinanceMicrofinance, a hybrid of formal and informalfinancial services, has been a recent innovation,which has a great potential for helping thepoor reduce their vulnerability to disasters. Itstarted with credit, and has since come toinclude savings and insurance. These differentinstruments which now comprise microfinanceservice help families increase their coping capacity,through diversification of income (differenttypes of jobs and capital, regular employment,opportunities for women). They also serve as akind of insurance policy following disasters.The need for small amounts of credit and flexibilityof terms was the motivation factorbehind the idea of microcredit. The GrameenBank in Bangladesh pioneered the concept ofmicrocredit in 1976, primarily for entrepreneurialactivities of the rural poor. Manymicrofinance institutions have since beenestablished to provide financial services to thepoor on a non-profit-making basis.These institutions have produced microcredit asan effective poverty alleviation instrument. Thelink between microcredit and disaster riskreduction relates primarily to increased capacityto cope with losses from disasters. Some initialexperiences have also promoted investments inrisk reduction measures. Nevertheless, disasterscan also have negative impact on micro-financinginstitutions themselves. According to IFRC,the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh reported thataround 1.2 million of their 2.3 million memberswere affected by the 1998 floods, which makerepayment of loans difficult. This calls for findingways to insure against credit, which maymake loans more expensive.One of the distinctive features of microcredit isthat it is based on group lending. Communitiesmay access resources for building social andphysical assets based on a shared perception oftheir vulnerability. The strong element of peermonitoring in microcredit programmes facilitatesgreater community participation. Microfinancealso encourages savings by groupmembers, which may be invested in mitigatinghazards at the household and community level.A number of microcredit programmes haveincluded government subsidies. If governmentsprovide incentives and subsidies for mitigation,it is feasible to combine it with microcreditso that households may access it for specificmitigation measures. Since mitigationrequires financial resources, knowledge of hazard,mitigation options, and communityefforts, microcredit models can bring togetherthese essential ingredients.Saving mechanismsAnother way to mobilise investment in mitigationis through savings. Households may begiven incentives to save and invest these savingsin improving their physical assets. Morduch(1998) has cited successful examplesfrom Bangladesh and Indonesia of mobilisingsaving from poor households.The savings mechanism was also successful inan earthquake reconstruction programme inthe state of Maharashtra, India. Although thegovernment provided assistance in cash and inkindto households for seismic strengthening,it also organized self-help groups at the villagelevel and encouraged them to save a part oftheir earnings. Most of the households participatingin the seismic strengthening programmeinvested more money and resourcesthrough their own savings than the governmentassistance they received.Public works programmes – a social safety net.In many developing countries, public worksprogrammes were taken up as a scarcity ordrought relief measure. This was a need-basedprogramme supported by governments. Oneof the most important examples was the MaharashtraEmployment Guarantee Scheme (MEGS)in India, developed as a response to severedrought in 1970-71. This scheme, aimed at

uilding public and individual assets yieldedbetter resources for rural communities. It tookcare of the basic entitlements by guaranteeingemployment to the rural poor, including smalland marginal farmers, landless agriculturalworkers and rural artisans.The public works programme represents animportant social safety net in dealing with situationsof mass deprivation. Its effectivenessin protecting poor households from severeshocks is consistent with longer-term goals ofeconomic growth and environmental protection.Public works programmes provideemployment when households find it difficultto restore their productive assets. Publicworks programmes may also contribute toreduce physical risks, by engaging in structuralmeasures. This was the case in Hondurasafter hurricane Mitch, when the InternationalLabour Organiyation (ILO) supportedSelected application of disaster reduction measuresseveral municipalities to implement intensivework plans to build protection works in riverbasins, as a means of protection but also torestore job-opportunities for victims of thefloods and landslides. Food for Work programmes,employed by the World Food Programmeand others, have also beenshown tobe useful both after disasters, and in promotingpublic works to reduce future risks anddiversify economies.However, some experience show that a numberof public works programmes have not been satisfactorybecause they are not sufficiently targetedand suffer from inefficient implementation.Also, public works programmes havebeen more effective in dealing with droughts orfamine, and its applicability to dealing withother natural hazards such floods and earthquakeshave not yet been tested.5259

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallengesFuture challenges and prioritiesFrom the issues described in this chapter, thefollowing main challenges and priorities standout:• Need for sustained support throughnational and international agencies forthese financial instruments and programmesfor establishing their viability inpre- and post-disaster situations.• Need for setting up vulnerability reduction/ mitigation / social funds for supportingthese financial services. Suchfunds have been set up for many otherdevelopment activities, and so they couldbe effectively used for the purpose of disasterrisk reduction too.• The need for continued encouragementfor international development banks anddevelopment agencies to require riskassessment and management for newinfrastructure development projects.• The need for more systematic documentationand research on quantification of benefitsof risk reduction and hazard mitigation.• The need to further elaborate a strategyfor involvement of the financial sector indisaster reduction. This also involves theinsurance sector exploring how insuranceincentives can encourage disaster riskreduction measures.• Development of more specific financialtools aimed at the very poor. Microcreditor revolving community funds are solutionsthat need more attention and sup-“In Canada, one of the most importantissues in the development of disaster riskreduction is to be able to substantiate thesavings from mitigation.”Canada response to ISDRquestionnaire, 2001.port. It is necessary to evolve financialinstruments that enable households toemploy risk and vulnerability reductionmeasures.The UN agencies and the development bankscan come together to promote many innovativefinancial instruments and mechanisms indisaster preparedness, mitigation, recoveryand reconstruction. Since a large number ofagencies are participating in this program,mobilization of resources for promotingfinancial and non-financial services for disasterrisk management should not be difficult.In addition, regional policy dialogues couldbe supported to facilitate exchanges in severalareas such as governmental strategies andpractices for financing catastrophe loss,including loss to government-owned assetslike infrastructure and government buildings,obligations to reimburse losses due to naturaldisasters, and new financial policy alternatives.Other areas which require more study andunderstanding are, on the one hand the detrimentaleffects of deregulation and economicinterconnection, and on the other hand, thebeneficial effects associated with trade opportunitiesand economic competitiveness.260

Selected application of disaster reduction measures55.6 Early warning systemsThe ultimate goal of hazard forecasting and early warning systems is to protect lives and property.They therefore constitute one of the key elements of any disaster reduction strategy. To servethe people effectively, they need to be integrated instruments designed to link the scientific andtechnical initiators of warnings and those who identify vulnerabilities, the intermediaries composedof public authorities who issue warnings and emergency instructions, disseminators and processorsof sector-specific products, and the ultimate users of the warnings in local communities.Robust, accurate and timely means of reliable and understandable communications are essential.Effective early warning procedures should be part of the national institutional and legislativeframeworks for disaster management and have redundancy built into the system. To be fully successful,early warning must be complemented by professional services, training and capacitybuildingactivities and the allocation of resources, to enable timely actions to be taken to avert lossor avoidable damage.This section begins with the current status of early warning thinking. An effective early warningsystem is built on three requisites:• Political responsibility to promote early warning strategies;• Participation and knowledge of the public;• Support at the international and regional levels;completed by the following three elements:• Technical identification and monitoring of hazards;• Multidisciplinary, multi-agency and intersectoral communications;• Institutional services to react to warnings; and concludes withCurrent status of early warning thinkingEarly warning has always been considered a cornerstoneof disaster reduction. From the outset,IDNDR had set as one of the targets to beattained by all countries by 2000, ready access toglobal, regional, national and local warning systemsand broad dissemination of warnings. Duringthe past decade, significant activities,events/conferences and programmes had promotedthe feasibility and added value of earlywarning, and identified major strengths andweaknesses of early warning capacities around theworld. These included the 1994 Yokohama Strategyand Plan of Action for a Safer World, theDeclaration of the 1998 Potsdam Early WarningConference and the Early Warning ProgrammeAction Plan for the Future presented at theIDNDR Programme Forum in 1999. Specificconcerns were also addressed related to climaticphenomena such as El Niño (Guayaquil Interna-Elements of the early warning chain:Forecast and prediction of impendingextreme events, on the basis of scientificknowledge and monitoring resultsWarning processing and disseminationof information from the first segmenttogether with information on the possibleimpacts on people and infrastructure(i.e. vulnerability assessment) tothe political authorities and to thethreatened population. The informationincludes appropriate response-orientedrecommendationsReaction to warnings based on a properunderstanding of the information bythe population at risk and local authorities,and subsequent implementationof protective measures.261

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativestional Seminar on the 1997-1998 El Niño Event:Evaluation and Projections in 1998), or to specificcircumstances such as those of small islanddeveloping States (Barbados Global Conferenceon the Sustainable Development of Small IslandDeveloping States in 1994).Renewed efforts at all levels to integrate earlywarning as an essential component in the cultureof disaster reduction have always beenencouraged by the United Nations GeneralAssembly. Recently, the crucial importance ofearly warning was again validated by IATF forISDR which identified early warning as a priorityarea for its future work and created a specificworking group on early warning,described later in this chapter.Advances in science and technology during thelast decade have reinforced the possibilities ofGuiding Principles for Effective Early WarningTHE OBJECTIVE of early warning is to empower individuals and communities, threatenedby natural or similar hazards, to act in sufficient time and in an appropriate manner so as toreduce the possibility of personal injury, loss of life and damage to property, or nearby and fragileenvironments.RISK ASSESSMENT provides the basis for an effective warning system at any level of responsibility.It identifies potential threats from hazards and establishes the degree of local exposure orvulnerability to hazardous conditions. This knowledge is essential for policy decisions that translatewarning information into effective preventive action.Several groups must contribute to this empowerment. Each has a set of essential overlappingfunctions for which it should be responsible:Members of vulnerable populations should be aware of the hazards and the related effects towhich they are exposed and be able to take specific actions themselves which will minimize theirpersonal threat of loss or damage;Local communities should have sufficient familiarity with hazards to which they are exposed,and the understanding of advisory information received, to be able to act in a manner to advise,instruct or engage the population in a manner that increases their safety or reduces the possibleloss of resources on which the community depends;National governments should exercise the sovereign responsibility to prepare and issue hazardwarnings for their national territory in a timely and effective manner, and to ensure that warningsand related protective guidance are directed to those populations determined to be mostvulnerable to the hazard risk. The provision of support to local communities to utilize informationand to develop operational capabilities is an essential function to translate early warningknowledge into risk reduction practices;Regional institutions should provide specialized knowledge, advice or benefit of experience insupport of national efforts to develop or to sustain operational capabilities related to hazard risksexperienced by countries that share a common geographical environment. Regional organizationsare crucial to linking macro-scale international capabilities to the particular needs of individualcountries and in facilitating effective early warning practices among adjacent countries;andInternational bodies should provide means for the shared exchange of data and relevant knowledgeamong themselves as a basis for the efficient transfer of advisory information and the technical,material and organizational support necessary to ensure the development and operationalcapabilities of national authorities or agencies officially designated as responsible for early warningpractice.262

early warning reducing the consequences andespecially the human losses from natural disasters.To give but a few examples, forecast timeand location of landfall of tropical cyclones isnow 48 hours in advance; the warning time oftornadoes has doubled in one decade; andwarnings of drought are now issued severalmonths in advance. The development of newinformation technologies and the very rapidspread of global communications have considerablyincreased the availability of informationand early warnings about natural disasters.These technological advances now enable bettermonitoring, prediction and forecasting ofextreme weather conditions. Significantimprovements in global observation systemshave also enhanced the early detection of medium-termabnormal climatic conditions such asEl Niño events, and will contribute to warningsof long-term hazards associated with environmentalchange. Sophisticated early warningsystems can only become effective with the freeand unrestricted exchange of meteorologicaldata throughout and among societies, and withsimilar attention given to the expression ofwarnings so that the people for whom they areintended can understand them.However, the ability to deliver this vital informationto the public in the locations where it ismost likely to be affected by disasters has notalways enjoyed similar success. Local mechanismsfor communicating risk, or downscalingthe interpretation of alerts to relate to local conditionsor experience, remain very weak inmany cases. Sophistication has to be weighedagainst local capacities, needs, resources andtraditions. Moreover, information about theadverse impacts of disasters on people andinfrastructure (i.e. vulnerability and riskassessments) that is necessary for informeddecision-making is often missing. Even whereabilities and procedures do exist, communitiesdo not often respond appropriately to them,because there is a lack of planning, resources orviable protective options that they could utilizein a timely manner. Ironically, in many documentedcases, the perceived threat of losingtheir property to looters when unprotected duringa time of evacuation, is considered a greaterthreat by many people than a loss caused by asevere weather disaster.Elements for effective early warning are welldocumented. Guiding principles for effectiveSelected application of disaster reduction measuresearly warning resulted from several years ofwork undertaken under the aegis of theIDNDR Early Warning Programme, byexperts associated with all aspects of warningpractices and for various types of hazards. Thedifferent sets of these guiding principles arereproduced throughout this chapter as theystill provide a clear and comprehensive basisfor the early warning process. The challenge tobe met in the coming years is to translate theseaccepted principles into concrete action-orientedmodalities.By way of introduction to the specific issues ofconcern to improve the effectiveness of earlywarning, the Mount Pinatubo example illustratesthe added value of early warning systemsand describes the factors that contribute to theeffective warning of populations at risk.Early warning for the 1991 eruptions of the Pinatubo volcano,the Philippines: a success storyEarly warning for the 1991 eruptions of the Pinatubo volcanois a success story in that the number of deaths compared tothat of those at risk was small despite the magnitude and violenceof the eruption. The success was due to a number offactors that illustrate the important issues in this chapter: timelyidentification of the hazard and delineation of vulnerableareas, successful application of state-of-the-art monitoring andsurveillance techniques, accurate prediction of the destructivephases, timely issuance and dissemination of easily understoodwarnings, prompt action of key civil defence officials and disasterresponse workers, and timely evacuation of majority ofinhabitants at risk.The positive aspects of the experience highlighted the value ofthe following: state-of-the-art monitoring equipment and techniques,international cooperation based on mutual respect, sustainedintensive public education, active involvement of selectedscientists as spokespersons for awareness and disseminationpurposes, open and speedy communication lines between sciencepeople and civil defence officials, good relationshipbetween scientists and the media adapted fromPunongbayan and Newhall, 1998Early warning is not a technical and even less atechnological issue, but a human and organizationalone. Satellite coverage and state-of-theartsurveillance techniques are now sufficientand the most difficult part, which is composedof the following requisites, remains to be tackled.2635

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives264Political responsibility to promote integratedearly warning strategiesThe first requisite for achieving an effectiveearly warning system is recognition of the valueof early warning in protecting the interests ofsocieties and communities. Political willingnessto use it as a meaningful policy instrument fordisaster risk management will derive from thisacknowledgement. However, commitment isnot enough. Mobilizing the necessary political,human, technical, material and financialresources is needed to underpin better warningsthat can avoid, or at least reduce, risks.Governments need to support legislation,administration, contingency planning andoperational procedures including inter-ministerial/inter-agencyrelationships. Well-developeddecision-making capacities will avoid disastersthat occur because predictions are consideredas being too uncertain. Governmentsneed to take the initiative to establish, andthereafter, maintain the necessary collaborativeframework needed for the functioning of credibleand accountable warning systems. Theyhave the responsibility to promote integratedearly warning strategies so as to gain wide supportfor the implementation of governmentaldecisions at times of crisis. Political initiativesand support will guarantee the technical andsocial relevance, usefulness and efficiency ofearly warning strategies. One element thatshould increase political commitment towardsearly warning strategies is the availability ofindicators to measure their effectiveness, especiallyin terms of losses avoided and recipientsatisfaction.The following are examples of successfulnational early warning systems in use.Mauritius offers an interesting example ofinstitutional arrangements according high priorityto early warning of cyclones. The explicitspecifications of the principal elements of thecyclone warning dissemination system, includingroles and responsibilities (with details ofwarnings and their dissemination) are set outin the Cyclone and other Natural DisastersScheme (1995). The Mauritius MeteorologicalOffice is part of the Prime Minister’sOffice. The Central Cyclone Committee, awell-administered and communication-orientedcentral body, provides leadership to ensurethe effectiveness of the warning system. Thisendorsement from the political centre of Mauritiusis a particularly strong and commendablefeature of its disaster planning from which otherselsewhere can learn. A high degree of legitimizationis accorded by this support. Effectiveleadership is provided from a central governmentcommittee in the area of disaster preparedness(including the warning system),mitigation and recovery (UK Flagship Programme,1998).SADC countries have long focused attentionon drought and resulting food security issuesfor which early warning and preparednessmechanisms have been developed over the lasttwenty years. However, recent extreme weatherevents have encouraged a wider perspective forearly warning and more comprehensive disasterpreparedness activities. Such a shift conveysthe understanding that potential disasters arerooted in the relations between human actions,environmental conditions, management of naturalresources and the climate. Therefore additionalwarning requirements need to beaddressed through policies that can provide anintegrated regional early warning and disasterpreparedness framework. Necessary steps havebeen taken through the development of aframework for a multisectoral disaster managementstrategy supported by UNDP.Another step forward was made through theprocess launched by SADC heads of State andGovernment following the devastating floodsin Southern Africa in early 2000. This initiativeprovides a good example of political willingnessto improve early warning and preparednesscapacities. A review of the contributionsthat meteorological and hydrological servicesprovide to early warning and disaster preparednessresulted in recommendations forpolitical decisions to boost regional early warningstrategies. Recommendations included theneed for SADC countries to create a policy thatis more focused on regional requirements forearly warning and disaster preparedness. Toachieve this, the formulation and progressiveimplementation of a structured regionalapproach was proposed, able to link increasednational capacities to improve early warning. Itwas also recommended that adequate fundingbe provided to national institutions to equipthem with the necessary facilities and tools tomaintain their high level of public service inthe national interest, and to enable them to

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5In Cuba, a national hurricane preparedness plan is practised every year before the start ofthe hurricane season, when the early warning system is tested. The system is activated atthe first information notice by the military authorities and civil defence, involving thepolitical party authorities and all provincial or municipal government officials, representativesof all administrative and political institutions, companies, co-operatives, etc. Plannedmeasures are then activated according to different levels of warning, including an InformativePhase, a Cyclone Alert, a Hurricane Alarm and a concluding RehabilitationPhase, if required.Hurricane Michelle, Cuba, November 2001 - a success storyHurricane Michelle formed in the Gulf of Honduras on the 2 November, 2001, landedon Cuba 4-5 November, reaching wind speeds of up to 220 km/h (category 4 Saffir-Simpson-Scale). Michelle has been the strongest hurricane affecting Cuba in the last 50years.Upon early notice from the Institute of Meteorology the evacuation plan came intoaction.Twelve provincial and 150 municipal headquarters for civil defense involving 87000 peoplewere activated. More than 5000 vehicles were deployed for evacuation, etc.Over 700,000 persons were evacuated, of which 270,000 for a longer time and providedwith temporary accommodation and basic needs. 777,000 animals were also moved to safeareas. Reports indicated only 5 fatalities and 12 people injured.Nevertheless, a major economic setback was the result of the hurricane. Principal damageswere to building infrastructure, agriculture and communications facilities.contribute more effectively to early warning anddisaster preparedness systems on a regionalbasis. Another recommendation was furtherdevelopment of comprehensive implementationand contingency plans by countries that integrateearly warning systems, disaster preparednessand related mitigation activities into overallnational disaster management frameworks.Thanks to UNDP support, the Viet Nam DisasterManagement Unit (DMU) is benefitingfrom a nationwide information system thatprovides a combination of real-time informationto the Central Committee for Flood andStorm Control (CCFSC), the primary Governmentagency for disaster management. Thesystem provides early warning information,updates on developing disaster situations, andrelated information about damage or needsassessments through a computerized networklinking CCFSC-DMU, the national hydrometeorologicalservices and all of the 61 provincialcommittees for flood and storm control.The system is also able to draw on informationsupplied by the Ministry of Agriculture andRural Development. Internet provides anexpanded opportunity to disseminate timelywarnings about floods to the public and toaddress immediate emergency requirements,or disseminate general information related todisaster management. Since early 2001, theproject has benefited from more advancedinformation technology provided by additionalfunding from OFDA/USAID. Expandedactivities include the design of weather andnatural disaster warning systems based oncomputer graphics for use by Viet Nam Televisionto enable the dissemination of more effectivepublic warnings. Flood maps for all of thecentral provinces in Viet Nam are being createdwith the latest GIS technology, accompaniedby training that will encourage its effectiveuse by provincial and local authorities. A newflood-hazard alerting system is also beingdesigned for the areas most prone to rapid orflash flooding.265

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPublic knowledge and participationThe second requisite for an effective early warningsystem is public participation in the design, implementationand assessment of warning formulationand dissemination. The following principles weredeveloped to provide concrete guidance for the applicationof early warning at the national and local level.They cover the issues discussed in this subsection.Early warning messages should reach, be understood,believed and personalized by the public at riskto enable it to take action to reduce its vulnerabilityto hazards. Therefore community involvement isnecessary to design locally efficient and socially relevantearly warning systems. Such involvement permitsa continuous dialogue between users andauthorities to make collective decisions and choices.Investment in modern technology and topdownprofessional expertise to forecast hazardsand issue warnings can only be justified if warningseffectively reach every citizen likely to beaffected. In this regard, there is much to be gainedand learned from providing support to grass-rootsbottom-up approaches. Communities and NGOsthat represent their interests are key elements inoperating early warning systems, i.e. disseminatingmessages, operating and maintaining warningequipment, organizing training and regular testingto avoid surprises at times of crisis, raising awarenessof the responsibility people have for their ownsurvival, providing motivation and coping strategies,avoiding confusion, contradiction and conflicts.Principles for the application of earlywarning at NATIONAL and LOCAL levels1. Early warning practices need to be a coherent set of linked operational responsibilities established at national and local levels ofpublic administration and authority. To be effective, these early warning systems should themselves be components of abroader programme of national hazard mitigation and vulnerability reduction.2. Within each country, the sole responsibility for the issuance of early warnings for natural and similar disasters should rest with anagency, or agencies, designated by the Government.3. The decision to act upon receipt of warning information is political in character. Authoritative decision makers should be identifiedand have locally recognized political responsibility for their decisions. Normally, action resulting from warningsshould be based on previously established disaster management procedures of organizations at national and local level.4. In the chain of political responsibility, initial hazard information is often technically specialized or specific to a single typeof hazard authority. To be applied effectively, warnings need to be clearly understood and operationally relevant to local agenciesthat are more frequently oriented towards non-specific hazard functions.5. Early warning systems must be based upon risk analysis that includes the assessment of the occurrence of hazards, thenature of their effects and prevailing types of vulnerability, at national and local levels of responsibility. The warningprocess should lead to demonstrated practices that can communicate warning and advisory information to vulnerable groups ofpeople so that they may take appropriate actions to mitigate loss and damage.6. Locally predominant hazard types and patterns, including small-scale or localized hydrometeorological hazards related to patternsof human, economic or environmental exploitation, must be incorporated if early warning is to be relevant to riskreduction practices.7. There is a continuing need to monitor and forecast changes in vulnerability patterns, particularly at local levels, such as suddenincreases in vulnerability resulting from social developments. These may include conditions of rapid urbanization, abruptmigration, economic changes, nearby civil conflict or similar elements that alter the social, economic or environmentalconditions of an area.8. The primary responsibilities must rest at local levels of involvement for producing detailed information on risks, acting on thebasis of warnings, communicating warnings to those individuals at risk and, ultimately, for facilitating appropriate communityactions to prevent loss and damage. A high resolution of local knowledge and developed experience of local risks,decision-making procedures, definitive authorities concerned, means of public communication and established copingstrategies are essential for functions to be relevant.9. Groups of people that exhibit different types of vulnerability will have different perceptions of risk and various copingstrategies. Locally appropriate warning systems will provide a range of communication methods and should provoke multiple strategiesfor protection and risk reduction.10. To be sustainable, all aspects of the design and implementation of early warning systems require the substantive involvement of stakeholdersat the local and national levels. This includes production and verification of information about perceived risks,agreement on the decision-making processes involved, and standard operational protocols. Equally important abilitiesinvolve the selection of appropriate communication media and dissemination strategies that can assure an effective level ofparticipation in acting upon receipt of warning information.266

Selected application of disaster reduction measuresThe following boxes provide a summary of the benefits of public participation and indicate factorsthat facilitate this process.5Benefits of public participation include:• Improved understanding of warnings as a complexsocial process;• Identification of warning recipients;• Identification of resources available at the locallevel to tailor message contents, disseminationchannels and response options (including empiricalknowledge of hazards and local copingstrategies);• Access to most vulnerable community groups(an effective early warning system is one thatcaters adequately and equally to remote andother vulnerable social groups with special needsor limited access to resources, including remoteisland communities, squatter settlements, disabledand elderly people, tourists and fishermen);• Better understanding of user needs and preferencesin terms of product-type and application,as well as display of information;• Social support for public policies and decisions,mass evacuations, for example;• Enhanced credibility of warning messages;• Easier improvement of early warning systemsbased on feedback analysis from warning recipients.How can public participation befacilitated?1. Political commitment to create theconditions for allowing publicinvolvement.2. Early start in the warning designprocess in order to allow time fortrust-building.3. Definition of how participationwill be organized.4. Provision of all necessary informationto community leaders andcivil society representatives.5. Advertisement and wide sharingof the process through the massmedia, for example.6. Testing of warning options; monitoringof implementation.7. Maintenance of communicationand iteration (feedback with users)during the process.8. Institutionalisation of feedbackprocedures and assurance of sustainability/maintenanceof the system.Adapted from B. Affeltranger, 2002The following examples show several facets ofpublic involvement, participation and knowledge.They display useful practices such aspublic involvement in warning dissemination,strengthening of local capacities, the applicationof local experiences and public participationin the design of early warning systems.For the past thirty years, the Bangladesh RedCrescent Society’s Cyclone Preparedness Programme(CPP) has disseminated warnings andassisted cyclone-affected communities along710 kilometres of the Bangladesh coastline inthe Bay of Bengal. Equipped with hand sirens,megaphones, transistor radios, signal lightsand flags, first-aid and rescue kits, more than30,000 volunteers act as the communicationschannel through which the CPP head office inDhaka relays weather bulletins from theBangladesh Meteorological Department tomore than ten million people living in areas ofhigh cyclone risk. CPP has demonstrated thatdisaster preparedness programmes can be successfulthrough the use of community-basedmanagement methods and basic forms of technologythat can link appropriate and effectivewarning systems to distant providers of life-savinginformation. Selected volunteers serve as“information lifelines” for people at times ofthreatening cyclones.Through the CPP communications network,high-frequency radio broadcasts are transmittedfrom the capital city of Dhaka to field stationsequipped with additional very high frequency(VHF) radio receivers, where information is thenpassed on to the volunteer unit teams by way oftransistor radios. Local information on theprogress of an approaching cyclone or the resultingeffects after it has passed through an area islikewise transmitted back to the central office.The network has also proved to be an importantasset for relief operations after a cyclone.267

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe CPP volunteer training and public awarenessprogrammes are central to its success andwell-founded reputation. Public awarenessabout the risks associated with cyclones is conveyedby the volunteers themselves anddemonstrated through drills and demonstrations,dramas and folk songs. Printed materials,the use of films and videos and targetedpublicity campaigns supplement the regularuse of the radio and television media to build acommon understanding of basic elements ofearly warning and cyclone protection behaviour.It is the dedication and tireless efforts of thesevolunteers–and all who support them withtheir understanding, support and respect–thatcontributed to the CPP receiving Thailand’s“Smith Tunsaroch Award” in 1998 in recognitionof the volunteers’ efforts to protect thepeople of Bangladesh.Informal and social networks have been found to reinforcewarning dissemination systems in Mauritius. It appearslikely that small, isolated island communities such as Mauritiushave particularly strong and effective social networks,which considerably help warning dissemination. Informalpersonal and community networks can be highly effectivein disseminating warnings and deserve the right appreciationfrom those issuing formal warnings. They usually benefitfrom an organizational and popular culture in whichpreparation for cyclone and cyclone warning and responseare to some extent embedded.Source: UK Flagship Programme, 1998er, as the main characteristics of the six zoneswere comparable, regional action was possibleat a local level. As pilot zones, they served asexamples that demonstrated the experienceslocal communities had had in applying localdisaster management techniques, supported bynational and regional structures that were competentin the area of disaster reduction. Themain activities implemented during thisprocess were:• Analysis of the zones of risk and of thespecific demands (risk maps, interviews,participatory planning);• Training of the local population in floodfightingmeasures;• Selecting, training and equippingobservers and analysts in the watershed ofthe affected river;• Improving communication capacitiesamong the individuals and institutionsinvolved;• Developing contingency plans and implementingevacuation exercises in the pilotzones.The results of all these efforts in the six pilotzones were early warning systems that work inthe following way. Selected people living in theupper parts of the river regularly measure rainfalland water level. They transmit this informationby radio to a central office in the closestmunicipality where the data collected areanalysed. The centre itself is in communicationwith people in the flood-prone areas. At timesof expected danger, the centre can thus alert thepopulation exposed to risks and can prepare fortheir evacuation, if necessary.268The RELSAT Project (Strengthening of localstructures and early warning systems) wasimplemented in pilot zones in each of the sixCentral American countries between November1998 and December 1999. The project wasfinanced by the European Commission HumanitarianAid Office (ECHO) and realized in thecontext of long-term community-based disasterrisk reduction cooperation betweenCEPREDENAC and the German Agency forTechnical Cooperation (GTZ).The purpose of the project was to establish efficientand reliable early warning systems withregard to floods, tailored to the realities andcapabilities of the selected pilot zones. Howev-In order to be effective, this system requires reliablecommunication and coordination processesamong all actors and the population at risk.Responsibilities have also to be clearly assignedand commitment must be continuous. If theseconditions are met, the early warning systemhelps to reduce substantially the losses and damagescaused by floods and to motivate people totake further action aimed at achieving sustainabledisaster risk reduction for the region.The ongoing work to design an early warningsystem for the Lower Mekong floods undertakenby the Mekong River Commission(MRC) and its member countries (Cambodia,the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Thai-

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Early warning of forest fire at local levelThe Integrated Forest Fire Management (IFFM) project in Indonesia is a technical cooperation project supportedby GTZ and the Global Fire Monitoring Centre (GFMC). The project approach relies on the involvement oflocal communities in fire prevention and preparedness (community-based fire management). IFFM has beenworking with a fire danger rating (FDR) system in East Kalimantan since 1995. The FDR is based on the Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) and is part of a fire information system (FIS) that manages spatial fire-related dataand information in an integrated manner. The graph indicates the KBDI readings for the 1997-1998 El Niñoyears that show the development of drought and fire danger in the coastal zone of East Kalimantan. This droughtindex is easy to handle because it only requires on-site rainfall and temperature measurements. Since fire-weatherpatterns in the tropical rainforest region vary within short distances, it is advantageous for this system to be used bylocal entities such as local fire departments, forestry enterprises and communities.Source:GTZ/GFMC,2001land and Viet Nam) illustrates efforts to devisea strategy that is both technically efficient,socially useful and relevant to the recipientcommunities. The ongoing project is guidedby research focusing on the complex socialprocess triggered by warnings, which needs tobe understood to design both the technical andsocial aspects of the warning system. MRCfully endorsed the value of the “social ownership”of the warning strategy when developingits Flood Mitigation and Management Plan in2001. Thanks to the Commission and otherparties involved, participatory approaches areprogressively being introduced into the disastermanagement culture of the region. Individualcountries should in principle apply a similarapproach depending on their institutionalsettings and political preparedness. Possibleaction plans to implement user-based floodwarning and disaster mitigation were presentedto the MRC secretariat, as well as to representativesof member countries on the occasionof the MRC Expert Meeting on Flood Forecastingand Early Warning Systems (PhnomPenh, Cambodia, 26 February-1 March2002). The plans emphasize the need to understandvulnerability, risk culture and relatedtrade-offs, as well as the social response tofloods to provide useful warnings. Nationalauthorities were advised to conduct a proactive,preliminary assessment of the social relevance,relative usefulness and expected efficiency oftheir flood warning strategy in order to furtherimprove it.269

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives270A number of activities focused on communitybasedflood mitigation and management are ongoingor have been completed in the Mekong Basin.New projects will capitalize on these initiatives,thereby strengthening networks, building mutualtrust and developing professional practice andexpertise.Similar approaches have been developed elsewhere.The European Union’s OSIRIS project andInformation Society Technologies Programme assessedthe potential added value of so-called “new informationand communication technologies” forflood-related warning and information management.The project also studied conditions foreffective operation of such tools, as well as socialownership. In 2000-2001 the European Centre onRisk Prevention (CEPR), Niort, France, organizedcommunity-based workshops. A two-phasedstudy was carried out to understand differences inrisk perceptions and information demandsamongst stakeholders, and to survey the social relevanceand efficiency of existing or planned floodwarning systems. In Hungary and Mozambique,the United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO) carried out astudy on flood-related information managementsystems and public participation at communitylevelin flood mitigation and control.These examples confirm that early warning strategiesshould not be separated from broader developmentplanning and poverty reduction goals.Practical and tangible objectives or immediateincentives are likely to trigger communities’ commitmentto user-based processes. Respectfulunderstanding of existing social processes andcapitalizing upon them are keys to successfulschemes for public participation.Support at the internationaland regional levelsThe third requisite for the emergence, maintenanceand improvement of effective early warningsystems is the support provided by internationaland regional institutions and networks. The followingprinciples provide a basis to guide the collaborationand coordination efforts required atthe international and regional levels.First of all, international and regional supportprovides incentives and motivation to strengthenand improve early warning capabilities, while atthe same time ensuring coordination of activitiesand facilitating the exchange of knowledge.There are many benefits to be found in thethree-tiered support structure in which international/globalefforts are mobilized tostrengthen and build capacity at the regionallevel, which level does the same at the nationallevel.As seen in the examples given in this chapter,regional processes provide a framework foraction at the national level; regional institutionsprovide advice and motivation to national institutions;these assist in fund-raising and are keyinterlocutors for governmental authoritiesthanks to their appreciation of national circumstances;finally, they assist countries to playtheir part in international activities.International cooperation provides essentialfinancial and support in kind to build nationalearly warning capacities. Major networkinginitiatives that facilitate exchange of informationand experience and linkage with internationalagendas are launched through internationalcooperative arrangements for the benefitof national institutions. Specific activities suchas the development of uniform standards andconcepts can only take place internationallywith the cooperation of as many UnitedNations Member States as possible.Recent activities undertaken at the internationallevel include the Expert Meeting on EarlyWarning and Sustainable Development held inMarch 2002, under the auspices of the GermanCommittee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV),within the framework of ISDR. The purpose ofthe meeting was to translate what is neededfrom the ongoing early warning process intoconcrete recommendations for action. Therationale of the initiative was to define modalitiesto implement the action plans and strategiesresulting from the work carried out during thepast decade and to take the opportunity of theupcoming WSSD to increase the visibility ofthe early warning process. Outputs of the meetingare intended to serve the WSSD preparatoryprocess and beyond.The meeting was instrumental in reiteratingthe contribution of early warning systems tothe process of achieving sustainable development.Building on the elements of early warningand disaster reduction negotiated in the

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Principles for Early Warning Systems at INTERNATIONAL and REGIONAL levels1. In the interest of concerted international efforts to reduce the adverse effects of natural and similar disasters,the technologically advanced countries have an obligation to encourage and support improved earlywarning practices in developing countries, small island developing States, economies in transition, andother disaster-prone countries with special circumstances.2. Primarily affected countries equally have a primary responsibility to conduct a rigorous audit of the effectiveness,or consequential identification of needs, of their early warning capabilities. The conduct of post-mortemassessments of regional and national warning system capabilities is particularly relevant following anydisaster event.3. Specialized regional and global centres involved in the preparation and dissemination of warnings, such as theWMO Regional Specialized Meteorological Centres (RSMCs) provide important links to national earlywarning systems. The application of their technical capabilities and the utility of their products shouldbe carefully integrated with the needs of the countries being served, including any necessary clarificationabout the warning responsibilities between these centres and national agencies in the same region.4. In the interest of protecting people from the risk of natural hazards, it is essential that the formulationand presentation of warnings be based on the best available technical and scientific knowledge, and free ofpolitical distortion or manipulation.5. International bodies and regional organizations must work to maintain the vital importance of timelyexchange and unrestricted access of observational data and other warning information between countries, particularlywhen hazardous conditions affect neighbouring countries.6. Timely, accurate and reliable warnings should be understood in the context of commonly accepted internationalstandards, nomenclature, protocols and reporting procedures. Established or internationally agreed means ofcommunication should be employed for the international and regional dissemination of any warninginformation to specific authorities designated in each country.7. Collaboration and coordination is essential between scientific institutions, early warning agencies, publicauthorities, the private sector, the media, and local community leaders to ensure that warnings areaccurate, timely, meaningful and can result in appropriate action by an informed population.WSSD preparatory process, the meeting identifiedspecific needs and suggested a course ofaction to fulfil those needs. First and foremostneed for better interlinkages to ensure dialogueamong all stakeholders at all levels was identified,as well as the lack of vulnerability assessmentsat local and national levels. Capacitybuilding,technology development, indicatorsto evaluate the effectiveness of early warningsystems as well as a thorough inventory/reviewof ongoing initiatives/programmes were listedamong the specific needs.The development of a global programme onearly warning was suggested to fulfil the needsidentified. The purpose of the programmewould be to raise political commitment atnational, regional and international levelstowards the integration of early warning systemsin disaster risk management strategies.Recognizing and drawing upon the valuablework already under way, especially by WMO,an important dimension of the programmewould be the development of an early warningplatform/forum, under the auspices of theUnited Nations to facilitate dialogue betweenstakeholders and support exchange of experiencesand information on early warning, at theinternational, regional, national and local levels.Hopefully the global programme on earlywarning and the international early warningplatform/forum would trigger the establishmentof national and subregional early warningplatforms/forums to strengthen networkingand capacities among the actors involved in theearly warning chain. Such a programme wouldalso be active in the areas of capacity-buildingand technical cooperation to reduce the technical/technologicaland scientific gaps betweendeveloped and developing countries.The above activities would be elaborated withinthe ISDR framework and relevant strategiesand structures through wide consultations,Working Group 2 and the ISDR secretariatbeing actively associated in this endeavour.Finally, a time frame to implement the aboverecommendations was developed.271

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesISDR Task Force Working Groupon Early WarningThe aim of Working Group 2 on early warning createdby the ISDR IATF is to better coordinate global practicesin early warning and to make sure it is effectivelyutilized as an instrument in disaster reduction activities.The UNEP Division of Early Warning and Assessmentleads this Working Group whose membershipincludes CDERA, the Food and Agriculture Organizationof the United Nations (FAO), the GermanNational Committee for Disaster Reduction, and theADRC, GFMC, the Intergovernmental Authority onDevelopment (IGAD), the SADC Drought MonitoringCentres, the South Pacific Applied GeoscienceCommission (SOPAC), the United Nations Programmefor Human Settlements (UN-HABITAT),the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification(UNCCD), UNDP, UNESCO and WMO. Thegroup builds on previous activities undertaken in thefield and coordinates with those of the different IATFworking groups in the areas of data and informationmanagement, to support assessments of risk and vulnerabilityto natural hazards and early warning and viceversa. The group seeks to involve as many parties aspossible from national, regional and internationalorganizations into its discussions, on an ad hoc basis, toensure its intersectoral and multidisciplinary dimension.Key words characterizing the six objectives of theGroup are coordination, collaboration, harmonization,dissemination of information and networking to createand share knowledge. The work of the group will focuson inventorying capacities for early warning and vulnerabilityassessments, as well as related scientific andtechnical issues, learning lessons and identifying shortcomings,developing effectiveness indicators and communicatingearly warning information. The group willAt the regional level, the growing economicimportance of climatic variability has promptedWMO and other technical institutions toreach beyond scientific research and to extendavailable information to establish early warningsystems and to strengthen local risk reductionpractices. An excellent example in this area isthe series of Regional Climate OutlookForums (RCOFs) organized by USAID, theUnited States National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration (US/NOAA) and WMO. Theseseasonal, multidisciplinary technical meetingshave brought together meteorologists, climateforecasters and disaster managers from neighbouringcountries to review advance climateforecast indicators jointly and then to considerthe potential implications in their respectivecountries. The weather forecast data are likewisediscussed with respect to other social andeconomic dimensions of governmental interest,in an effort to develop routine opportunities bywhich climatic and meteorological considerationsare integrated into disaster management,agricultural, public health, energy, commercialand similar interests shared by all of the participatingcountries.A review to assess the accomplishments andshortcomings of RCOFs and recast theirfuture was carried out in 2000. Conclusions areconsistent with the needs identified at the Bonnmeeting, i.e. improved interlinkages among allstakeholders involved in the early warningprocess. As stated in “Coping with the Climate:A Way Forward”, there is a need to clarifyand reinforce the current three-tiered supportstructure. There is also a need to focusand build capacity in key areas, including thedevelopment of improved, user-tailored forecastproducts in partnership with appropriateintermediaries, broader outreach through themedia, verification of forecast products andevaluation of forecast costs and benefits.Development and use of forecasts will beenhanced by “more systematic organization ofthe roles and responsibilities of forum partnersincluding users, researchers, and operationalorganizations” and by the “partnerships …needed at all levels of the process”. Governments,policy makers, development experts,scientists and other interested parties are invitedto engage in a process of dialogue and programmedevelopment needed for the managementof climatic impacts.Technical identification andmonitoring of hazardsScientific knowledge and monitoring capabilitiesare needed to identify and forecast short tolong-term hazards. The first segment of theearly warning chain is the forecast and predictionof hazards, which along with vulnerabilityand risk information, will allow the formulationof warning messages for intermediaries.Until now, early warning has taken place alongthe lines of singular events and hazards or272

organization-specific requirements. Howeverthe challenges that humanity will face in thetwenty-first century require a systematic andcomprehensive approach encompassing bothenvironmental and climatic processes–over alonger period of time as well as during periodsof quiescence (e.g. between El Niño episodes,in between fire weather, smoke and haze seasons,during hurricane and typhoon off-seasons,etc.). There is then a much greater needfor institutionalized standard nomenclature,procedures, extended organizational relationshipsand common approaches to informationmanagement–which will be eased by advancesin omnidirectional communication facilitiesand information technologies. Recommendationsof the Bonn meeting described above andthe action programme to be adopted at WSSDimplicitly provide a starting point to addressthese concerns. As stated in the conclusions ofthe IDNDR Programme Forum in 1999,there is a crucial need to implement an earlywarning concept of the second generation thatmust be interdisciplinary and intersectoralcomprising sociological, economical, political,organizational and scientific wisdom.It is difficult to pay tribute to the number andvariety of “warning centres”, dispersed by typeof hazard, location, organization, mandates,etc. Some examples have been selected and arebriefly described in this subsection. Otherexamples are given in chapter 4.1 dealing withinformation management and communication.As almost three-quarters of all natural disastersare related to weather, water or climate, WMOplays an important role in structuring the systematicanalysis and reporting on hazards. Itboth works through, and provides, technicalsupport to all National Meteorological andHydrological Services (NMHSs) and manyregional specialized meteorological centresworldwide. Without these institutions, earlywarning capabilities would almost be non-existent.The following WMO programmes are particularlyimportant in contributing to global capabilitiesin the detection, forecasting and earlywarning of hazards, as well as in providingeffective means and procedures to minimizetheir adverse consequences through the applicationof science and technology for greaterpublic understanding:Selected application of disaster reduction measuresWMO technical cooperation projects contribute to theimprovement of early warning systems in developing countries.For example, one recently completed project supportedearly warning systems for the national meteorological servicesof Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. Another project is lookinginto the feasibility of establishing a regional system, whichwill produce and utilize early warning of impending dangerand related social and economic consequences based on theactual predictions of El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO)and thus ameliorate the socio-economic impacts of ENSOby improved early warning mechanisms. Feasibility will beanalysed from the technical, economical, social, environmental,legal and institutional points of view.• The World Weather Watch (WWW) programmeenables the exchange of real-timedata, forecasts, warnings and advisories forthe public and the international community;• The Tropical Cyclone Programme (TCP)works to develop professional abilities andpromotes nationally and regionally coordinatedsystems to ensure effective preparednessmeasures against tropical cyclones andassociated phenomena;• The World Climate Programme (WCP)rovides assistance through its ClimateInformation and Prediction Services tocountries for the application of climateinformation and knowledge in the predictionand early warning of climate-relatednatural disasters;• The World Weather Research Programme(WWRP) develops and promotes costeffectiveand improved techniques for theforecast of high-impact weather like tropicalcyclones, sand and dust storms, and heavyrainfall that can provoke severe flooding;• The Hydrology and Water Resources Programmeassists national hydrological servicesin assessing the risks, and issuing forecasts,of water-related hazards, with a focuson major floods and droughts; and• Regional Specialized Meteorological Centres(RSMCs) are designated worldwide byWMO to provide weather forecasts andadvisories on tropical cyclones or other specializedrisks associated with the atmosphereor having global implications, likevolcanic plumes, fire haze, or environmentalemergencies including nuclear facilityaccidents or other local and large-scale pollutionemergencies.2735

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives274

The success of the WMO programmes illustratesthe economic and social benefits that arederived from an accurate global weather forecastingsystem. Studies show that the benefitsof weather forecasting do not stop at earlywarning of natural disasters. However, meteorologicaland hydrological services are stillundervalued in most countries even thoughthey constitute a building element of anynational disaster reduction strategy given theirimportance in early warning systems. Moreover,observations of weather phenomena gobeyond the immediate and seasonal forecastsdetermining daily human activity. Long-rangestudies of the stratosphere are crucial in understandingthe phenomenon of global change,including El Niño, climate change or thedepletion of the ozone layer. WMO scientificanalyses and warnings are instrumental inaddressing these issues and supporting multilateralenvironmental agreements.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresAn International Research Centre for the El NiñoPhenomenon (IRCEN, CIIFEN in Spanish) isbeing established in Guayaquil, Ecuador,under the auspices of the Government ofEcuador, ISDR and WMO. The Centre willbe a means to conduct a regional project thatwill address, inter alia, early warning systemsfor disaster loss reduction. It is conceived as acentre with global connections to other centres,but with a special focus on the Eastern EquatorialPacific and the western countries ofSouth America. Socio-economic benefits willbe derived from seasonal forecasts and ElNiño/La Niña warnings and advisories,which will be converted into informationproducts designed for disaster loss reductionpurposes and key socio-economic sectors,public health, agriculture, fisheries, watermanagement, energy production and use.The centre should be starting its operationsin September 2002.5Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF)UNEP through its Environment Assessment Programme for Asia and the Pacific (EAPAP), at the Asian Institute ofTechnology, Bangkok, is contributing to the establishment of an operational early warning system to monitor hazardsin the Hindu Kush Himalayan region. Through a project implemented in collaboration with the InternationalCentre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Nepal recently produced inventories of glaciers and glaciallakes in Bhutan and Nepal, specifying the potential risk lakes. Outputs of the project also included recommendationsfor the establishment of a system for monitoring potential risk lakes using remote sensing, GIS and strengtheningof national capabilities to implement an early warning system for GLOF hazards. Training of local expertswas also provided.Implementation of an early warning system in NepalFollowing panic created by the media in the summer of 1997 in the Rolwaling and Tama Koshi Valleys, HisMajesty’s Government of Nepal implemented an early warning system at the end of June 1997 to provide timelywarning to the people. An army and two police posts were established at appropriate locations and provided withhigh frequency (HF) radio transceivers, one post having a back-up set. Regular radio contacts were maintainedwith headquarters in Kathmandu. In addition, the posts were provided with satellite telephones. The disaster preventioncell at the Home Ministry was informed twice a day. In the event of a GLOF, Radio Nepal, the nationalbroadcaster, would broadcast a warning. Radio Nepal can be received in most places along the valleys that are atrisk.The GLOF early warning systemThe first flood warning system in Nepal was installed in May 1998 to warn the people living downstream fromTsho Rolpa Glacial Lake, in the potential GLOF affected areas along the Rolwaling and Tama Kosi Valleys aswell as at the Khimti Hydroelectric Project. The Department of Hydrology and Meteorology implemented theproject financed by the World Bank. The operation of the warning system has been satisfactory. The GLOFwarning system can be essentially divided into two general components: the GLOF sensing system, which detectsthe occurrence of a GLOF and initiates the warning process, and the downstream warning system, which conveys275

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesGFMC provides a web portal with the global,regional and national systems that areavailable for real-time or nearly real-timeearly warning of wildland fire. Most systemsare based on weather forecasts at short toextended time ranges and global to regionalspace scales. The global system is generatedby the Experimental Climate Prediction Centre(ECPC). Regional systems are provided bythe Association of South-East Asian Nations(ASEAN) Fire Weather Information System(generated by Forestry Canada), the EurasianExperimental Fire Weather Information System(Forestry Canada and GFMC) and theEuropean Natural Hazards Project Forest FireRisk (European Union). Other systems aresatellite-based indices, e.g. the NormalizedDifference Vegetation Index (NDVI) andthermal data from the NOAA Advanced VeryHigh Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR)sensors. Area, intensity and duration of vegetationstress, fire potential and danger can beestimated from maps that are updated regu-Early Warning and Response Network (EWARN),Southern SudanEWARN was launched in 1999 by WHO in collaborationwith several international agencies, NGOs and local communitiesto strengthen outbreak detection and response.Objectives of EWARN:• Early detection, alert and prompt investigation of suspectedoutbreaks;• Establishment and strengthening of outbreak preparednessand rapid response;• Provision of regular feedback and technical guidance to allinvolved;• Building local capacity for early detection, prompt investigationand rapid response.Currently, EWARN partners handle alerts that would previouslyhave called for mobilization of international teams.In 2000 a relapsing fever outbreak was contained within twoweeks of reported onset, with 154 cases and eight deaths. Partnershiphas improved alerting, reporting and response in theevent of suspected outbreaks and saved time, money and lives.The development of an early warning and response network inSouthern Sudan which has built on the experiences andresources of existing NGOs, has provided a model of successin using scarce resources to build capacity and make a differencewithin a multidisease or integrated disease surveillanceand response framework.larly. Together with real-time satellite data onactive fires the GFMC information systemprovides a range of information tools forearly warning of critical fire situations.The Pacific Tsunami Warning System (PTWS)of the International Oceanographic Commission(IOC) of UNESCO provides timely andeffective tsunami warning, watch and informationbulletins to the populations of thePacific. It is operated through the Pacific TsunamiWarning Centre (PTWC) with the support ofnational and regional tsunami warning centres.IOC also maintains an International TsunamiInformation Centre (ITIC), which acts as asource of information for national andregional tsunami warning authorities.Alongside these programmes, the Three GlobalObserving Systems (G3OS), namely theGlobal Climate Observing System (GCOS), theGlobal Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS)and the Global Ocean Observing System(GOOS), in which United Nations agencies,the International Council of Scientific Unions(ICSU) and satellite agencies work together,make important contributions to the warningprocess. G3OS activities are harmonizedthrough the Integrated Global Observing Strategy(IGOS), to which the United Nations system-wideEarthwatch is also providing supportespecially as far as environmental observationand assessment are concerned. Environmentaldata need to be integrated intoearly warning strategies and Earthwatch providesa useful platform for information andknowledge exchange.With continuing globalization in travel andtrade, global epidemic surveillance is essentialto ensure international public health security.International efforts to contain healthrelatedthreats are coordinated by WHO.WHO has established a number of internationalnetworks for specific disease threatsand has developed several electronic databasesincluding: FluNet, a geographical informationsystem to monitor influenza activityand the Global Public Health Intelligence Network(GPHIN), a web-based system developedin collaboration with Health Canadawhich scans the web for outbreak-relatedinformation. The early warning and responsenetwork of Southern Sudan (see box) also276

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5Drought early warning systemsPossible achievements through concerted and systematic approaches undertaken internationally,regionally and nationally are evidenced by the accomplishments in drought early warningsystems established in the wake of the world food crisis in the early 1970s.The FAO Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture(GIEWS) provides a framework for institutional links and information-sharing agreementsamong United Nations organizations, governments, NGOs and trade, research and mediaorganizations, while supporting national and regional initiatives. It monitors food supply anddemand conditions for all countries in the world on a continued basis and provides timelywarnings of any imminent food shortages, droughts and hunger at individual country or subregionallevel.The USAID Famine Early Warning System (FEWS) Net provides a full range of productsand services strengthening the abilities of African countries and regional organizations to managethreats of food security through the provision of timely and analytical early warning and vulnerabilityinformation.Article 10 of UNCCD encourages parties to “enhance national climatological, meteorologicaland hydrological capabilities and the means to provide for drought early warning”. UNCCDencourages parties to ensure that the collection, analysis and exchange of data and informationon drought and land degradation addresses the needs of local communities and that these areinvolved in these activities (article 16). Parties to UNCCD have recognized the importance ofbuilding on existing operational early warning systems within the framework of national actionprogrammes. The UNCCD Committee on Science and Technology established two ad hocpanels of experts to examine the issue of early warning systems in the light of the approachadopted by ISDR. The panels concluded that early warning for drought prediction andassessment, and monitoring and assessment for desertification are fundamentally interrelated,yet operationally different activities. The panels recommended that operational drought warningsystems should incorporate desertification monitoring into their activities and integratesystems to address both drought and desertification, rather than establishing separate systems.Traditional knowledge should also be integrated into monitoring and assessment activities.The IGAD policy on food security and environment addresses requirements of early warningsystems such as remote sensing services. Drought Monitoring Centres for Eastern and SouthernAfrica primarily focusing on drought have extended their products and services to coverweather and climatic patterns, as well as impact assessments.The new SADC Food Security Programme has widened its scope to encompass economicdevelopment, trade, investment and poverty (see also chapter 3.2). A regional coordinationand cooperation programme supports cooperation on all food security, agricultural and naturalresources development issues. A regional information system for food security supports thegeneration and exchange of information relating to all aspects of food security, ranging frominformation about policies through socio-economic data of economies to data concerning thenutrition of households for decision-making purposes across all the facets of the food, agricultureand natural resources sector. Components of the system include: the Regional Early WarningSystem for Food Security (REWS); the Regional Remote Sensing Unit (RRSU); and the RegionalEnvironmental Information System (REIS).The Sahelian Regional Training Centre for Agrometeorology and Operational Hydrology and theirApplications (AGRHYMET) of the Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in theSahel (CILSS) is now also dealing with natural resources management and the impacts of climatechange.277

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEarly warning of volcanic eruptions in JapanThe Japanese Coordination Committee for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions dedicates its efforts to the mitigation of damagesfrom volcanoes. In this regard, early warning of eruptions is essential. Therefore, the Japan Meteorological Agency(JMA), universities and other research institutes are constantly monitoring and conducting research on volcanoesusing up-to-date technologies. JMA and university institutions regularly observe the most active volcanoes on a realtimebasis by using seismographs and cameras. Usu is one of the intensively observed volcanoes. In March 2000, theCommittee reported the possibility of an eruption. In response, the relevant administrative organizations such as theNational Land Agency, JMA, the Ministries of Construction, Home Affairs and Transport, and the national policedispatched officials to the site and organized a local liaison meeting, followed by the setting up of a local headquartersfor major disaster countermeasures to share information and decide on appropriate action. Local government officials,public corporations/companies and relief services were dispatched on site. Thus a response system both at the nationaland local levels was in place before the eruption. Advisory evacuation bulletins were issued to local residents usinglocal community networks and mass media. The agencies and ministries concerned arranged shelter, transportationand security. Evacuation orders then followed, whereby 10,000 people were evacuated; no death or injury was reported.The absence of human casualties can be attributed to the coordinated efforts of the organizations involved in disastermanagement. In this regard, accurate prediction of the eruption through constant observation with the latest technologieswas a key factor, allowing quick governmental response. Strong collaboration between each ministry andorganization allowed quick evacuation and provision of shelters. Moreover, partnerships with other organizations suchas the media secured efficient dissemination of warnings and evacuation orders.Source: ADRC, 2001provides a concrete example of health-related earlydetection, alert and investigation of diseaseutbreaks.At the national level, the Nicaraguan Governmenthas given natural hazard prevention an importantrole in its politics. Scientific investigations, mappingactivities and the establishment of early warning systemsare carried out by INETER. These efforts andcooperation with the Civil Defence of Nicaraguaand other institutions should lead to successful earlywarnings.Multidisciplinary, intersectoral andmulti-agency communications requirementsCommunication-related issues in the context of earlywarning systems have two aspects; the hardwareaspect relates to the maintenance of lifelines, i.e. thenecessity to build or strengthen robust hazard-resistantcommunication systems; the software aspectrelates to the maintenance of relationships, i.e. theneed to establish and maintain effective links andworking relationships among the actors involved inthe early warning chain.As stated earlier, considerable scientific, technical,communication and managerial efforts have beenachieved to improve early warning systems for arange of natural hazards. Systems are more accuratethan ever and can deliver information more quicklythan ever. However, most advanced technologies forobservation, analysis and transmission are not equallyavailable and affordable throughout the world. Presentand anticipated activities within the ISDR frameworkand bilateral/regional technical cooperation programmesoffer concrete vehicles to assist developingcountries in improving their forecast, prediction andcommunication systems. Moreover, it is recognizedthat occurrence of a hazard and ensuing relief aid,usually target the more “technical in nature” needs,such as hazard-resistant forms of communication orsophisticated means of data collection and processing,to mention but two.The necessity to build or strengthen key lifelineresources, such as electrical supply or telephone networks,to robust hazard-resistant standards is welldocumented and obvious. Solutions exist and are wellExperience shows that one of the most effectivemeasures for reducing damage and consequencesof natural disasters is a well-functioning coordinationof actions among a number of governmentalinstitutions involved in this activity. In the frameworkof the State Emergency Commission ofUkraine, special procedures for natural disasterpreparedness and mitigation have been establishedby the Government for national agencies.These specify basic principles and directives,define roles and responsibilities of differentdepartments and institutions for action at thenational, subregional and local levels.278

Selected application of disaster reduction measures5The role of the mass media in early warning systemsAn effective early warning system is one that reaches people using means with which they are conversant.Mass media can serve to warn the public effectively, especially about slow-onset hazards. Television andradio have potentially important roles in making and disseminating public information and educationalprogrammes that can help improve the population’s knowledge and behaviour in the face of hazards andrisks. However low capacity to make their own programmes reduces the extent to which national mediaand broadcast services can fulfil a more important role in hazard education and warning. An additionalshortcoming is the lack of interaction between professional originators of warnings and professional mediapresenters and programmers. If both sides work together, the impact of broadcasts on warning response issignificantly enhanced. In Mauritius, a low-cost media weather presentation system allows weather professionalsto prepare, construct and record their own weather presentations on video for broadcast. Selectedweather professionals are trained in presentation and video recording, as their authority is higher than professionalpresenters with some meteorological training.Source: UK Flagship Programme , 1998.known; recent developments in information technologywill go a step further in protecting key resources fromdamages caused by disasters. Back-up communicationsystems such as battery-powered radio and telephonelinks need to be part of effective warning systems. InMauritius, the back-up system would still operate evenif a cyclone were to destroy or interrupt the power supplysystem.At the intersection of technology and communicationissues, capitalizing on the extensive penetration ofmobile phones even among the poorest of the poor andinto village life, street vendors and coastal fishermen,constitutes a potentially valuable means for “leapfrogtechnology” to be used in delivering warnings. It willrequire a consistent process, based on collaborationbetween public services, communications technologyand a highly competitive commercial field, to work outuniform standards, inter alia.Improvements in the hardware side of early warninghave unfortunately not meant that communities havebeen made safe from disasters. This will be achieved bydevoting more attention to the software side of earlywarning, i.e. developing improved or alternative methodsof communication to address the inappropriatelinkages between technical originators, intermediaries,disseminators and the receivers of warnings. To betruly effective, human and institutional inadequacies ofcommunication links need to be addressed. Communicationthroughout the early warning chain must be anintegrated multiple-way process, through which originators,intermediaries, disseminators and users are inconstant touch with one another in order to make thesystem responsive to people’s needs, priorities anddecisions or in other words, translate predictions intoresponse actions. This implies recognizing earlywarning as a socio-organizational process and findingsuitable means of communication to establishstrong partnerships between different social groupsand organizational systems, including the media andprivate/commercial communications channels. Institutionalizedintersectoral, multi-agency communicationcapabilities need to be developed outside emergencysituations so as to be able to function and generatetimely response when disasters strike. Suchefforts should start with an assessment of the existinginformation systems and organizations in place, aswell as of their communication channels. Mutualtrust and respect has to grow from friendship andregular joint working between actors in a warningsystem. It is also vital to define roles and responsibilitiesclearly, preferably by law within an effectiveoperational system of disaster management. Inthe Philippines, regular training takes place wherethe different actors in a typhoon warning systemmeet to practise management of the warning–fromorigination to protective action on the ground.Proper information and data management and transferfrom the international to the local level will alsohelp countries reduce the resource burden generatedby scientific, technological and technical sophistication.The basic aim of the recommendations from theBonn meeting described above, was to create linkagesto ensure dialogue among all stakeholdersinvolved in early warning through early warningplatforms. They also addressed most of the concernsdescribed in this subsection.279

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives280Institutional services that canreact to warningsWarning in itself has no value, what is fundamentalis how people react to it. The ultimateindicator of a warning system’s effectiveness isthe warning recipient’s response to the warning.The mere existence of an efficient earlywarning system should not lead to a false senseof security.In Kenya, the Early Warning System (EWS) model pioneeredby the Turkana Drought Contingency Planning Unit(TDCPU), which has now been scaled up to cover 10districts in the north of the country, provides an interestingexample of how early warning data can be translatedand communicated clearly to decision makers. Althoughmonitoring at least 18 indicators, covering environment,the rural economy and human welfare, EWS delivers asimple message to decision makers. By using a predefinedsequence of warning stages, from “normal” to“alert” to “alarm” to “emergency”, it presents an easilyunderstood summary analysis, directly linked to responseinterventions.Early warning is widely acknowledged asbeing much more than a technological issuerelated to hazard monitoring, forecasting andtelecommunications and a scientific issue relatedto climatology, volcanology and seismology.It is expected to provide clear, consistent, criticaland user-friendly information to emergencymanagement officials and the public in duetime to ensure that appropriate action can betaken to minimize loss of life and property.Therefore, the last segment of the early warningchain, namely the reaction to warning messages,deserves more attention in the designand operation of early warning systems.Known, structured, practised and sustainedcontingency action plans are required to elicitproper response after clear and consistent messagesare issued, especially when the time to actbecomes shorter. In this regard the importanceof regular simulation exercises is critical toimprove both the efficiency of the responseactions and receive the necessary feedback toadjust the overall design of the early warningsystem. After the disastrous Oder flood eventin 1997 it was recognized that there was anecessity for combined exercises for emergencysituations and improved coordination of countermeasuresbetween respective governmentauthorities on the German and Polish sides ofthe river. It also pointed to the need for someearly warning systems to be transboundary innature.There is one example of disaster managementcontingency planning based upon a wellunderstoodearly warning system and accomplishedmeasures of disaster preparedness thatcould provide wider beneficial experience. Asystematic and annually reviewed process ofcontingency planning for disaster preparednessand response has been in force in Mauritiussince the 1960s. It is derived from the primaryforecasting and early warning authority of theNational Meteorological Service, and is coordinatedacross all operational sectors of government,under the overall authority of thePrime Minister’s Office. This programme hasgiven particular attention to maintaining therelevance of its operational plans throughoutchanging conditions of growth and developmentin the country, even though tropicalcyclones directly impact the society only everyeight to ten years. The public and officialacceptance of early warning and disaster preparednessas integral elements of governmentresponsibility and the resulting informed publicbehaviour displayed across generationsmust both be considered as factors of the strategy’ssuccess. The National MeteorologicalService has been central to the early warningprocess and has been a motivation for the preparednessstrategy since its inception. It hasfurther demonstrated the leadership that mete-Warrick et al. (1981) cited the case of the ashfall warning that was issued by the WashingtonState Department of Emergency Services inadvance of the eruption of Mount St. Helens.Although issued by an authoritative source,this message was not passed on to the communityat risk by intermediate agents because itlacked a sense of urgency, was not specificabout the areas likely to be affected by ash falland contained no guidance about precautionaryactions which people were expected to take.It is now believed that effective warning messagesshould contain a moderate sense ofurgency, estimate the time before impact andthe scale of the event and provide specificinstructions for action, including the need tostay clear of the hazard zoneSource: Gruntfest 1987

orological services can provide by reaching outto include other partners and professional sectorsthrough disaster preparedness initiatives.By appreciating the threat of future potentialnatural disasters, the National MeteorologicalService and the Disaster Management Unitcontinue to work closely with other government,commercial and public interests on preparednessand mitigation initiatives to addressthe possible consequences of climate change onall the social and economic aspects of the country.Unusual for early warning systems, the Directorof the Mauritius Meteorological Service isempowered by the political authority to issuenecessary warnings himself, without prior oradditional recourse or approval by any otherpublic authority. In the course of a developingemergency, close communication is manifestlymaintained with the political authorities. Thisis, however, a clever contingency if communicationis impossible; it also clearly situates theresponsibility on the professional shoulders ofthe Meteorological Service.The interaction between the prediction andresponse elements of the warning chain isimportant. For example, the Russian Federationhas institutionalized interaction betweendisaster prediction and mitigation in its national“Safety” programme, responsible for riskresponse activities in emergency situations.The framework for interaction extends to allthe member countries of the Commonwealth ofIndependent States through the Inter-StateCouncil on Emergencies. A joint programmedevelops and adopts, inter alia, systems andtechnical means for prediction, warning andquick response measures.Selected application of disaster reduction measuresHowever, clear procedures for verification thatmessages are not only received and understood,but also acted upon, are often overlooked.In Hong Kong, for example, thetyphoon warning system requires that whenmeteorologists issue a warning message to thepolice and fire services, recipients should confirmthat the warning has been received andwill be acted upon.In some cases, slow or no response to timelyearly warning information received can berooted to a lack of trust in the reliability of thesystem; to contradictory information or to thefact that messages are not tailored to potentialbeneficiaries or do not include advice on viablecourses of action to reduce risk. The socio-economic,cultural, or else political reasons not toact once warnings are received, need to beovercome by making provisions for follow-upresponse capacities.This is illustrated by the comparative studyconducted by the Philippine Institute of Volcanologyand Seismology (PHIVOLCS) of the Mayonvolcano and Taal Volcano Island in the Philippines.The study showed that on Mayon volcano,inhabitants at risk complied with evacuationorders received through the radio onlyafter having sought confirmation from thebarangay (village) or municipal leader. In comparison,on Taal Volcano Island, most of theinhabitants were responsive to evacuationorders received from community leaders andby broadcasts. The difference in attitude wasexplained by reporting habits/styles of popularlocal radio announcers and consistency of theradio announcers’ warning with folk-observedprecursors to eruptions (Jean C. Tayag, 1998).5281

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeschallenges282Future challenges and prioritiesWhat should the early warning process accomplishin the coming years? From the issues discussedin this chapter, the following areas foraction stand out:• Human-based and communicationrequirements;• Conceptualization of early warning;• Interpretation of scientific predictionsbased on vulnerability and risk assessmentsand their translation into effectiveactions;• Public participation;• Coordination of national, regional andinternational early warning activities.The establishment of a global early warningprogramme and the development of an internationalearly warning platform/forum, as suggestedat the Bonn meeting on early warningand sustainable development (March 2002),should provide a useful framework to respondto these challenges. If as envisaged the globalprogramme on early warning and the internationalearly warning platform/forum trigger theestablishment of national and subregional earlywarning platforms/forums to strengthen networkingand capacities among the actorsinvolved in the early warning chain, many ofthe above needs could be solved.Human-based and communicationrequirementsThis chapter made clear that more than aprocess of technological paraphernalia, theearly warning process should become a clevercommunication system. The most pressingneed is to address the human-based and communicationsystems-related weaknesses. Thisconclusion is not a new one; a major outputfrom the IDNDR early warning systemsWorking Group was that the difficulties aredecidedly NOT technological ones, but ratherconceptual, systemic, and human or institutionally-basedcommunication ones. The samefact is reflected in the recommendations of theBonn meeting, which calls for better interlinkagesto ensure dialogue among all stakeholdersat the international, regional, national and locallevels, to, among other things, integrate activities,interests and expertise of the variousgroups involved in the early warning process,organize information and technologyexchange, train users to find and utilize appropriateearly warning products, strengthen institutionsat all levels and build capacities. Institutionalizedand regularly tested communicationchannels clearly spelling out the functionsand roles of the various actors along the warningchain will avoid contradictions and duplicationand ensure the ultimate success of gettingthe warning message down to populationsat risk wherever they live. Greater coordinationbetween services involved in the provision ofdata and information will provide a comprehensivepicture of conditions and outlooks necessaryto inform decision-making and responseactions.Conceptualization of early warningThe initiative to hold a meeting on early warningand sustainable development was timely inaddressing one other challenge, which relatesto the fact that conceptualization and implementationof early warning still take placealong the “old rapid onset hazard/event ororganizational specific” lines. This is counterproductiveto an overall, and more systematic,comprehensive approach to the global needs ofthe twenty-first century. Early warning being apillar of disaster reduction strategies has to findits way in sustainable development policies.This means that early warning must now necessarilyencompass both environmental and climaticprocesses–over a longer period of time aswell as during periods of quiescence (e.g.between El Niño episodes, in between fireweather, smoke and haze seasons, during hurricaneand typhoon off-seasons, etc.) ratherthan being singular event-based concepts orscenarios. There is then a much greater needfor institutionalized standard nomenclature,procedures and extended organizational relationships,which should benefit from advancesin communications facilities and informationtechnologies. Convergence and coherence inearly warning activities in the context of sustainabledevelopment should be promoted.This will involve the ability of early warningsystems to deliver information about vulnerabilitypatterns in addition to hazards forecasting.Systems such as GIEWS and FEWS thatprovide vulnerability information related tofood security are needed in the areas describedin chapter 2.

Criteria to measure the effectiveness of earlywarning systems need to be elaborated toincrease their credibility and improve their efficiency.In this regard, special attention shouldbe given to the accuracy, timeliness and coverageof warnings, including number of recipientsand validation process, calculation ofavoided deaths and economic losses, failure toidentify risk and take response measures, ratingof recipients’ satisfaction, including awarenessof the system in place, warning time, conflictinginformation and inappropriateness orinconsistency of it.Interpretation of scientific predictions basedon vulnerability and risk assessments and theirtranslation into effective actionsUnrestricted and affordable access to all relevantinformation on early warning for all usersis necessary but not sufficient. Improvement ofthe interface between issuers and intermediariesfor a better interpretation of scientific predictionsand their translation into positiveadministrative actions is a key factor of theearly warning chain. This issue involves severalfacets. First of all, if as noted, advances inforecasting and monitoring are remarkable, theaccompanying vulnerability and risk informationis often missing. Major efforts should beundertaken in the coming years to assess vulnerabilities,generate risk scenarios and vulnerabilitymaps, based on standardized methodologies.Then more attention should be devotedto developing user-friendly products fordecision makers and communities at risk. Thiswill require a better understanding of userneeds and preferences on how the informationshould be presented and how to apply it in thedecision-making process. This last point willneed treatment of the uncertainty factor in predictionsand its consequence for decision-makingprocesses.Public participationThe user-oriented requirements spelled outabove will be met through structured andfocused participation of the public in theSelected application of disaster reduction measuresdesign and dissemination of warning messages.People need to know the types of risks they arefacing, then be aware of the alert systems inplace in case the risk becomes a reality, then tounderstand the warning messages they willreceive in case of crisis and finally the reactionexpected from them. Public participation is thekey to trustworthy and credible early warningsystems. Therefore integrated information systemsensuring community participation innational early warning strategies need to bedeveloped. These systems will have built-incapacities to record, test and incorporate traditionaland local knowledge and coping strategiesin early warning systems, including fromone generation to the other. This feature isimportant for infrequent events. Public participationis also essential to regularly test systemsin place and carry out after-event feedbackanalysis to improve them.Coordination of national, regional and internationalearly warning activitiesThe need to strengthen the internationalframework for improving early warning systemsthrough an effective international mechanism,including for the transfer of technologyto developing countries is not a new one either.The recommendation from the Bonn meetingto establish a global early warning programmeand develop an international early warningplatform/forum responds to this need. Coordinationand cooperation, exchange of information,experience and technologies, interfacebetween national, regional and internationalactivities are necessary driving elements toavoid duplication and move the early warningprocess forward. The early warning processwill benefit from resources andinformation/knowledge exchange throughenhanced contacts with institutions in chargeof multilateral environmental agreements,especially UNCCD and the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC). Such contacts will also improveinteraction between the early warning processand the international agenda for sustainabledevelopment.5283

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesMain challenges for drought early warning systems illustrating the range of issuesfaced in the early warning processchallenges• Data sharing: Meteorological and hydrological data are often not widely shared betweengovernment agencies. This restricts early assessment of drought and other climate conditionsand retards its use in drought preparedness, mitigation and response. In some countries,the high cost of data acquisition from meteorological services restricts the flow ofinformation for timely assessments and for use in research. Memorandums of Understanding(MOUs) between government agencies would facilitate data sharing and useand could bring tremendous societal benefits;• Early warning systems products: Data and information products produced by early warningsystems are not often user-friendly. Products are often too complicated and do notprovide the type of information needed by users for making decisions. Users are seldomtrained on how to apply this information in the decision-making process or consultedprior to product development. Products are often not evaluated for their utility in decision-making.User needs should be assessed and products evaluated through permanentfeedback mechanisms;• Monitoring tools: In the case of droughts, triggers for specific mitigation and responseactions are often unreliable because of inadequacy of detection tools and inadequate linkagesbetween indices and impacts. Integrated assessment products are preferred but fewattempts have been made to integrate meteorological and hydrological information into asingle product for purposes of detecting and tracking drought conditions and development.It is critical that an integrated approach to climate monitoring be employed toobtain a comprehensive assessment of the status of climate and water supply;• Impact assessment methodology: One of the missing links in early warning systems is theconnection between climate/drought indices and impacts. The lack of effective impactand reliable assessment methodologies has hindered the activation of mitigation andresponse programmes and reliable assessments of drought-related impacts;• Delivery systems: Data and information on emerging drought conditions, seasonal forecastsand other products are not often delivered to users in a timely manner. This characteristicsignificantly limits the usefulness of these products for most users. It is criticalthat delivery systems be improved and be location appropriate. For example, the Internetprovides the most cost-effective information delivery in many settings but is inappropriatein most developing countries. Electronic and print media, as well as local extension networks,need to be used more fully as part of a comprehensive delivery system to diverseuser groups.Source: WMO, Early Warning Systems for Drought Preparedness andDrought Management.284

Chapter6Related international commitments andthe UN role in disaster risk reduction6.1 Selected internationaldevelopment agendas and commitments6.2 UN agencies and scope of activities285

Photo: G. Berz, Munich Re

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction66.1. Selected international development agendas and commitmentsThe international community has adopted several significant declarations, agendas and conventionsduring the last decades, on, among other things, environment, fresh water management,climate change and desertification, social development, habitat and food security, which allcontain commitments related to disaster reduction. These are often referred to in the text of thisreview.The following section will provide a short overview of some of the most relevant ones, in particularthose related to sustainable development, which is built around three pillars: social andeconomic development, and environmental protection. These are all relevant elements for disasterrisk reduction and need to be linked to the efforts to implement the objectives of the InternationalStrategy for Disaster Reduction. The full implementation of the global visions expressedbelow are yet to be realized.The following mainstream agreements or subjects are touched upon in this chapter:• Millennium development goals• Sustainable development agenda• Climate change• Desertification and drought• Wetlands• Freshwater agenda• Gender agenda• Habitat agenda• Small island developing states• Least developed countriesAn overview of how the different parts of the UN system relate to risk reduction is described insection 6.2. of this chapter.The Millennium Development GoalsThe UN Millennium Summit gathered inNew York in September 2000. A total of 189world leaders met and adopted the UNMillennium Declaration (A/RES/55/2).Targets, known as the Millennium DevelopmentGoals were established, setting a new milestoneand providing guiding principles for the internationalcommunity, national governmentsand, in particular, the United Nations. Manyof them touch on areas which are closely linkedto vulnerability to natural hazards, such aseradicating extreme poverty and hunger,achieving universal primary education,promoting gender equality, ensuring environmentalstability and partnerships for development.For example, the goal of improving thelives of thousands of slum dwellers around theworld living in high-risk areas by 2020,"We recognise that, in addition to our separate responsibilitiesto our individual societies, we have a collective responsibility touphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity atthe global level. As leaders, we have a duty therefore to all theworld's people, especially the most vulnerable and, in particular,the children of the world, to whom the future belongs."Millennium Declarationinvolves poverty eradication, proper land useplanning and the improved understanding ofvulnerability to disasters in densely populatedareas.Under “Protecting our common environment”the declaration resolves "to adopt in all ourenvironmental action a new ethic of conservationand stewardship and, as first steps,resolves...to intensify cooperation to reduce thenumber and effects of natural and man-madedisasters."287

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives288Strategies linked to ISDR for moving ahead onthis goal as described in the "Road maptowards the implementation of the UnitedNations Millennium Declaration" (Secretary-General Report to GA A/56/326) include:• developing early warning systems, vulnerabilitymapping, technological transfer andtraining;• supporting interdisciplinary and intersectoralpartnerships, improved scientificresearch on the causes of natural disastersand better international cooperation toreduce the impact of climate variables, suchas El Niño and La Niña;• encouraging governments to address theproblems created by megacities, the locationof settlements in high-risk areas and othermanmade determinants of disasters;• encouraging governments to incorporatedisaster risk reduction into national planningprocesses, including building codes.The Sustainable Development AgendaThe World Summit on Sustainable Development(WSSD) is being held in Johannesburg,South Africa, in August 2002, 10 years afterthe UN Conference on Environment and Development(UNCED). UNCED, also known as theEarth Summit, took place in June 1992, in Riode Janeiro, Brazil.The main outputs of that summit were the Rio Declarationon Environment and Development and Agenda 21- a 40 chapter program of action. UNCED also ledto agreement on two legally binding conventions onBiological Diversity (CBD) and Climate ChangeDisaster reduction and sustainable developmentThe First World Conference on Natural Disaster Reductionconvened in Yokohama, Japan, in May 1994, represented a turningpoint for promoting disaster reduction. It led to the adoptionof the Yokohama Plan of Action and changed focus of the workin the second half of IDNDR. The new approach included morefocus on risk and vulnerability reduction and renewed effort toincorporate disaster reduction concerns into sustainable development.Increased emphasis was given to social sciences and afocus on public policy and promotion of community involvementto reduce risk to disaster in all stages. A ten-year review of theimplementation of the Yokohama strategy will take place in2004.”(UNFCCC). It also produced a Statement of ForestPrinciples. It started the process of developing aConvention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) inthose countries experiencing serious drought and/ordesertification, in particular in Africa, adopted in1994. The Earth Summit gave rise to a number ofpositive responses including the emergence of thousandsof local Agenda 21 initiatives and an enhancedpolitical profile of environmental issues. It led to theformation of the Commission for Sustainable Development(CSD) and many countries set up strategies forsustainable development. But in only a few cases didthese include concerns for risk and disaster reduction.The journey toward sustainable development isfar from being achieved. This is one conclusionreached during the preparatory process toreview the implementation of Agenda 21, inpreparation for the WSSD. In the last thirtyyears a whole series of summits, meetings andagreements have brought us to the wide ranginginterpretation of sustainable developmentthat we see today.For a long time, environment was seen asantagonistic to development. However, in1972 a major step was made towards the recognitionof the need to address environmentalproblems if better living conditions were to beattained. In 1992, although experience hadbeen gained and environmental policy wasbecoming routine practice worldwide, resistanceagainst the environmental agenda was stillhigh. Thanks to the high political profile ofclimate change and biodiversity, the environmentagenda was boosted. In 2002, the essentialneed for environmental strategies toachieve sustainable development is no longerquestioned, even if in terms of implementationthe situation is still far from ideal.Disaster reduction was not dealt with as suchduring the Rio conference's agenda, even though itwas included in the discussion on human settlements,mountain development, fresh watermanagement and land degradation. During theIDNDR, the connection between disaster reductionand sustainable development, including itssocial, economic and environmental dimensionshas been clarified to a greater extent. The awarenessof these issues and the nature of the crosssectoralrelationships evolved as an increasing arrayof United Nations Multilateral EnvironmentalConventions on climate change, desertification andbiodiversity, signed between 1992 and 1994.

These joined the long standing Ramsar Conventionon Wetland Preservation (1971) to emphasizethe importance of natural resource managementand the dynamic growth of risk factors thatcontribute to natural disasters.History of the Earth SummitRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionsustainable development as development which"meets the needs of present generations withoutcompromising the ability of future generations tomeet their own needs."Sustainable development meets the needs of the presentgenerations without compromising the ability of futureones to meet their own needs….6The concept of sustainable development datesback a long way but it was at the UN Conferenceon Human Environment (Stockholm, 1972) whenthe international community met for the firsttime to consider the global environment andhighlighted the need to support people in thisprocess. The Conference indicated that industrialisedenvironmental problems, such as habitatdegradation, toxicity and acid rain, were notnecessarily relevant issues for all countries andcommunities. However, it was the existingenvironmental problems that dominated themeeting and led to wider public environmentalawareness.In the 1980s, the UN set up the World Commissionon Environment and Development, alsocalled the Brundtland Commission. Theyproduced Our Common Future, otherwiseknown as the Brundtland Report, whichframed much of what would become Agenda21 and the 27 principles of the Rio Declarationon Environment and Development. It definedHowever, the description of sustainable developmentin Agenda 21 called for a total shift inthe status quo of prevalent value systems andinstitutional processes. Such global changecould never have occurred over night. Whenprogress was assessed after five years - Rio+5 inNew York, 1997 - many gaps in implementationwere identified, particularly with regard to socialequity and poverty. Falling levels of officialdevelopment assistance (ODA) and growinginternational debt contributed to this. It alsoshowed failures to improve technology transfer,capacity building for participation and development,institutional coordination, and to reduceexcessive levels of production and consumption.The review meeting called for the ratificationand implementation of the growing number ofinternational agreements and conventionswhich refer to environment and development.The same concerns regarding implementationhave been raised in the Rio+10 preparatoryThe four broad areas of action of Agenda 21ElementsSocial and economic dimensions todevelopmentConservation and management of naturalresourcesStrengthening role of major groupsMeans of implementationIssuesPoverty, production and consumption, health,human settlement, integrated decision-makingAtmosphere, oceans and seas, land, forests, mountains,biological diversity, ecosystems, biotechnology,freshwater resources, toxic chemicals, hazardousradioactive and solid wasteYouth, women, indigenous people, NGOs, localauthorities, trade unions, businesses, scientific andtechnical communities, farmersFinance, technology transfer, information, publicawareness, capacity building, education, legalinstruments, institutional frameworks289

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesprocess, leading to the WSSD. During thisprocess, natural disaster has been identified asa serious constraint to sustainable developmentand has been included as an action point in thedraft programme of implementation.More information can be found onwww.earthsummit2002.orgExpected results of WSSD• Political declaration on increased commitmentfor action.• Programme of implementation buildingon Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles.• Partnerships (global, regional or sub-regional)to implement specific parts of the plan ofimplementation.Disaster is emerging as one of the new subjects inthe draft plan of implementation and will hopefullybe recognised as a prerequisite for sustainabledevelopment. The subject is dealt with under theissue of protecting and managing the naturalresource base of economic and social development,and also touched upon under poverty eradicationfor adequate and secure housing for the poor andunder means of implementation. The sections onsmall island developing states, as well as the one forAfrica, include special concerns and action pointsrelated to increased capacities to cope with disasters.Elements discussed for the programme of implementation of Johannesburg:"An integrated, multi-hazard, inclusive approach to address vulnerability, risk assessment anddisaster management, including prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery, isan essential element of a safer world in the 21st century." Actions, which are required at all levels,mentioned in the draft after the last preparatory committee held in Bali, call for a strengthenedrole of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), and include:• The need to strengthen or establish effective regional, subregional and national strategiesand scientific and technical institutional support for disaster management, including jointobservation and research.• Wetland and watershed protection and restoration to reduce floods, improved land-use planning,improving and applying techniques for assessing the potential adverse effects ofclimate.• Dissemination and use of traditional and indigenous knowledge to mitigate the impact ofdisasters.• Promoting community-based disaster management planning by local authorities, includingthrough training activities and raising public awareness.• Supporting the ongoing voluntary contribution of, as appropriate, NGOs, the scientificcommunity, and other partners in the management of natural disasters according to agreed,relevant guidelines.• Development and strengthening of early warning systems and information networks indisaster management.• Strengthening capacity at all levels to collect and disseminate scientific and technical information,especially El Niño and La Niña, through assistance to institutions devoted toaddressing such events.290

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction6Steps to Earth Summit 2002UN Sustainable Development Process1972 UN Conference on Human Environment(Stockholm) UNEP established1980 World Conservation Strategy (IUCN)1983 World Commission on Environmentand Development (the BrundtlandCommission) set up1989 Brundtland Report Our CommonFuture1989 Launch of the International Decade forNatural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)1992 UN Conference on Environment andDevelopment (the Earth Summit), inRio de Janeiro. UN Commission onSustainable Development (CSD) established.1997 Rio+5 Summit review (critical becauseof slow implementation)1999 End of IDNDR2000 Launch of the International Strategy forDisaster Reduction (ISDR)WSSD (Rio+10) process:2001 Defining modalities of process. National,sub regional and regional preparatorymeetings2002 Global Prep Comm. 2 (Jan., New York)Substantive review of implementation ofAgenda 21Global Prep Comm. 3 (March, NewYork)Review and finalize elements forprogramme of actionGlobal Prep Comm. 4 (May, Bali)Identificationof priority issues, programme ofKey Events1982 UNEP's first high level meeting1991 Children's Summit, New York1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change(FCCC) and Convention on Biological Diversity(CBD) agreed1993 Human Rights Summit, Vienna1994 World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction"For a Safer World", YokohamaConference on Small Island Developing States,Barbados1995 Social Summit CopenhagenWomen's Summit, BeijingWorld Trade Organization (WTO) established1996 Human Settlements, Summit IstanbulFood Summit, Rome1997 Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change adopted1998 Convention on Prior Informed Consent adopted1999 IDNDR Programme Forum, Geneva2000 Millennium Summit, New YorkWorld Youth Forum, DakarBiosafety Protocol adopted2001 UNEP 21st Governing Council, CartagenaUN Third Conference on Least DevelopedCountries, BrusselsInternational Conference on Freshwater, BonnWTO negotiations, including GATTS and agriculture2002 Financing for Development, MexicoWorld Food Summit, Italy2002: World Summit on Sustainable Development defining national, regional and globalcommitments in Johannesburg, South Africa, 26 August-4 September 2002Adapted from www.earthsummit2002.org/Es2002.pdf291

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives292United Nations Framework Conventionon Climate Change (UNFCCC)The climate change convention was openedfor signature at the UN Conference on Environmentand Development in 1992. Its ultimategoal is the "stabilisation of greenhouse gasconcentrations in the atmosphere at a levelthat would prevent dangerous anthropogenicinterference with the climatic system". TheKyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997, andcompleted three years of negotiations relatingto its operational details in November 2001. Itcontains legally binding commitments fordeveloped country parties. Most OECDcountries agreed to decrease their anthropogenicgreenhouse gas emissions by at least5 per cent below 1990 levels in the firstcommitment period from 2008-2012. Manycountries with high emission rates have notyet ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the mostevident being the United States. The Protocolis not yet in force.Time is ripe for forging the links between climatechange adaptation and disaster reduction.Since the convention's entry into force, partieshave met annually in the Conference of the Parties(COP) to monitor its implementation andcontinue talks on how best to tackle climatechange. The decisions taken by the COP atannual sessions now make up a detailed rulebook for the effective implementation of theconvention. The landmark Marrakesh Accordsadopted at the seventh session of the COP inMarrakesh, in October/November 2001, wereespecially important in elaborating the convention'srules on issues of particular concern todeveloping countries.Industrialised countries, who have historicallycontributed most to climate change, arerequested by the convention to submit regularreports, known as national communications,detailing their climate change policies andmeasures. These countries are termed Annex1 Parties of which there are currently 41.All remaining countries, mostly developingcountries, make up the group of non-Annex IParties, currently numbering 145. Thesecountries are invited to provide nationalcommunications in more general terms ontheir actions to address climate change andmeasures taken to adapt to its effect, as well ason their needs to implement the convention.Much of the information requested from Partiesto the Convention will be of use for disasterreduction strategies (for example, informationon policy frameworks for implementing adaptationmeasures and response strategies in thecontext of disaster preparedness, with a view tointegrating climate change impact informationinto national planning processes).Specific needs and concerns with regard tofinancial assistance and technology transfer,along with support for capacity building ofparticularly vulnerable developing countriesare taken into account under the climateregime. Some developing countries, such aslow-lying island nations or those with areasprone to natural disasters, face high risks fromthe adverse effects of climate change itself,while others, such as oil exporting states, feelmore threatened by the potential economicrepercussions of response measures.The protocol requests Parties to minimize theadverse effects of their climate change policiesand measures, including social, environmentaland economic impacts on other Parties.Climate change legislation and financial meansat the disposal of the poorest countriespursuant to the provisions of the UNFCCCwill bring additional benefits to cope withclimate-related disasters, which constitute twothirdsof all disasters.The 2001 Marrakesh Accords took some importantsteps forward on vulnerability and adaptation,especially decisions on the adverse effectsof climate change including response toclimate related hazards. Two new conventionfunds, to be managed by the GEF, were alsoestablished, plus one operating under theKyoto Protocol.The scope of activities eligible for fundingunder the convention was extended, notably inthe area of adaptation to climate change andcapacity building. These include the integrationof climate change considerations insustainable development planning, systematicobservation and monitoring networks andearly warning for extreme weather events anddisease outbreaks.

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)established under the Protocol also represents apotential for financing projects providingdisaster reduction services. This mechanism ismeant to ease emission target compliance fordeveloped countries through the financing ofenergy projects in developing countries. In theRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionfirst commitment period reforestation projectswill also be eligible. The door has been leftopen to add land use projects for the secondcommitment period.More information can be found onwww.unfccc.int6The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeThe IPCC, established by UNEP and WMO in 1988, provides important scientific input to theclimate change process. The current structure of the IPCC consists of three working groups: workinggroup I addresses the science of climate change; working group II deals with impacts, vulnerabilityand adaptation; and working group III with mitigation of greenhouse gases. In addition to thethree working groups, the IPCC also includes a Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas inventories.The IPCC is best known for its comprehensive assessment reports, incorporating findings from all threeworking groups, which are recognised as the most credible source of information on climate change.The latest, Third Assessment Report released in 2001, stated that "there is new and stronger evidencethat most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities and humaninterference will continue to change atmospheric composition throughout the 21st century".The IPCC has projected the following alarming chain reaction of events by 2010:• Largest greenhouse gas emissions would increase from today's level of about 365 ppmv (parts permillion by volume) to between 550 and 1000 ppmv.• Global mean surface temperatures will increase by about 1.5 to six degrees Celsius.• Incidence of some extreme events will increase including the frequency and magnitude of the ElNiño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon.These projections directly affect the very existence of some low-lying states and are likely to have aprofound impact on the planet in terms of the likelihood of large-scale disasters.The IPCC states that there is little evidence that efficient and effective adaptations to climate changerisks will be undertaken autonomously. It says that in most developing countries local governmentsare weak and ineffective at environmental management and have little capacity to integrate disasterpreparedness into current tasks and responsibilities.More information can be found on www.ipcc.ch, see also Chapter 2293

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCombat desertification and droughtThe international community has long recognisedthat desertification is a major economic,social, and environmental problem of concernto many countries. In 1977, the United NationsConference on Desertification (UNCCD) adopteda Plan of Action to Combat Desertification(PACD). Unfortunately, despite this and otherefforts, the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP) concluded in 1991 thatthe problem of land degradation in arid, semiarid,and dry sub-humid areas had intensified,although there were "local examples of success".As a result, the question of how to tackle desertificationwas still a major concern for the 1992Rio Earth Summit. The Conference supportedUNCCD and desertification/land degradationDesertification does not refer to the expansion of existingdeserts. It occurs because dry land ecosystems, which coverover one third of the world's land area, are extremely vulnerableto over-exploitation and inappropriate land use. Poverty,political instability, deforestation, overgrazing, and bad irrigationpractices can all undermine the land's productivity.Over 250 million people are directly affected by desertification.In addition, some one billion people in over onehundred countries are at risk. These people include many ofthe world's poorest, most marginalized, and politically weakcitizens.Combating desertification is essential to ensuring the longtermproductivity of inhabited Rylands. Unfortunately, pastefforts have too often failed and the problem of land degradationcontinues to worsen. This is because the causes of desertificationare many and complex, ranging from internationaltrade patterns to unsustainable land management practices.UNCCD and droughtDrought has received less attention than land degradation inmost of the national action programs, possibly due to thelack of capacity in many developing countries to addressdrought-related issues, and because it is relatively easier toimplement concrete measures for combating land degradation.Drought strategies are basically dealt with in terms ofadaptation, rather than mitigation.See more at www.unccd.org (United Nations Secretariat of theConvention to Combat Desertification)a new, integrated approach to the problememphasizing action to promote sustainabledevelopment at the community level. TheConvention to Combat Desertification inThose Countries Experiencing SeriousDrought and/or Desertification, particularly inAfrica (UNCCD) was adopted in 1994 andentered into force in 1996. Over 179 countriesare now Parties to the convention.The Conference of the Parties (COP), the convention'ssupreme body, will hold its sixth sessionin October, 2003. A permanent secretariat isbased in Bonn. The Committee on Science andTechnology (CST) is multidisciplinary and opento the participation of all Parties. Composed ofgovernment representatives, the CST advisesthe COP on scientific and technologicalmatters relevant to desertification and drought.National Action Programme: Countries affectedby desertification are implementing the conventionby developing and carrying out national,sub-regional, and regional action programme.Drawing on past lessons, the Convention statesthat these programmes:• must adopt a democratic, bottom-up approach• should emphasize popular participationdesigned to allow local people to help themselvesto reverse land degradation• must make politically sensitive changes, suchas decentralizing authority, improving landtenuresystems, and empowering women,farmers, and pastoralists• should permit NGOs to play a strong role• must be fully integrated into other nationalpolicies for sustainable development• should be flexible and modified as circumstanceschangeRamsar Convention - wetlandsThe Convention was adopted in 1971 in Iran,in the city of Ramsar. It came into force in1975 and 131 countries already join theConvention and some other are in the process.Ramsar is the only global environmental treatydealing with a specific ecosystem and themission of the Convention is " the conservationand wise use of Wetlands by national actionand international cooperation as a means toachieving sustainable development throughout294

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction6The Ramsar Convention on Wetland Preservation and disaster reductionAmong the many values and functions of wetlands some of the most important involve flood reduction,coastal protection, mitigation of climate change and desertification effects. These considerationsare at the heart of the Convention's guidance on management planning for wetlands. In additionto the revised management planning guidelines currently under development for adoption bythe Conference of the Parties, additional guidance is also being developed on integrated coastalzone management which stresses these values very strongly.Ramsar, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the Niger Basin Authority are presentlyworking on a project financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to designate wetlandsthroughout the Niger River Basin as Ramsar sites and develop management plans for them whichwill help to mitigate the effects of seasonal climate variations. A similar initiative also financed byGEF is currently underway with Ramsar, WWF, and the Lake Chad Basin Commission to bringthe entire basin under a cooperative management plan following Ramsar guidelines.Similarly, Ramsar staff is working with local officials and NGOs on a number of projects inEurope to develop sound management regimes for transboundary wetlands such as the NeretvaRiver delta, the trilateral Prespa Park, the Danube Delta and the Dyje Morava floodplain.Although the main purpose of these activities is sustainable use of resources, all have a componentthat is relevant to disaster prevention.Source: Ramsar Secretariat, and G. Bergkamp, B.Orlando, IUCNRAMSAR secretariat and G. Bergkamp, B.t Orlando, IUCN, 1999the world." Some of the main activities of theConvention are the development of NationalWetlands Policy and inventories of Wetlands.The Convention deals with all wetlands issuesfrom surface water to groundwater (salty,freshwater, etc). Wetlands and flood controlwas mentioned in the initial Convention.Nevertheless this has not been a priority untilvery recently. For the Strategic Work Plan2003-2008, this topic is included.The Ramsar Convention Bodies are theConference of the Contracting Parties, theStanding Committee (regional representativesof Ramsar's six regions), the Scientific andTechnical Review Panel and the RamsarBureau (Secretariat), in Gland, Switzerland.Main partners for the implementation of policiesare the non-governmental organizationsIUCN-World Conservation Union, WetlandsInternational, World Wide Fund for Nature(WWF) and Birdlife International.The Ramsar Convention shares headquarterswith IUCN, and has a joint Work Plan withthe Convention on Biological Diversity and aMemorandum of Cooperation with UNCCD,Convention on Migratory Species and WorldHeritage Programme of UNESCOFor more information see www.ramsar.orgThe Fresh water agendaSome 1.3 billion people worldwide lack accessto safe drinking water and close to 2.5 billionare not provided with adequate sanitation.Water is becoming scarce due to increasingdemands for food production and growingpopulations. Pollution is also on the increase,threatening water supplies.There are two intrinsic links between disastersrisk reduction and the water agenda. Theimpact resulting from climate change on thenatural surface and ground water systems isincreasingly having an adverse affect on socialand economic development patterns. Freshwaterinfrastructures are vulnerable to naturalhazards, such as floods, earthquakes, landslidesand volcanic eruptions.There are many political documents thatmention risk and water related hazards, formingthe so-called fresh water agenda. Prior to295

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesthe Rio Earth Summit, the UN InternationalConference on Water and the Environment(ICWE) was held in January 1992. TheDublin Statement (www.wmo.ch/web/homs/documents/english/icwedece.html) on Waterand Sustainable Development establishes fourguiding principles, as well as an agenda foraction, which have guided academic and politicaldiscussions ever since.One of the recommendations relates to theWorld Water Assessment ProgrammeThe World Water Assessment Programme/World WaterDevelopment Report (WWAP/WWDR), is administeredby UNESCO, and is a UN-wide effort, set up upon therequest of governments, to pool UN resources regardingworld water management. WWAP will assist developingcountries to strengthen their capacity to assess their ownwater situation. The WWDR will target all thoseinvolved in the formulation and implementation ofwater-related policies and investments.More information is available at:www.unesco.org/water/wwapprotection against natural disasters, and callsfor proactive measures to reverse the currenttrends. In particular, the Dublin Statementidentifies climate change and sea level rise asfactors that would exacerbate disaster risk,"threatening the apparent security of existingwater resources". Chapter 18 of Agenda 21covered the "protection of the quality andsupply of freshwater resources: application ofintegrated approaches to the developmentmanagement and use of water resources" withample reference to disasters and hydrologicalextreme events.implement these commonly agreed principles. Forexample, the WMO, has set out to promote floodmanagement activities in the context of IntegratedWater Resources Management (IWRM).The reduction of vulnerability to floods anddroughts will have to be included in the manyfacets of the freshwater agenda. These includethe integration of all stakeholders in river basinmanagement, the institutional framework toeffectively manage water demand and internationaltrade arrangements, which respectnational water regulations. Such watermanagement processes need to go hand inhand with an increased delegation of responsibilityand means to local authorities.At a global level, the upcoming WSSD, theUnited Nations International Freshwater Year2003, as well as the third World Water Forum,to be held in March 2003, will provide opportunitiesto further develop these concepts.Research in support of Integrated WaterResource Management and ComprehensiveDisaster Risk Management .WADI (Water-related Disasters) is a recentresearch initiative of the Potsdam Institutefor Climate Impact Research (PIK) thatresponds directly to humankind's increasingvulnerability to water-related disasters.It provides a scientific basis for adaptationand mitigation options for sustainable transitionprograms that are developed inconjunction with the various stakeholders.See more at: www.pink-potsdam.de296More recently, in March 2000, the SecondWorld Water Forum, launched the World WaterVision and a Ministerial Declaration on WaterSecurity in the 21st Century was developed.The declaration identifies seven challenges forthe global community, including the "managementof risk - to provide security from floods,droughts, pollution and other water relatedhazards."A vast body of knowledge exists on water management,and flood and drought management inparticular. An increasing focus in local, nationaland international programs is on best ways toThe gender agendaFourth World Conference on Women andfollow-upThe Beijing Platform for Action, adopted atthe Fourth World Conference on Women(1995) recognised that many women areparticularly affected by environmental disasters,disease and violence. It requested governmentsto "promote knowledge of and sponsorresearch on the role of women, particularlyrural and indigenous women, in food gathering

and production, soil conservation, irrigation,watershed management, sanitation, coastal zoneand marine resource management, integratedpest management, land-use planning, forestconservation and community forestry, fisheries,natural disaster prevention, and new and renewablesources of energy, focusing particularly onindigenous women's knowledge and experience."Five years later, the review and appraisal of theimplementation of the Beijing Platform forAction (2000) identified natural disasters andepidemics as emerging issues, which deservedgreater attention. It was noted that the social andeconomic impact of natural disasters andepidemics remained relatively invisible as a policyissue, in particular their impact on the statusof women and the achievement of gender equality.In their responses to a questionnaire, severalstates in Africa and Asia cited the feminization ofpoverty, often aggravated by natural disastersand crop failure, as an obstacle to improvinggender equality.The twenty-third special session of the GeneralAssembly entitled "Women 2000: gender equality,development and peace for the twenty-firstcentury" acknowledged an increase in casualtiesand damage caused by natural disasters andraised awareness of the inefficiencies and inadequaciesof existing approaches and interventionmethods in responding to such emergency situations,from a gender perspective.It suggested that a gender perspective be incorporatedinto disaster prevention, mitigation andrecovery strategies. The special session alsorecommended that the UN system and internationalorganizations should assist governments indeveloping gender-sensitive strategies for thedelivery of assistance and responses to humanitariancrises resulting from natural disasters.Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionGender mainstreaming: This is the process ofbringing a gender perspective into the mainstreamactivities of governments at all levels, as a means ofpromoting the role of women in the field of development,integrating women's values into developmentwork. Gender mainstreaming builds on theknowledge and lessons-learnt from previous experienceswith gender equality policies.Gender analysis: Gender analysis involves thecollection and use of sex-disaggregated data thatreveal the roles and responsibilities of men andwomen, to be fed into the policy process forenabling assessments of how existing and futurepolicies and programmes potentially affect men andwomen differently. Gender analysis needs to be bothquantitative and qualitative.The committee has urged certain states to paygreater attention to environment and natural disasters.In the case of Nicaragua, it suggested thataspects of natural disasters impeded women's fullenjoyment of their rights. When it considered thereport of Kazakhstan, the committee expressedconcern about the degree of environmental degradationin the country and its extremely negativeimpact on the health of the whole population, inparticular on women and children.The committee also expressed its concern aboutthe degree of environmental degradation inUzbekistan and its negative impact on the healthof the whole population, in particular womenand children.In the case of Belarus, the committee noted thegovernment's attempts to deal with the healthimpact of the Chernobyl disaster and addressedthis issue as a principal area of concern.Commission on the Status of Women6Convention on the Elimination ofDiscrimination against WomenSeveral articles of the Convention on the Eliminationof Discrimination against Women explore theviolations of women's human rights in the case ofnatural disasters. A number of general recommendations,adopted by the Committee on theElimination of Discrimination Against Women,also offer interpretation of articles of the conventionas they relate to disasters and environment.The UN Commission on the Status of Women,in its programme of work for 2002-2006, willconsider the "environmental management andmitigation of natural disasters: a gender perspective".In preparation for this topic, an expertgroup was organized by the United Nations Divisionfor the Advancement of Women (DAW) incollaboration with the ISDR Secretariat.The expert group meeting discussed the linkbetween gender and environmental manage-297

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesment, natural disaster reduction and riskmanagement. It adopted a number ofrecommendations some of which were lateradopted by the commission.Experts recommended, in particular, tosystematically include hazard pronenessand gender-based vulnerabilities in environmentalimpact assessments. They alsoreiterated the importance of women'sparticipation in decision-making in publicadministration and in governmental structuresat all levels.Experts also highlighted the necessity tointroduce a gender perspective into theongoing research on the relationshipbetween climate, natural hazards, disasterand related environmental vulnerability.They stressed the need to use gender-sensitiveindices and indicators and furtherpointed out the need to develop instrumentsfor including gender analysis in localdisaster risk management.The Commission on the Status of Womenin 2002 also called for the integration ofgender perspectives in the implementationof all policy documents and treaties relatedto sustainable development and in thereview of the implementation of the YokohamaStrategy for a Safer World.Email: daw@un.orgWeb:www.un.org/womenwatch/dawThe Habitat agendaMore vulnerable cities…As more and more people move to cities, the pressure on theland increases. Often, the poorest end up in badly-builthousing in high density areas on marginal land such asexposed coastal areas, river deltas and steep slopes. Theseare the same areas likely to have the poorest supply ofwater, the most rudimentary sewage disposal, and wheregovernment is least likely to enforce safety standards. Theseare the places where, in the event of a disaster, the rescuerswill find it hardest to get to.The Habitat agenda was defined during the SecondUnited Nations Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul,1996. It includes a series of commitments and guidingprinciples for sustainable cities. Most disasters arecaused by vulnerabilities created by human action such asuncontrolled or inadequately planned human settlements,lack of basis infrastructure and the occupation of disasterprone areas. The most efficient and effective disasterpreparedness systems are usually provided at the neighborhoodlevel through volunteer contributions and localauthority actions. Specific actions are required at theappropriate levels of central government and localgovernments in close coordination with the private sectorand all community groups.UN HABITAT takes actions in improving disastermanagement in human settlements by working with partnersthat include local governments, insurance companies,NGOs and the academic, health and scientificcommunity. The goal is to adopt appropriate norms forland use, building and planning standard.298Chapter III - Commitments ….Sustainable human settlements"We commit ourselves to the goal of sustainable human settlements in an urbanizing world by developingsocieties that will make efficient use of resources within the carrying capacity of ecosystems and take intoaccount the precautionary principle approach, and by providing all people, in particular those belonging tovulnerable and disadvantaged groups, with equal opportunities for a healthy, safe and productive life inharmony with nature and their cultural heritage and spiritual and cultural values ….." "Preventing manmadedisasters, including major technological disasters, by ensuring adequate regulatory and other measuresto avoid their occurrence, and reducing the impacts of natural disasters and other emergencies on humansettlements, inter alia, through appropriate planning mechanisms and resources for rapid, people-centredresponses that promote a smooth transition from relief, through rehabilitation, to reconstruction and development,taking into account cultural and sustainable dimensions; and rebuilding disaster-affected settlementsin a manner that reduces future disaster-related risks and makes the rebuilt settlements accessible toall" Extract from the Habitat Agenda, Istanbul 1996.In the five-year follow up review of the Habitat Agenda in 2001, renewed commitment to engage in disasterpreparedness and risk reduction was stated.

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction6Kobe - a city adapting and recoveringThe Habitat-agenda aims to buildcapacities for sustainable human settlementsissues. A window of opportunityfor change is after a disaster. In the caseof Kobe, Japan, disaster and risk reductionacquired a new meaning after 1995.The Kobe earthquake, with a magnitudeof 7.2 in the Richter scale, hit the cityand its surrounding areas on 17 January1995 at 5:46. There were over 6,400casualties and more than 200,000 people(Hyogo Prefecture Government) wereforced to find temporary shelter due tothe destruction of buildings and infrastructure.Public facilities such as offices, schools and hospitals were damaged extensively, paralysing servicesfor several days. Utilities were also interrupted - electricity was unavailable in 25 per cent of the cityand telephone, gas and water was disrupted in the entire city. Many severe fires broke out, resultingin more than 800,000 square metres of burnt land. The economic damage to the city was estimatedat 7 trillion Japanese yen (approx. US$60 billion).The earthquake showed the need for a multidisciplinary approach of disaster management withappropriate incorporation of the socio-economic context. A massive reconstruction plan was undertakenfollowing the earthquake both at the city and provincial levels. The basic ideas of the reconstructionplan were:• balance between the urban conveniences and safety precautions• raising awareness of both benefits and hazards of nature• more emphasis on human interactionKey issues for creating community safety were incorporated in the reconstruction planning andemphasised the following:• Security. Creation of a community where people can live and work with a sense of safety.• Vitality. Creation of a community and built environment full of creativity.• Appeal. Creation of a community consistent with its unique nature and appeal.• Cooperation. Creation of a community that will work together in mutual trust.The goal of the reconstruction plan was to create a safer city while respecting the necessity to live anormal, everyday life. Many evaluations were conducted during Kobe's reconstruction period.Following are some of the findings found useful in improving earthquake countermeasures:• Promoting integrated risk management• Enhancing community involvement in the formulation of earthquake countermeasures and developingcooperation between administrative organizations and residents• Continued efforts toward the creation of safe and disaster resistant towns• Passing results to future generations and establishing a framework for international cooperationconcerning earthquake countermeasures.Source: Kenji Okazaki, 2001299

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives300Small island developing states anddisaster reductionAll together there are 43 small island developing statesand territories (SIDS) in the Caribbean, Pacific andIndian Ocean regions. Their special circumstances areincreasingly gaining global attention. For example, theRio Declaration and Agenda 21 recognised the specialneeds of SIDS. Subsequently, the Barbados Programmeof Action for the Sustainable Development of Small IslandDeveloping States was adopted in 1994. It includes thecall to develop a vulnerability index, as well as the needto focus on disaster prevention and preparedness. Atthe 2000 UN Millennium Summit, world leadersresolved to "address the vulnerabilities faced by SIDSrapidly and in full by 2015."The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is pursuingthe interests of SIDS collectively, even thoughnot all SIDS are members of the Alliance. As afollow up to the Barbados Programme of Action, aninternet network, supported by UN/DESA, hasbeen established to ensure easy access of information(www.sidsnet.org). UNESCO is also supporting aninitiative, Small Islands Voice.(www.smallislandsvoice.org)Owing to the small size, remoteness and fragility ofisland ecosystems, SIDS are especially vulnerable tohazards and the impact of a changing climate. Theymust also deal with the visible sea level rise, carefulmanagement of coastal and marine resources, scarcefresh water resources - in contrast to susceptibility toflood- and waste management. Environmental disasterssuch as oil spills could also severely damage SIDS.Caribbean islands- vulnerability to hazardsSimilar to the Pacific small island developing states are theCaribbean islands. Idyllic though they may seem, the islands havenot escaped global trends of increasing urbanization and occupationof marginal lands resulting in higher levels of vulnerabilityand exposure to more risk. The economies of most islands areunderpinned by tourism, the very nature of which exposes theindustry's infrastructure and investments to coastal flooding fromstorm surges and tsunamis. Exploitation of natural resources fortourism or the mining industry and development of coastal areasall increase vulnerability. Pollution destroys coral reefs andseagrass beds important to reducing impact of storm surges.Destruction of mangrove stands for coastal development or charcoalproduction also increases coastal vulnerability.Past events in banana-based economies have reduced GDP by upto 40% as in the case of St. Lucia and Tropical Storm Debby.Least developed countriesLeast developed countries (LDCs) are the poorestcountries in the world, officially designated assuch by the UN General Assembly. More than600 million people live in the 49 LDCs, half ofwhich are very disaster prone, and 32 of which arelocated in Africa. In 1981, when the concept of anLDC was articulated, there were only 30 suchcountries.The criteria for being an LDC are the following:• A low gross domestic product.• A low level of economic diversification.• Weak human resources, measured by lifeexpectancy, calorie intake, primary and secondaryschool enrolment and adult literacy.Three UN conferences have been dedicated toLDCs. All of them have recognised the disproportionallyhigh social and economic costs ofdisasters. The programme of action stemmingfrom the first two conferences focussed in this areaon the need to improve disaster response capacity,with some references to early warning capacities.However, during the third conference, held in2001, the focus had shifted to reducing vulnerabilityand developing disaster mitigationprogrammes.The programme of action for the least developedcountries for the decade 2001-2010 aims to forgestrong partnerships between north and south tosignificantly improve the human and economicconditions in the poorest countries of the world.The programme of action also includes a commitmentfor reducing vulnerability and protecting theenvironment. It suggests actions to strengthen institutionsand increase ownership for local stakeholdersin formulating a sustainable development policy.It encourages both LDCs and development partnersto involve the private sector in the areas ofdisaster mitigation and disaster preparedness. Italso encourages the involvement of local communitiesand NGOs in disaster mitigation, earlywarning systems and relief efforts. A reference ismade to the donor community to give priorityattention to the LDCs for implementing theprogramme set out within the International Strategyfor Disaster Reduction at national level.A special Trust Fund within the ONU is open forcontribution to support this action plan. Administratedby UNDRO.

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction66.2 UN agencies and scope of activitiesIntroductionThe United Nations system is a mosaic that reflects the complexity of activities to be conducted inorder to fulfil the objectives and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. It is composed ofprincipal organs, specialized agencies and other autonomous organizations carrying out specificmandates. Reducing vulnerability and risk to natural or man-made hazards is addressed by many entitiesof the United Nations system within the framework of their respective field of activities. By establishingthe International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) as the successor arrangement to theInternational Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR, 1990-2000), the internationalcommunity recognized the need for a consolidated and coordinated approach to disaster and riskreduction by concerned entities within and outside the United Nations system.The purpose of this section is to give an indication of how the parts of the United Nations systemfunction when it comes to disaster and risk reduction. It is a general overview, which does not includedisaster relief or emergency management activities. This brief assessment of the key players within theUnited Nations system and their action in disaster reduction seeks to demonstrate the potential forincreased coherence in this field and facilitate a targeted approach to the system by Governments andother entities.Graphic overview of the United Nations system in relation to disaster reductionOnly United Nations entities relevant to disaster reduction are mentioned. This overview is not intendedto illustrate a comprehensive explanation of the complete United Nations system or hierarchy.Principal organs of the United NationsGeneral AssemblyProgrammes and funds• United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP)• United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP)• World Food Programme(WFP)• United Nations Children'sFund (UNICEF)• United Nations HumanSettlements OProgramme(UNCHS/HABITAT)Economic and SocialCouncil• Functional commissions• Regional commissionsUnited Nations Secretariat• Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs (OCHA)− Inter-Agency Secretariar of theInternational Strategy for DisasterReduction (ISDR)• Department of Economic andSocial Affairs (DESA)- United Nations Centre forRegional Development(UNCRD)• Regional commission Secretariates• Office for Outer Space AffairsOther entities• United Nations University(UNU)• United Nations Institute forTraining and Research(UNITAR)• The United Nations Officefor Project ServicesSpecialized agencies• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)• International Labour Organization (ILO)• United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO)• World Health Organization (WHO)• World Bank• International Telecommunication Union (ITU)• World Meteorological Organization (WMO)301

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesPrincipal organs of the United Nations System concerned with disaster and risk reductionGeneral AssemblyThe General Assembly is the main deliberativeorgan of the United Nations and is composedof representatives of all Member States. Whilethe decisions of the Assembly expressed in resolutionshave no legally binding force forGovernments, they carry the weight of worldopinion as well as the moral authority of theworld community. Decisions of the Assemblyare based on documentation produced at itsrequest on reports from United Nations organs(i.e. Secretary-General's reports, reports fromUnited Nations conferences). Non-UnitedNations entities are widely consulted for thedrafting of these reports, which thereforeinclude an overview of issues at stake. TheAssembly's awareness of the necessity to reducethe impact of disasters began in 1971 when itadopted a resolution for the creation of theOffice of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator(UNDRO) for the improved coordinationof "assistance in cases of natural disasterand other disaster situations", including disastermitigation. In 1988 the Assembly endorsed theestablishment of a Disaster Management TrainingProgramme (DMTP), recommending theupgrading of professional skills in disastermanagement through inter-agency trainingprogrammes under the joint management of theUnited Nations Development Programme(UNDP) and UNDRO. The Assemblyrecognized the need to focus on disaster reductionas an activity in itself in 1987 and launchedthe International Decade for Natural DisasterReduction in 1989 followed by ISDR in 1999.Resolutions were also passed on the need forcooperation to reduce the impact of the ElNiño phenomenon (from 1997) and on earlywarning capacities of the United Nationssystem with regard to natural disasters (from1994). Disaster reduction is generallydiscussed under the segment Environment andSustainable Development in the SecondCommittee of the General Assembly. TheHumanitarian segment of the Assembly mighttouch upon the subject when related to humanitarianissues ("relief to development" isdiscussed in the Third Committee).Web site: www.un.org/ga/56/Economic and Social CouncilThe Economic and Social Council is the principal organcoordinating the economic, social and related work ofthe United Nations and has 54 members, elected forthree-year terms by the General Assembly. The Councilcooperates with, and to a certain extent also coordinates,the work of United Nations programmes (such as UntedNations Development Programme (UNDP), the UnitedNations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the UnitedNations Children's Fund (UNICEF)) and the specializedagencies (such as Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO), the International Labour Organization (ILO), theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) and the World Health Organization(WHO), all of which report to the Council. The UnitedNations, and the Economic and Social Council inparticular, are increasingly considering non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs), including academic institutions,private sector and other stakeholders, as partners andvaluable links to civil society. The Council has long sincerecognized that the promotion of economic growth andsustainable development cannot be achieved withoutadequate measures to prevent and reduce the impact ofnatural disasters. It has also consistently called for acoordinated approach to disaster reduction within andoutside the United Nations system. Decisions and resolutionsof the Council include recommendations to theGeneral Assembly on supporting efforts for the goodfunctioning of IDNDR and later on ISDR as well as onissues such as early warning and the El Niño phenomenon.Nine functional commissions and five regional commissionsare part of the Council's so-called machinery thatcarries out its work. The functional commissions, servicedby the United Nations Secretariat, are deliberativebodies whose role is to consider and make recommendationson issues in their areas of responsibility andexpertise. Two commissions are particularly relevant todisaster reduction: the Commission on SustainableDevelopment (CSD) and the Commission on the Statusof Women (CSW).Division for ECOSOC Support andCoordinationDepartment of Economic and Social Affairs1 UN Plaza, Room DC1-1428New York, NY 10017, United StatesE-mail: esa@un.orgWeb site: www.un.org/esa/coordination/desc.htm302

Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction6United Nations SecretariatThe United Nations Secretariat, headed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, servicesthe General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, and administers theprogrammes and policies laid down by them.ISDR, placed under the direct authority of the Under-Secretary-General for HumanitarianAffairs, is the only entity within the Secretariat entirely dedicated to disaster reduction. TheOffice for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the Department of Economic and SocialAffairs (DESA) and the secretariats of the regional commissions consider disaster reduction inrelation to their mandated activities. The United Nations Centre for Regional Development(UNCRD) also performs specific disaster reduction-related activities, in particular in its DisasterManagement Planning Hyogo Office in Kobe, Japan.The Inter-Agency Secretariat of theInternational Strategy for Disaster Reduction(UN/ISDR)Comprehensive information on the ISDRsecretariat can be found in the section onISDR (see pages 19- 20).ISDR secretariatPalais des NationsCH-1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 917 2759Fax: (+41-22) 917 0563E-mail: isdr@un.orgWeb site: www.unisdr.orgOffice for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs (OCHA)Formerly Department of Humanitarian Affairs(DHA), which in turn had replaced UNDROin 1992, OCHA is led by the Under-Secretary-Generalfor Humanitarian Affairs/EmergencyRelief Coordinator and located in NewYork and Geneva. OCHA aims at alleviatinghuman suffering by facilitating internationalcoordination for the effective and efficientdelivery of assistance to victims of natural andman-made disasters. While concentrating onthe response side of disasters, OCHA alsopromotes preparedness and prevention effortsto reduce vulnerability to natural disasters andassists the operational humanitarian agencies indeveloping common policies to improve planning,preparedness and response to naturaldisasters, particularly for protracted disasterssuch as drought. In this respect, the ResponseCoordination Branch (RCB) as well as the EmergencyServices Branch (ESB) collaborate closelywith UNDP and other relevant UnitedNations and non-United Nations programmesand agencies on activities such as improvinglinks with national authorities, implementinglessons learned and/or organizing seminars todiscuss coordination mechanisms. Moreover,the ISDR Secretariat in Geneva, OCHA andUNDP maintain periodic working meetingsto share information and engage in commonplans and activities related to disaster reduction.Working with the resident coordinator,the United Nations country team and throughits regional disaster response advisers, OCHAmaintains close contact with countries prone tonatural disasters before and between crises. TheRegional Disaster Response Advisers providetechnical, strategic and training assistance toGovernments, United Nations agencies andregional organizations in order to improvenatural disaster planning, response and postemergencyreconstruction efforts. Desk officersbased in Geneva monitor for each regionweather conditions, earthquake bulletins andthe news services for potential natural disastersas well as environmental and technologicalemergencies. The United Nations DisasterAssessment and Coordination (UNDAC) team isa stand-by instrument composed of nationalprofessionals drawn from Governments and/oragencies from around the globe and mobilizedwithin 24 hours to assist affected countries andthe United Nations resident coordinators inassessing damage and preparing recommendationsfor adequate support often including303

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives304actions towards disaster reduction. Administeredby OCHA, ReliefWeb (www.reliefweb.int)is an online source of information on humanitarianemergencies, including useful tools anddocumentation for disaster prevention such astime-critical situation reports, maps and financialcontribution tracking, searchable archivesof over 150,000 emergency response documentsand 15,000 links to country-specificbackground information. The Inter-AgencyStanding Committee (IASC), chaired by theUnder-Secretary General for HumanitarianAffairs/Emergency Relief Coordinator, bringstogether a wide range of United Nations andnon-United Nations humanitarian partners,including agencies, NGOs, and internationalorganizations such the Red Cross and RedCrescent Movement, to facilitate inter-agencydecision-making on the response to complexemergencies and natural disasters.Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian AffairsUnited NationsSecretariat BuildingNew York, NY 10017United StatesTel: (+1-212) 963 8528Fax: (+1-212) 963 9489Palais des Nations,CH-1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 917 2160Fax: (+41-22) 917 0020E-mail: ochagva@un.orgWeb site: www.reliefweb.intDepartment of Economic and Social Affairs(UN/DESA)This department is led by the Under-Secretary-Generalfor Economic and Social Affairsand is located in New York. The predecessorto DESA, the Department of Policy Coordinationand Sustainable Development, was createdas a result of the Earth Summit, held in Rio in1992. The DESA multidimensional programmepromotes broad-based and sustainabledevelopment through an integrated approachto economic, social, environmental, populationand gender-related aspects of development.The Department serves as the secretariat forthe Commission on Sustainable Developmentand is currently organizing the World Summiton Sustainable Development (Johannesburg,26 August-4 September 2002). The functionsof DESA include normative work, coordinationand policy advisory services supplementedby research and training. DESA activities areguided by the programmes and platforms ofaction adopted by major United Nationsconferences and summits, as well as theEconomic and Social Council machinery.Several divisions of the Department areconcerned with disaster reduction, particularlythe Division for Sustainable Development (DSD)with its Water, Natural Resources and SmallIslands Branch and the Division for theAdvancement of Women (DAW).Division for Sustainable Development: Themission of DSD is to facilitate the implementationof Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration onEnvironment and Development, the NonlegallyBinding Authoritative Statement ofPrinciples for a Global Consensus on theManagement, Conservation and SustainableDevelopment of All Types of Forests (alsoknown as the Forest Principles), and the GlobalProgramme of Action for SustainableDevelopment of Small Island DevelopingStates (SIDS). The Division carries out multiyearwork programmes on sustainable developmentindicators, with interest in expandingthe work on disaster reduction indicators.DSD provides substantive services to theEconomic and Social Council functionalcommission CSD. As such, it serves as thesecretariat for the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment. CSD was created inDecember 1992 and has 53 members forterms of office of three years. Its function is tofollow up on the Earth Summits.United NationsDepartment of Economic and Social AffairsDivision for Sustainable DevelopmentUnited Nations Plaza, Room DC2-2220New York, NY 10017, United StatesTel: (+1-212) 963 3170Fax: (+1-212) 963 4260E-mail: dsd@un.orgWeb sites: www.un.org/esa/sustdev/dsd.htmwww.johannesburgsummit.orgwww.sidsnet.org

Division for the Advancement ofWomen: DAW promotes and supports themainstreaming of a gender perspective intothe work of intergovernmental bodies, policyand programmes of departments andoffices of the United Nations Secretariatand the United Nations system at thenational and regional levels. The Divisionalso provides substantive servicing to theEconomic and Social Council functionalcommission, CSW, which is composed of 45members elected by the Council for a periodof four years.Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionActivities of this office include basic researchprogrammes for (a) the design of communitybasedprojects for disaster management planning;and (b) disaster management capacitybuildingintroducing best practices case studiesin developing countries. During the past threeyears, the Hyogo Office has developed, testedand evaluated tools that are now recognized asthe basic tools for disaster mitigation atcommunity level. The office closely cooperatedwith the IDNDR Secretariat in carrying outthe RADIUS (Risk Assessment Tools forDiagnosis of Urban Area against SeismicDisasters) Initiative (see page 75).6United NationsDivision for the Advancement of Women,DESA2 UN Plaza, DC2-12th FloorNew York, NY 10017, United StatesFax: (+1-212) 963 3463E-mail address: daw@un.orgWeb site: www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/United Nations Centre for RegionalDevelopment (UNCRD)The UNCRD head office, located in Nagoya,Japan, was created in 1971 and encouragesthrough its substantive programmes for trainingand research in regional development aswell as information dissemination. The Centrereports to DESA. Since 1992 the UNCRDAfrica Office based in Nairobi has beenmandated to carry out training and researchactivities, advisory services and informationexchange related to local and regional developmentin African countries. The UNCRDProject Office for Latin America and theCaribbean was established in Bogotá, Colombiain 1997, to carry out UNCRD activities inLatin America and the Caribbean. It conductedthree sub-regional workshops (1998) incollaboration with the Organization of AmericanStates (OAS) and the IDNDR secretariat,in order to assess sectoral needs in terms ofvulnerability and risk reduction to naturalhazards for sustainable cities and commercialcorridors.The Hyogo Office conducted research projectsin developing countries with specific focus onurban vulnerability to earthquakes at the predisasterstage (Global Earthquake Safety Initiative(GESI)) and on rural vulnerability toearthquakes at the post-disaster stage (rehabilitation).In the latter the Gujarat earthquake wasgiven special attention. In addition to theseyearly programmes the Hyogo Office has beeninvolved in developing a global database ofactive faults, and its possible hazards, in cooperationwith the Asian Disaster ReductionCenter (ADRC). It is also engaged in acommunity development project in KathmanduValley, Nepal, and a project promoting theconcept of a School Earthquake Safety Initiative(SESI).As part of the disaster educationcampaign, the Hyogo Office initiated a CultureExchange Programme between the high schoolstudents of Kathmandu, Nepal, and Kobe,Japan. The Office performed trainingprogrammes and capacity-building in urbanand rural communities, organized workshopsfor the dissemination of best practices, providedadvisory services and promoted networkingof different sectors of communities.UNCRD Web site: www.uncrd.or.jpDisaster Management Planning Hyogo OfficeIHD Centre Building, 3F,1-5-1 Wakihaka Kaigan-dori, Chuo-ku,Kobe 651-0073, JapanWeb site: www.hyogo.uncrd.or.jpThe UNCRD Disaster Management PlanningHyogo Office was established in Kobe,Hyogo Prefecture, in 1999 in the aftermath ofthe Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake of 1995.305

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesRegional CommissionsThe regional economic commissions werefounded by the Economic and Social Council forthe purposes of promoting greater economiccooperation within and between regions,contributing to the economic and social developmentof a region, coordinating actions directedtowards this end and reinforcing economic relationshipsamong the countries and with the othernations of the world. The five commissions arethe Economic Commission for Europe (ECE),the Economic and Social Commission for Asiaand the Pacific (ESCAP), the EconomicCommission for Latin America and theCaribbean (ECLAC), the Economic Commissionfor Africa (ECA) and the Economic andSocial Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA).The secretariats of these regional commissionsare part of the United Nations Secretariat andperform similar functions including disasterreduction activities, although adapted to theneeds and priorities of the region with whichthey are entrusted.The secretariat of the Economic and SocialCommission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)Headed by an Executive Secretary at the level ofUnder-Secretary-General of the United Nations,the ESCAP secretariat is located in Bangkok,Thailand. This Commission, comprising 52members and associate members, promotes capacity-buildingin developing countries andcontributes to the mainstreaming of disaster reductioninto sustainable development with particularfocus on water-related disasters, especially floods.Activities in this context include the organization ofseminars and training courses for flood control andmanagement, a regional overview of experiences inwater-related disaster management in Asia and aregional project for "strengthening capacity inparticipatory planning and management for floodmitigation and preparedness in large river basins".In cooperation with the World MeteorologicalOrganization (WMO), ESCAP conducted aregional survey, which has contributed to thestrengthening of regional cooperation in flood forecastingand disaster reduction. Similarly, ESCAPprovided advisory services to the secretariat of theMekong River Commission on the formulation ofthe regional strategy for flood management andmitigation.ESCAP secretariatThe United Nations BuildingRajadamnern Nok AvenueBangkok 10200, ThailandTel: (+66-2) 288 1234Fax: (+66-2) 288 1000Web site: www.unescap.orgThe secretariat of the Economic Commission forLatin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)The ECLAC secretariat, led by an ExecutiveSecretary, is based in Santiago de Chile with subregionalheadquarters in Mexico City and Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, country offices inBogotá, Brasilia, Buenos Aires and Montevideoand a liaison office in Washington, D.C. TheCommission, with its 41 member States and sevenassociate members, plays an active role in disasterreduction, concentrating especially on the socioeconomicimpact of natural and other relatedhazards. In this context, ECLAC organized aseries of inter-agency assessment studies on themacroeconomic impact of natural disasters in theregion since the earthquake in Managua in 1972,including the 1999 floods and landslides inVenezuela, the earthquakes in Colombia (1999) andin El Salvador (2001), Hurricanes Georges, Mitch(1998) and Keith (2000), as well as climatic variationslike the El Niño current's effects (1997-1998)and the severe drought that affected Central Americain 2001 and the earthquake of El Salvador in2001. ECLAC has over the years developed amethodology to assess the impact of disasters ondevelopment including an environmental impactanalysis, a gender perspective and a comprehensiveanalysis of the macroeconomic impact of disastersand its effect on reconstruction plans. Currently,this methodology is being disseminated with thesupport of organizations such as the Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank, the Pan American HealthOrganization (PAHO)/WHO and the WorldBank and training is being provided for its use.ECLAC is also advancing the development ofindicators of vulnerability and risk, in terms ofmeasuring the economic, social and environmentalimpact of extreme natural phenomena. In additionto these activities, the Commission has implementedtraining programmes for small island developingstates vulnerable to hurricanes through itsregional office for the Caribbean.306

ECLAC secretariat headquartersCasilla de Correo 179-D, Santiago de ChileTel: (+56-2) 210 2000/208 5051Fax: (+56-2) 208 0252E-mail: jaocampo@eclac.clWeb site: www.eclac.clwww.eclac.cl/mexico/Office for Outer Space Affairs (OOSA)Work of the General Assembly is also carried out bybodies it has established to study and report on specificissues. In this respect, the United Nations Office forOuter Space Affairs (OOSA), based in Vienna andlinked to the United Nations Committee on the PeacefulUses of Outer Space (COPUOS), has developed andis implementing a programme for an IntegratedSpace Application System for Disaster Management,in cooperation with a number of United Nationsagencies and programmes as well as other entitiessuch as the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites(CEOS). This activity is carried out in response to thecall for implementing an integrated global systemcapable of using space applications and space-basedservices for disaster mitigation, relief and prevention(UNISPACE III Conference). Space technologiescan play important roles in the reduction of disasters.Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionThe use of such technologies can be particularlyuseful in the risk assessment, mitigation andpreparedness phases of disaster management. Spacetechnologies are also vital to the early warning andmanagement of the effects of disasters. For developingcountries to be able to incorporate the routine useof space technology-based solutions there is a need toincrease awareness, build national capacity and alsodevelop solutions that are customized and appropriateto the needs of the developing world. OOSA isfocusing on the definition and successful transfer ofsuch solutions by holding Regional Workshops(Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and theCaribbean) on the Use of Space Technology forDisaster Management. A regional plan of action willthen be defined leading to the definition and implementationof pilot projects that will incorporate andrefine the use of space technology for disastermanagement.Office for Outer Space Affairs (OOSA)United Nations Office at ViennaA-1400 Vienna, AustriaTel: (+43-1) 260 60 4950 Fax: (+43-1)260 60 5830E-mail: oosa@oosa.un.or.at Web site:www.oosa.unvienna.org/SAP/stdm/index.html6307

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSpecialized agencies and other autonomous organizations and disaster reductionOrganizations and agencies part of the United Nations system carry out active programmes insupport of disaster reduction and many of them have strengthened their disaster reductioncapacity in their respective areas of competence during recent years. All agencies andprogrammes work with national or local authorities and in many cases with civil society organizationsand groups.308Programmes and fundsUnited Nations Development ProgrammeThe overarching mission of UNDP is to helpcountries build national capacity to achievesustainable human development. TheProgramme is giving top priority to the eliminationof poverty and the building of equity byproviding development advice, advocacy andgrant support. UNDP, with headquarters inNew York and specific functions in Geneva,delivers most of its services through its 132country offices, supported by regional bureaux,specialized programmes and trust funds. In eachcountry office, the UNDP resident representativenormally also serves as the resident coordinatorfor the United Nations system as a whole.UNDP is the most substantive United Nationsprogramme to promote and support the implementationof risk and vulnerability reduction indeveloping countries. In 1997, a GeneralAssembly decision transferred the responsibilitiesof the Emergency Relief Coordinator (headof OCHA) for operational activities for naturaldisaster mitigation, prevention and preparednessto UNDP while OCHA retained its coordinationfunction of international relief operations.UNDP has been a member of the ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force for Disaster Reduction sinceits inception and chairs the Working Group onRisk, Vulnerability and Impact Assessment.The UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention andRecovery (BCPR)-formerly known as theEmergency Response Division (ERD)-is the inhousemechanism set up to provide a quickerand more effective response in Countries inSpecial Development Situations (CSDS)through the provision of services. As part ofBCPR, the Geneva-based Disaster Reductionand Recovery Programme (DRRP) focuses onpromoting and supporting capacity-buildingand/or strengthening of appropriate regionalorganizations, national authorities and institutionsfor mitigation, prevention and preparednessof natural, technological/industrial andenvironmental disasters, through a structure ofregional advisers. Main functions of DRRPinclude support to preventive development andtraining by:• Assessing vulnerability to crises and naturaldisasters;• Establishing early warning systems;• Developing and maintaining a framework ofdevelopmental responses and other contingencydisaster plans;• Forming and strengthening country UnitedNations disaster management teams;• Integrating disaster preparedness, mitigation,prevention and response programmes intonational development programmes;• Regular reporting and updating of importantdevelopments in CSDS, as a part of the earlywarning process;• Contributing to human resource developmentby improving capabilities in risk and vulnerabilityanalyses; planning for contingencies;designing responsive structures; implementingprevention and mitigation strategies fordisaster and crisis.BCPR New YorkUNDP-1 UN PlazaNew York, NY 10017, United StatesTel: (+1-212) 906 5194Fax: (+1-212) 906 5379E-mail: erd@undp.orgWeb site: www.undp.org/erd/disred/index.htmBCPR Geneva11 Chemin des Anémones, ChâtelaineCH-1219 Geneva, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 917 8540Fax: (+41-22) 917 8060E-mail: erd.gva@undp.orgWeb site:www.undp.org/erd/disred/index.htm

The UNDP Drylands Development Centreformerly the Office to Combat Desertificationand Drought (UNSO) -moved to Nairobi inearly 2002. The Centre is responsible forpromoting sound dryland management anddevelopment as well as drought preparednessand mitigation as part of sustainable humandevelopment. UNSO has been an advocate ofthe United Nations Convention to Combat Desertificationand Drought (UNCCD) and providestechnical and catalytic financial support toaffected countries for the implementation of theConvention.UNDP Drylands Development CentreUnited Nations Avenue-GigiriP.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, KenyaTel: (+254-2) 62 20 57Fax: (+254-2) 62 46 48E-mail: unso@undp.orgWeb site: www.undp.org/seed/unsoCapacity 21 is a trust fund launched by UNDPafter the Rio Earth Summit of 1992, whichworks with countries to build skills and aknowledge base to implement the principles ofsustainable development as outlined in Agenda21. Capacity 21 promotes a partnership forincreased coping capacity to deal with naturaldisasters in small island developing States, inthe framework of the World Summit onSustainable Development and the BarbadosPlan of Action. www.undp.org/capacity21/United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP)UNEP is the leading global environmentalauthority and promotes the coherent implementationof the environmental dimension ofsustainable development within the UnitedNations. The Programme is based in Nairobi,Kenya, and counts several regional and thematicoffices and programmes around the world.The UNEP Governing Council identifiedincreasing environmental emergencies as one ofthe environmental threats that needed to beaddressed and emphasized the important rolethe Programme played globally in the areas ofemergency prevention, preparedness, assessment,mitigation and response. Through itsRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionDisaster Management Branch in Nairobi, part ofthe Division for Environment Policy Implementation(DEPI), UNEP has developed a strategicframework on emergency prevention, preparedness,assessment, mitigation and response withand agenda for action which serve as basis for thedevelopment and implementation ofprogrammes on disaster reduction at the national,subregional, regional and global levels.Further, has carried out a number of activitiesaimed at reducing the impact of natural and otherrelated environmental and technological disastersin furtherance of the objectives of ISDR. It is amember of the ISDR Inter-Agency Task Forcefor Disaster Reduction and chairs the TaskForce's Working Group on Early Warning. Italso has a joint unit with OCHA in Geneva toassist countries in responding to a variety of environmentalemergencies.In line with its role in environmental monitoring,assessment and early warning, the UNEP Divisionfor Early Warning and Assessment (DEWA)has launched a Global Environment Outlook(GEO) report series which contains baselineinformation on environmental emerging issuesand threats, as well as policies being implementedat the global and regional levels.www.unep.org/DEWA.The UNEP Global Resource Information Database(GRID) is a global network of environmentalinformation centres and aims at providing andfacilitating access to environmental data andinformation for decision-making and policysetting. It underpins the UNEP review of thestate of the world's environment and providesearly warning on environmental hazards. TheUNEP.Net partnership, a global informationnetwork, offers access to distributed and remotedatabases from different institutions to developcomprehensive and local solutions, often relyingon best practices from various regions and countriesof the world.United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP)United Nations Avenue, Gigiri,P.O.Box 30552,Nairobi 00100,KenyaTel: (254 2) 621234Fax: (254 2) 624489/90Email(generic): firstname.secondname@unep.orgWeb site: www.unep.org3096

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesThe UNEP Awareness and Preparedness forEmergencies at a Local Level (APELL), basedat the Industry and Environment Office inParis, is a programme serving as a tool fordisaster prevention and preparedness and raisespublic awareness of the need to reduce environmentalemergencies and damage. It seeks tominimize, particularly in developing countries,the occurrence and harmful effects of technologicalaccidents and emergencies resultingfrom human activity or as the consequence ofnatural disasters.Web site:ww.uneptie.org/pc/apell/disasters/disasters.htmlWorld Food Programme (WFP)WFP is mandated by the United Nations tocombat global hunger. Based in Rome, Italy,the Programme counts 85 country offices andeight regional offices to assist populations inneed. As the food-aid arm of the UnitedNations, WFP meets emergency needs,provides the necessary logistics to deliver foodand supports economic and social developmentby promoting policies, strategies and operationsfor the benefit of the poor and hungry.WFP has been a member of the ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force on Disaster Reductionsince its inception in 2000.In 1999 the WFP key strategy document entitledEnabling Development identified disastermitigation as one of the five priority areas ofaction with a focus on reduction of the impactof natural hazards on food security for vulnerablepopulations. A steering committee for disastermitigation was established to assist countryand regional offices to integrate disaster mitigationactivities into their developmentprogrammes. The WFP dual mandate fordevelopment and emergencies results in developmentactivities designed to facilitate potentialemergency response. Guidelines on disastermitigation have been prepared and field-testedin pilot country offices. The formalization ofthe WFP role in disaster mitigation is reflectedin the new generation of programming documents.In 2000 already nine of the 11 CountryStrategy Outlines and Country Programmesthat were approved by the Executive Board hadincluded disaster mitigation activities. Forexample, WFP is supporting water harvestingin Sudan to decrease the impact of drought onrural livelihoods. In Tanzania, the WFP CountryProgramme is using food-for-work activitiesto create assets, such as grain stores and accessroads, in order to improve long-term food securityand decrease the vulnerability of householdsto drought.The WFP emphasis on early warning andcontingency planning includes collaborationwith the Framework Team based in New Yorkand the WFP Vulnerability and AnalysisMapping Unit (VAM). The Office of theHumanitarian Adviser (OHA) is responsiblefor coordinating the overall contingency planningprocess, while the Augmented LogisticsIntervention Team for Emergencies (ALITE)collates specific logistics-based contingencyplanning information such as logistics capacityassessments (LCAs).WFPVia C.G. Viola 68Parco dei Medici00148 Rome, ItalyTel: (+39-06) 65131Fax: (+39-06) 6513 2840E-mail: wfpinfo@wfp.orgWeb site: www.wfp.orgUnited Nations Children's Fund(UNICEF)UNICEF headquarters are based in NewYork. UNICEF has regional offices and countryoffices in 162 countries and territoriesaround the world. The UNICEF mandate toprotect and improve the well-being of the mostvulnerable groups, children and women,anywhere in the world, by definition, includesthe aspect of disaster preparedness and prevention.By supporting empowerment of communitiesat the local level and capacity-building atthe national level, UNICEF programmesenhance abilities to deal with disasters and tomitigate the negative effects of disasters. Policyand procedural guidelines for UNICEFstaff in emergencies include both emergencyresponse and preparedness/prevention activities.310

The foundation of UNICEF action lies in itslong-term country programme approach andits development orientation. Recognizing thecentral importance of building capacity andself-reliance for effective and sustainable assistanceand reducing the vulnerability of childrento future disasters, UNICEF aims toenhance rather than supply locally availableresources and mechanisms. The maximuminvolvement of individuals, communities andlocal and national institutions is stressed at alllevels of UNICEF development and emergencyaction.Following the recommendation of the YokohamaStrategy to include disaster reductioninto national development plans, UNICEFprogramme and policy guidance includesincorporation of disaster reduction elementsinto country programmes in disaster-pronecountries. Vulnerability and capacity assessmentin relation to natural hazards is beingintroduced as an integral part of the situationanalysis process at the country level.UNICEF cooperates with UNDP as part ofthe United Nations country teams at the countrylevel in support of disaster preparednessactivities in national development plans.UNICEF is playing an important role in tacklingboth analysis and capacity-buildingnationally and in the empowerment of communities.Selected programmes in disaster-pronecountries enhance abilities to respond to immediateneeds and to mitigate the negative effectsof disasters. For example, a major thrust ofUNICEF emergency assistance in a numberof emergency countries is the development andinstitutionalization of local capacities for disasterpreparedness and management.In order to ensure adequate levels of preparednessfor effective response in emergencies,UNICEF country and regional offices carryout preparedness planning as part of theirplanning and programming process. Preparednessplanning includes risk assessment identifyingall types of risks from natural hazards toeconomic distress and civil conflicts.In addition to viewing support to sustainabledevelopment as the key element for disasterreduction, UNICEF country offices in differentparts of the world are involved in specificactivities geared towards improved awarenessof potential natural disasters. These activitiesRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductioninclude development of education and awarenessmaterials and campaigns for children andadults. UNICEF collaborates closely with theISDR secretariat outpost in Costa Rica andthey have jointly developed educational andawareness materials available on the web sitesof both organizations.UNICEFUNICEF House3 United Nations PlazaNew York, NY 10017, United StatesTel: (+1-212) 326 7000Fax: (+1-212) 887 7465Web site: www.unicef.orgUnited Nations Human SettlementsProgramme (UN-HABITAT)UN-HABITAT promotes socially and environmentallysustainable human settlementsdevelopment, good urban governance and theachievement of adequate shelter for all. It isbased in Nairobi, Kenya, and is assisted bythree regional (Brazil, Japan and Kenya) andseveral liaison and information offices worldwide.The Programme has been a member ofthe ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force for DisasterReduction since 2002.The establishment of ISDR coincided with theconsolidation of the process of restructuringcarried out by UN-HABITAT. A key componentof this process was the consolidation of theRisk and Disaster Management Programme(RDMP) and the establishment of the Disaster,Post-Conflict and Safety Section (DPCSS)to cater for an increasing demand frommember countries for technical support,normative and policy tools and field operationalcapacity concerning disaster prevention,mitigation and post-disaster rehabilitation inhuman settlements, as well as on issues relatedto urban safety. UN-HABITAT disaster-relatedactivities focus in particular on the physicaland management components of shelter, infrastructureand service, with priority given toactivities at the local level. Emphasis is given tothe development of training and technicalsupport programmes to increase the capacity oflocal authorities and communities forimproved disaster and human settlements3116

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesmanagement in a context of good local governance.UN-HABITAT is an active partner ofISDR, especially in the areas of land and urbanmanagement, impact assessment and capacitybuilding.Processes such as the GlobalCampaigns on Urban Governance and forSecure Tenure constitute important opportunitiesto promote disaster reduction in urbanareas and strengthen collaboration with localauthorities.RDMP under DPCSS is a programme establishedto strengthen UN-HABITAT capacityto deliver technical cooperation and capacitybuildingservices with a focus on direct countrysupport, with the objective of helpingvulnerable communities and human settlementsto reduce vulnerability and bettermanage the effects of disasters and conflict.RDMP provides support to national governments,local authorities and communities inclose cooperation with UN-HABITAT technicalcooperation units and other specializedprogrammes. As part of its normative functions,RDMP develops and disseminatesmanagement tools and capacity-building activities.Its operational activities deliver directsupport to national and local partners through:• Technical advisory missions upon requestby Governments and external supportagencies;• Execution of assessments in disasterprone/hitand post-conflict countries;• Identification, design, technical backstoppingand follow-up of operational projectsin response to countries' demands;• Participation in donor consultations andnegotiations for the provision of externalsupport to affected countries;• Assessment of global and regionaldemands for support on disasters andhuman settlements management and thedesign and implementation ofglobal/regional projects and methodologicalapproaches through collaboration withcountries and other external support agencies.UN-HABITATP.O. Box 30030, Nairobi, KenyaTel: (+254-2) 621 234Fax: (+254-2) 624 266/624 267E-mail: habitat@unhabitat.orgWeb site: www.unhabitat.org312

Specialized agenciesFood and Agriculture Organization (FAO)The FAO general mandate is to raise the levelsof nutrition and standards of living, to improveagricultural productivity and to better thecondition of rural populations. Based in Rome,Italy, FAO has engaged itself to help buildinga food-secure world for present and futuregenerations over the next 15 years, as adoptedin its Strategic Framework (2000). FAOcounts five regional and five subregionaloffices and about 80 country offices workingdirectly with member countries and otherdevelopment partners at national level to coordinateinterventions including with regard todisaster management. FAO is a member of theISDR Task Force for Disaster Reduction andparticipates actively in its working groups.The World Food Summit of 1996 mandatedFAO, among others, to assist member countriesdevelop national food insecurity andvulnerability information and mapping systems(FIVIMS), based on the existing national foodsecurity information systems, many of whichwere established with FAO assistance, with aview to halving malnutrition by 2015 andreducing food insecurity and rural poverty,which includes disaster preparedness as well aseffective and sustainable responses to food andagricultural emergencies. FAO developed animportant strategy of which the key componentis to strengthen the capacity of communitiesand local institutions in preparing for andaddressing natural disasters, recognizing thatgenerally the resource-poor are the mostvulnerable while the people most severelyaffected by disasters are often those living inrural areas. In order to reduce disruption ofagricultural and food systems, this strategicobjective focuses on:• Strengthening disaster preparedness andmitigating the impact of emergencies thataffect food security and the productivecapacities of rural populations;• Forecasting and providing early warningof adverse conditions in the food and agriculturalsectors, and of impeding foodemergencies;• Strengthening programmes for agriculturalrelief and rehabilitation, and facilitatingthe transition from emergency relief toRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionreconstruction and development in foodand agriculture; and• Strengthening local capacities and copingmechanisms by guiding the choice of agriculturalpractices, technologies andsupport services to reduce vulnerabilityand enhance resilience.Through its normative and operationalprogrammes, FAO assists and provides technicalassistance to member States in the developmentand implementation of disaster preventionprogrammes and preparedness plans, inorder to reduce the vulnerability of agriculturalproduction systems to disasters. FAO,through its World Agricultural InformationCentre (WAICENT), develops and maintainsa web site on disaster-related activities toprovide access to disaster reduction informationand has mobilized international supportthrough its Global Information and EarlyWarning System (GIEWS). This systemmonitors food supply and demand around theworld, provides policy makers and analystswith up-to-date information on crop prospectsand gives early warning on imminent foodcrises. FAO has upgraded its capability toprovide an operational service on environmentalinformation through an Advanced Real-Time Environmental Monitoring InformationSystem (ARTEMIS) using satellite remotesensing data. Moreover, the FAO Environmentand Natural Resources Service of theSustainable Development Department developsvarious spatial information infrastructureand databases and uses integrated remote sensingand geographic information systems forsustainable development planning, includingdisaster impact assessments and mapping ofrisk and vulnerability to natural hazards.For the sake of reducing impacts of disasterson rural poverty and food insecurity, FAOassists member countries in the adoption ofsustainable agricultural and land-use systems.The FAO Land and Water DevelopmentDivision plays an important role in reversingdegradation and reducing vulnerability todisasters through promoting the developmentof sustainable and resilient agro-ecosystemsand the efficient, productive and environmentallysound use of land and water resources.Integrated planning and management of landresources are an essential prerequisite to implementingthe multiple national action plans and3136

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives314sectoral strategies that emanated from theAgenda 21 process and related conventionsand thereby to achieving sustainable agriculturaland rural development.The Special Programme for Food Security(SPFS) assists low-income food deficit countriesin improving food security both at national and athousehold levels, through rapid increases in foodproduction and productivity, by reducing year-toyearvariability in production and by improvingpeople's access to food. Chronic malnutrition andfood insecurity can be caused by high seasonal andyear-to-year variability in food supplies, often theresult of unreliable rainfall and insufficient waterfor crop and livestock production. Communitycentrednutrition programmes will strengthenlivelihood resilience to natural disaster throughincreased household food security, better healthand appropriate care for vulnerable individuals(small children, pregnant and lactating women,elderly people, the chronically sick and disabled).The FAO Emergency Coordination Group,chaired by the Assistant Director-General of theDepartment of Technical Cooperation, is theorganizational mechanism for the overall coordinationof emergency and disaster reduction-relatedissues. An interdisciplinary process has beenestablished within FAO to strengthen its capacityto address disaster prevention, mitigation andpreparedness and post-emergency relief and rehabilitationin a more integrated way, together withmember countries and partners. The areas ofattention initially identified include:• The preparation of a disaster managementdatabase;• The development of a guide for emergencyneeds assessment and guidance onmanagement of food and agriculturalemergencies; and• The development of strategies and capacity-buildingon drought mitigation, includinga regional workshop and programmedevelopment on capacity-building indrought mitigation.FAOViale Delle Terme di Caracalla00100 Rome, ItalyTel: (+39-06) 5705 5583Fax: (+39-06) 5705 3369E-mail: Changchui.He@fao.orgWeb site: www.fao.orgUnited Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO)UNESCO has its headquarters in Paris,France, and 73 field offices and units in differentparts of the world. The main objective ofUNESCO is to contribute to peace and securityin the world by promoting collaborationamong nations through education, science,culture and communication in order to furtheruniversal respect for justice, for the rule of lawand for human rights and fundamental freedoms.UNESCO is a member of the ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force for Disaster Reduction andpromotes activities aimed at developing abetter scientific understanding of the occurrenceand distribution of disasters in time andspace in respect of natural hazards and themitigation of their effects. It contributedactively to IDNDR. UNESCO is also activein the area of educational material developmentto raise public awareness and facilitate publicinformation and the provision of technicaladvice on the hazard resistant construction ofschools and the protection of cultural heritage.The UNESCO scientific and technical contributionto disaster reduction is promoted underthe Organization's natural hazardsprogrammes in the Earth sciences and buildson its five intergovernmental and internationalscientific programmes: the InternationalGeological Correlation Programme, the InternationalHydrological Programme, the Manand Biosphere Programme, the IntergovernmentalOceanographic Commission (IOC)and the Management of Social TransformationsProgramme (MOST). The GlobalOcean Observing System (GOOS) hosted inIOC provides a framework to coordinatesystematic observations of the world's oceans.Both the Medium-Term Strategy (2002-2007)and the Programme and Budget for 2002-2003 include provisions for an interdisciplinaryprogramme related to natural disasterreduction.UNESCO7 place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07-SP, FranceTel: (+33-1) 45 68 10 00Fax: (+33-1) 45 67 16 90Web site: www.unesco.org

World Health Organization (WHO)WHO is the United Nations specializedagency with responsibility for health. WHO isa decentralized organization with about 150country offices worldwide and six regionaloffices in Africa, the Americas, the EasternMediterranean region, Europe, South-EastAsia and the Western Pacific. Its headquartersare based in Geneva, Switzerland. The purposeof WHO presence at country level is to assistmember States to achieve sustainable nationalhealth policy goals and to draw on the experienceof individual countries to build publichealth knowledge that benefits the rest of theworld. WHO has been a member of the ISDRTask Force for Disaster Reduction since 2002.WHO works at country, regional and globallevels for disaster mitigation, emergencypreparedness and response, as well as for advocacyfor health and humanitarian action. Failureon the part of the health sector to be institutionallyprepared is particularly costly, notonly in terms of lives lost, but also technicallyand politically. WHO aims to achieve a reductionof avoidable death and illness that resultfrom any type of natural or man-made disasterand to ensure that member States and theinternational community are equipped toprevent disasters and mitigate their healthconsequences, in synergy between relief andsustainable development. WHO applies theepidemiological method and the public healthmodel to emergency management and disasterreduction. Risk reduction, preparedness andresponse against epidemics are responsibilitiesof WHO.More specifically, WHO focuses on strengtheninghealth systems for preparedness andresponse against all types of disaster. Trainingis provided to Ministries of Health and theirstaff in preparedness and response, as well asfor the development of emergency contingencyplans. WHO distributes guidelines, publicationsand audio-visual material on applyingbest public health practices in preparing forand assessing the impact of disasters. TheWHO early health assessment and healthintelligence web site provides situational informationincluding baseline statistics, health situationreports and epidemiological surveillancedata.Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionThe health sector does not exist in isolation andmust cooperate with other groups involved inthe overall framework for emergencypreparedness and establish priorities in accordancewith the overall disaster response plan.WHO has several collaborating centresaround the world, whose work is related todisaster reduction, including the Centre forResearch on the Epidemiology of Disasters(CRED), School of Public Health at theUniversity of Louvain in Brussels. In LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, there is the Schoolof Public Health at the University of Antioquia,Colombia, for higher education in disastermanagement issues and the Faculty ofEngineering of the University of Chile fordisaster mitigation in hospitals and health services.WHOGeneva, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 791 2750Fax: (+41-22) 791 4844E-mail: lorettia@who.intWeb site: www.who.int/disastersThe WHO Regional Office for the Americas,the Pan-American Health Organization(PAHO), is the most active WHO office inthe area of disaster reduction. PAHO is alsopart of the inter-American system and theoffice has been active in reducing the impact ofnatural and other related environmental andtechnological disasters in the Americas and theCaribbean since the mid-seventies. PAHOwas a close collaborator and contributor toIDNDR in Latin America and the Caribbean.The PAHO disaster preparedness programmehas three subregional offices (Barbados, CostaRica and Quito). PAHO contributes to institutionalstrengthening by supporting thecreation and enhancement of disasterprogrammes in the Ministries of Health in allcountries of the region and promotes coordinationwith other sectors involved in disasterreduction. It organizes workshops on allaspects of disaster management for the benefitof professionals dealing with disaster reduction.In addition, PAHO encourages universitiesthroughout the region to incorporatedisaster management in their formal curriculum.The preparation and distribution of trainingmaterials have been a cornerstone of theprogramme. Over the last two decades this6315

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeseffort has produced a considerable body oftechnical material (publications, slides andvideo programmes). Print copies are distributedfree of charge to institutions dealing withdisaster mitigation in member countries andelectronic copies are also made available on theInternet for worldwide access. PAHO worksat the highest level in member countries toensure that disaster mitigation becomes anintegral part of national disaster reductionprogrammes. Special programmes to developtechnical guidelines and political support tovulnerability assessments and disaster mitigationfor water systems and health services havebeen developed over the last decade.PAHO has a letter of understanding with theISDR Secretariat, in which both parties haveagreed on a number of measures to strengthencooperation in priority areas for the region,such as the publication of studies, joint lessonslearnedexercises and the strengthening of theRegional Disaster Information Centre(CRID), a regional multi-organization consortiumformed by the Coordinating Centre forthe Prevention of Natural Disasters in CentralAmerica (CEPREDENAC), Costa Rica's :National Risk Prevention and EmergencyResponse Commission (CNE), the InternationalFederation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties (IFRC), ISDR, Médecins sansfrontières (MSF) and PAHO/WHO.PAHO, in collaboration with ISDR, is workingon the implementation of a developmentplan for CRID in San José, Costa Rica. ISDRand PAHO have also agreed to increase accessto disaster information, exchange and networkingamong countries and organizations in theregion, through the joint support of CRID andnational and subregional disaster informationnetworks, including the Caribbean DisasterInformation Network.PAHOWashington, D.C., United StatesTel: (+1-202) 974 3434Fax: (+1-202) 974 3663E-mail: poncelej@paho.orgWeb site: www.paho.org/disasterswww.disaster.netWorld Meteorological Organization(WMO)Based in Geneva, Switzerland, WMO coordinatesglobal scientific activity to allow increasinglyprompt and accurate weather informationand other services for public, private andcommercial use. WMO activities contribute tothe safety of life and property, the socioeconomicdevelopment of nations and theprotection of the environment.WMO participated actively in the implementationof IDNDR and is now a member of theISDR Inter-Agency Task Force for DisasterReduction. It supports the work of its workinggroups, in particular those on Climate andDisaster Reduction (for which it has leadresponsibility), on Early Warning and onVulnerability and Risk Assessment. TheWMO constituent bodies, including theCongress and the Executive Council, followand provide guidance on the policy, scientificand technical aspects of the implementation ofISDR objectives at the regional and globallevels.As nearly three-quarters of all natural disastersare related to weather and climate, WMO hasa number of scientific and technicalprogrammes related to the mitigation of naturaldisasters supported by the participation ofNational Meteorological and HydrologicalServices (NMHSs) and a number of RegionalSpecialized Meteorological Centres (RSMCs)worldwide. The WMO World Weather Watch(WWW) programme coordinates the preparationand distribution of weather, climate andhydrological data, analyses and forecast productsto all nations. The WMO TropicalCyclone Programme promotes the establishmentof national and regionally coordinatedsystems to ensure effective preparedness so thatthe loss of life and damage caused by tropicalcyclones and associated phenomena arereduced to a minimum. The WMO PublicWeather Services (PWS) programme supportsNMHSs in disaster reduction planning byproviding a variety of routine forecasts andinformation to enhance the social and economicwell-being of nations. The World ClimateProgramme (WCP) provides an authoritative316

international scientific voice on climate, climatevariations and climate change. WCP hasprovided advanced climate database managementsystems to many countries, with applicationsin several areas of disaster mitigation,especially drought. WMO continues to assistits members in the development of techniquesto assess and combat drought, desertificationand other extreme events through its agriculturalmeteorology programme. Through itsleadership of the ISDR Working Group onClimate and Disaster Reduction, WMOcontributes to the review of sectoral systemswithin and outside the United Nations thatmonitor climate sensitive emergencies. Ofparticular interest are the monitoring andprediction of climate-related natural disastersassociated with the El Niño and La Niñaphenomena. The World Weather ResearchProgramme (WWRP) is aimed at developingimproved and cost-effective techniques forforecasting high-impact weather and atpromoting their applications among countries.The Hydrology and Water ResourcesProgramme assists the national hydrologicalservices of member countries to assess the riskof, and forecast, water-related hazards, inparticular major floods and droughts.WMO7 bis avenue de la PaixCH-1211 Geneva 2, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 730 8315Fax: (+41-22) 733 2829/730 8027E-mail: ipa@gateway.wmo.chWeb site: http://www.wmo.chThe World Bank GroupRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionThe World Bank Group, based in Washington,D.C., United States, is one of theworld's largest sources of development assistance.It works in more than 100 developingcountries. The World Bank Group consistsof five closely associated institutions, allowned by member countries that carry ultimatedecision-making power. Each institutionplays a distinct role in the mission tofight poverty. The term "World Bank" refersspecifically to the International Bank forReconstruction and Development (IBRD)and the International Development Association(IDA). IBRD provides loans anddevelopment assistance to middle-incomecountries and creditworthy poorer countries.It is not a profit-maximizing organizationbut has earned a net income every year since1948, which is used to fund several developmentalactivities. The World Bank considersdisaster reduction as an element in the fightagainst poverty linked to environmentalmanagement. In order to advance the goalof reducing the impact of disasters advocatedby ISDR, the World Bank updated itsstrategies and procedures to promote proactiveways to integrate disaster preventionand mitigation into its development work.IBRD, through its Disaster ManagementFacility (DMF), is a member of the InteragencyTask Force on Disaster Reduction.DMF was established in July 1998 topromote disaster risk management as apriority issue for poverty reduction. DMFhas worked actively to promote the integrationof risk analysis into project design andthe inclusion of effective prevention andmitigation measures into the Bank's CountryAssistance Strategies. The staff has beentrained to design safer investments empoweringcommunities to reduce their vulnerabilityto disasters. Furthermore, disaster riskmanagement is being mainstreamed into theBank's development efforts. Reconstructionprojects, such as those carried out in theaftermath of the earthquake in Turkey, ofHurricane Mitch in Central America and ofthe January 2001 earthquake in Gujarat,India, have been designed to go beyondmere rebuilding and to focus on how torebuild in a better way to strengthenresilience to future disasters. Along thesame lines, DMF pilot efforts are graduallybeing incorporated into Bank operations. Agood example of this approach is in Mexicowhere, following a DMF case study toassess the capacity of the country to managedisaster risk, the Government requested theBank to prepare a project aimed at reducingdisaster losses.The Bank is also working closely with itspartners through the ProVention Consortium,which serves as mechanism for thevarious partners to combine efforts to gener-6317

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives318ate evidence on the economic and financialimpact of disasters on longer-term development,to develop methodologies and standardsfor conducting damage and needsassessments following a disaster, tostrengthen communities' resilience to theimpact of disasters and to identify innovationsin risk transfer and financing.The World Bank1818 H Street, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20433, United StatesTel: (+1-202) 473 1000Fax: (+1-202) 477 6391Web sites: w.worldbank.org/html/extdr/backgrd/ibrd/www.worldbank.org/dmfwww.proventionconsortium.orgInternational Labour Organization (ILO)ILO is the United Nations agency specializedin matters related to labour and seeks thepromotion of social justice and internationallyrecognized human and labour rights. ILO isbased in Geneva, Switzerland.In 1999, to address the new trends characterizedby globalization, socially and environmentallysustainable growth patterns and the consequenceof economic reforms and structuraladjustment in many developing countries,ILO established a special In-FocusProgramme on Crisis Response and Reconstruction(IFP/Crisis) that concentrates onvarious types of crises including natural disasters.The Programme is implementing the ILODecent Work approach-emphasizing employment-tolay the foundations for crisis prevention,by promoting employment and creatingthe conditions for long-term reintegration,reconstruction, economic growth and sociopoliticalstability. Activities of the Programmerelated to disaster reduction include:• Knowledge development-ILO knowledgein crisis situations is continuouslyreviewed, updated and expanded with thelatest data and analyses. Links arestrengthened with ILO technical unitsand field offices, external research institutionsand crisis practitioners worldwide;• Tools development-Ready-made guidelinesand standard packages to answer thespecific needs of each individual crisiscontext and to steer rapid response action.These essential tools underpin effectivework, especially in ILO areas of concern;• Technical assistance-Direct interventionsin emergencies are undertaken, for rapidneeds assessment, programme developmentand implementation and to reducethe likelihood and inverse impact of futurecrises;• Capacity-building-Capacity to respondeffectively to crises is strengthenedthrough wide dissemination of the abovetools, along with training programmes andadvisory services;• Advocacy-A variety of activities promotenational, subregional, regional and internationalrecognition of the employmentdimension and other ILO crisis concernsand its contribution to effective crisismanagement. They include awarenessraisingworkshops, presentations, publications,videos and public material;• Resource mobilization-Efforts are made tomobilize resources internally and externallyfor timely interventions.ILORoute des Morillons 4,CH-1211 Geneva 22, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 799 7722Fax: (+41-22) 799 6895E-mail: edemp@ilo.orgWeb site: www.ilo.orgInternational Telecommunication Union(ITU)ITU, with its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland,is an international organization wheregovernments and the private sector coordinateglobal telecommunication networks and services.ITU is a member of the ISDR Inter-AgencyTask Force on Disaster Reduction.In 1994, the ITU Plenipotentiary Conferencein Kyoto, following the Yokohama Conferenceon Natural Disaster Reduction, emphasizedthe importance of telecommunications fordisaster mitigation and disaster relief operations.In 1998, the Tampere Convention on theProvision of Telecommunication Resources for

Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations wasadopted by the Intergovernmental Conferenceon Emergency Telecommunications (ICET-98). It raised concerns about the impact ofdisasters on communication facilities andinformation flows. Unexpected natural andman-made disasters can occur anywhere, at anytime. Rapid response to organize and coordinaterecovery operations is essential to savelives and restore community infrastructure.Disaster recovery activities depend upon availabilityand access to telecommunicationresources. However, telecommunicationnetworks often experience severe stress duringthese events due to high traffic demands andinfrastructure damage.Against this background, ITU is working onthe development of global standards to supportan Emergency Telecommunications Service(ETS). Many dimensions need to beaddressed in achieving an effective solution foremergency telecommunications includingtechnical aspects as well as issues associatedwith user requirements, operational, policy,legal and regulatory aspects. Cooperation andliaison among the many interest areas areessential to ensure consistency and completenessin the provisioning of an effective emergencytelecommunications capability. ITU istherefore engaging in the following activities:Related international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reduction• Study of the impact on telecommunicationsof disaster events;• Identification of requirements/applicationsof emergency telecommunicationusers;• Identification of types/modes of telecommunicationsfor emergencies;• Definition of the capabilities and priorityaspects needed for emergency telecommunications;• Identification of means of interchange ofemergency data for distributed databases;• Identification of specific types and sourcesof information needed to provide emergencytelecommunication services, includingthe means of conveyance;• Identification of security aspects forauthentication of users and prevention ofinterference with ETS traffic;• Identification of those dealing with variousaspects (technical and other) related toemergency telecommunications.ITUPlace des NationsCH-1211 Geneva 20, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 730 5111Fax: (+41-22) 733 7256E-mail: itumail@itu.intWeb site: www.itu.int6319

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives320Other entitiesUnited Nations University (UNU)UNU, with headquarters in Tokyo,Japan, comprises 13 research and trainingcentres and programmes around theworld and its partners include over 30United Nations organizations and morethan 100 research institutions globally.The overall mission of UNU is tocontribute, through research and capacity-building,to efforts to resolve thepressing global problems that are theconcern of the United Nations MemberStates.With regard to disaster reduction, UNUhas focused its activities in support of theISDR goals in three main areas: firstly,the social aspects of urban vulnerability (aUNU initiative has been designed tohighlight, produce and disseminatemethodologies for the analysis of urbansocial vulnerability); secondly, disasterinformation and technologies (activitieswhich have been carried out in partnershipwith the University of Tokyo's InternationalCenter for Disaster Mitigation-Engineering (INCEDE)); and thirdly,enhanced preparedness for climate-relateddisasters, which has always been a highpriority area for the University.A number of initiatives developed overthe years to address these important globalissues have made a significant contributionin linking the scientific communityand the United Nations system. Oneparticular example is the study on the ElNiño phenomenon, which was carried outas a joint project between the ISDR secretariat,the National Center for AtmosphericResearch (NCAR) (Boulder,Colorado, United States), UNEP, UNUand WMO. This activity, which includedthe work of multidisciplinary teams in 16countries, led to findings that have beencrucial to improving preparedness for thenext El Niño occurrence and otherclimate-related disasters. As a follow-upto the El Niño project, UNU has developeda new Climate Affairs Programme,which will encompass a broad spectrum ofissues ranging from ethics and policyformulation to the impact of climaticphenomena. An important contribution ofthis initiative is the development of amultidisciplinary Climate Affairs CapacityBuilding Programme, which facilitatescapacity development to meet disasterreduction challenges. Finally, UNUtogether with the University of Genevaand the Federal School of Lausanne haveprovided fellowships to postgraduatestudents from developing countries toattend the international course in analysisand management of geologic risk. UNUalso participates in the work of the Inter-Agency Task Force on Disaster Reductionas a member of the Working Group onClimate and Disasters.UNU53-70 Jingumae 5-chome, Shibuya-kuTokyo 150-8925, JapanTel: (+81-3) 3499 2811Fax: (+81-3) 3499 2828E-mail: mbox@hq.unu.eduWeb site: www.unu.eduUnited Nations Institute for Trainingand Research (UNITAR)UNITAR is an autonomous body withinthe United Nations with a mandate toenhance the effectiveness of the UnitedNations through training and researchactivities. Its headquarters are located inGeneva, Switzerland, where a majority ofthe UNITAR training and capacitybuildingprogrammes are organized. Italso has a liaison office in New York.UNITAR has provided training and projectservices for policy and institutionaldevelopment. These activities haveaddressed risk issues in the areas ofchemical and waste management, climatechange, biodiversity, land degradation,environmental law, environmental negotiations,national reconstruction, the use ofinformation systems and the involvementof local authorities. UNITAR conducteda programme in collaboration with severalother United Nations organizations,local authorities, NGOs, universities andthe private sector consisting in launching

an International Training Centre forLocal Actors (CIFAL) in Divonne-les-Bains, France. This Centre provides aservice structure, an international meetinglocation and an exchange of experiencesopen to all actors involved withsustainable development and internationalcooperation at the local level.Recognizing the utility of geographicinformation systems and other moderninformation and communication technologiesfor advancing disaster reduction,UNITAR has been organizing trainingsessions in these fields since 1986 as wellas several training activities related todisaster reduction. These include trainingRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionsessions for African civil servants workingin the field of land degradation, workshopsfor local authorities in Crimea andLebanon and additional workshops fornational decision makers in the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo and countriesof the Southern Caucasus on the use ofinformation systems for disaster reduction.UNITARPalais des NationsCH 1211 Geneva 10, SwitzerlandTel: (+41-22) 917 12 34Fax: (+41-22) 917 80 47E-mail: info@unitar.orgWeb site: www.unitar.org6321

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesInter-agency mechanisms and common initiatives within the United Nations SystemThe ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force on Disaster Reduction is the only platform within the UnitedNations system entirely dedicated to the coordination and policy setting of disaster reduction.The other inter-agency United Nations platforms and tools mentioned below complement andcontribute to the promotion and efficient implementation of disaster reduction activities.United Nations System Chief ExecutiveBoard for Coordination (CEB)Web site: www.ceb.unsystem.orgMembership:United Nations Secretariat, ILO, FAO,UNESCO, International Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO), WHO, World Bank,International Monetary Fund (IMF),Universal Postal Union (UPU), ITU,WMO, International Maritime Organization(IMO), World Intellectual PropertyOrganization (WIPO), International Fundfor Agricultural Development (IFAD),United Nations Industrial DevelopmentOrganization (UNIDO), InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA), WorldTrade Organization (WTO), UnitedNations Conference on Trade and Development(UNCTAD), UNDP, UNEP, Officeof the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees (UNHCR), United NationsRelief and Works Agency for PalestineRefugees in the Near East (UNRWA),UNICEF, United Nations Population Fund(UNFPA), WFP, United Nations InternationalDrug Control Programme(UNDCP), UN-HABITAT.CEB-formerly the Administrative Committeeon Coordination (ACC)-chaired by theSecretary-General of the United Nations, isthe forum that brings together the executiveheads of all United Nations organizations tofurther coordination and cooperation on thewhole range of substantive and managementissues facing the United Nations system.Since 1998 the former ACC had been regularlyinformed of the activities of IDNDRand subsequently of ISDR. It had periodicallyconsidered disaster reduction amongits agenda items and had issued severalstatements on the importance of increasedinter-agency coordination in this field.ISDR summary reports of the meetings ofthe Inter-Agency Task Force on DisasterReduction are circulated to CEB through itssecretariat. Several members of CEB arepermanent members of the Inter-AgencyTask Force on Disaster Reduction. Thisprovides a unique opportunity for strengtheningcoordination among agencies andorganizations active in disaster reduction,humanitarian assistance and related developmentand environmental issues.ISDR Inter-Agency Task Force onDisaster ReductionWeb site: www.unisdr.orgMembership:United Nations system organizations: FAO,ITU, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, UN-HABITAT, WFP, WHO, WMO, WorldBank.Non-UN organizations:ADRC, African Union (AU), ADPC,Commonwealth of Independent States(CIS) Interstate Council, Council ofEurope EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement,Drought Monitoring Centre (Nairobi),GFMC, Ibero-American Associationfor Civil Defense and Protection, IFRC,International Council for Science (ICSU),Munich Re, OAS/Inter-American Committeeon Natural Disaster Reduction (IACN-DR), SOPAC.Comprehensive information on the ISDRsecretariat and the Inter-Agency Task Forceon Disaster Reduction can be found in thesection on ISDR (see pages 19-20).United Nations Development AssistanceFramework (UNDAF)Web site: www.dgo.org/UNDAF constitutes a key component of322

the United Nations Secretary-General'sreform proposals adopted in 1997, topromote common objectives, time frames aswell as improved collaboration betweenUnited Nations programmes and funds. Ithas been designed as the centrepiece ofUnited Nations development cooperation atcountry level. UNDAF is primarily a UnitedNations instrument to respond strategicallyto countries' development challengesand to the United Nations global agenda.UNDAF is intended to strengthen thecapacity of host Governments to implementtheir development programmes andstrengthen their relations with the UnitedNations system. It is complemented withCommon Country Assessments (CCAs),carried out between the agencies and thehost country authorities. UNDAF andCCAs are therefore useful tools for theincorporation of disaster risk assessmentsand reduction measures into inter-agencyassessment and action in a country.United Nations Development Group(UNDG)Web site: www.undg.orgUNDG Executive Committee membership:UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA, WFP andother entities participating as warranted bytheir interests and mandates. The Office ofthe Spokesman for the Secretary-Generaland the United Nations Fund for InternationalPartnerships (UNFIP) participate inUNDG as observers.UNDG members: DESA, UNDCP, UN-HABITAT, United Nations Office forProject Services (UNOPS), UnitedNations Development Fund for Women(UNIFEM), Joint United NationsProgramme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS),UNCTAD, WHO, IFAD, UNESCO,FAO, the regional economic commissions,the High Commissioner for Human Rightsand the Special Representative of the Secretary-Generalfor Children and ArmedConflict.UNDG, chaired by the UNDP Administrator,provides a framework for greatercoherence and cooperation in UnitedNations development operations. ThisRelated international commitments and the UN role in disaster risk reductionenables UNDG members to maximize theircomparative advantages and build on andsupport the work of other members at thecountry level. As most of the UNDGmembers carry out activities towards disasterreduction (see previous pages of thissection), this group represents an opportunityto integrate disaster reduction intoother areas of concern, in particular sustainabledevelopment.The DevLink web site, managed byUNDG, provides key documents, examplesof good practice, training materials, sourcesof additional information and links to relevantUnited Nations and non-UnitedNations sites on UNDG areas of activityand in support of the implementation of theMillennium Declaration and the Secretary-General's reform programme, particularlyCCAs and UNDAF.United Nations Disaster ManagementTraining Programme (UNDMTP)Web site: www.undmtp.orgMembership:United Nations system agencies/organizations:FAO, IBRD, ILO, InternationalOrganization for Migration (IOM),OCHA, ISDR, Office of the UnitedNations High Commissioner for HumanRights (OHCHR), United Nations Centrefor Human Settlements (UNCHS),UNCTAD, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO,UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNITAR,UNOPS, United Nations Staff College(UNSC), United Nations Volunteers(UNV), WFP, WHO, WMO.Non-United Nations organizations: InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross(ICRC), International Council of VoluntaryAgencies (ICVA), IFRC, National RefugeeCommission (NRC), Steering Committeefor Humanitarian Response (SCHR)Under the management of UNDP, DMTPis an inter-agency tool shared to supportcapacity-building activities in the field ofcrisis and disaster management by undertakingtraining to meet the needs of governmentpersonnel, civil society groups,community leaders and partners in the3236

6Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesUnited Nations system. DMTP alsoprovides training for in-country UnitedNations system Disaster ManagementTeams (DMT).Disaster Management TeamsDMT are established in countries where theUnited Nations system works, in differentgrades of formality, towards promoting coherence,coordination and information exchangeamong agencies in disaster-related matters andbetween the United Nations system and thehost Government.All relevant agencies with presence in thecountry are encouraged to participate in DMT.UNDP, WFP, UNICEF, WHO (PAHO),FAO and UNESCO are the most commonlyrepresented agencies in the Teams. While thespirit of DMT is to promote medium andlong-term disaster reduction concerns in developmentplanning to reduce vulnerability tonatural or man-made hazards, the teams arehowever more active in the aftermath of disastersand serve as a coordinating mechanism toprovide assistance for relief and recovery. Inareas where similar natural disasters are recurrent,it is recommended that DMT embarksystematically on preparedness programmingas an exit strategy.See: "The Role and Responsibilities of theUNDMTs" at the website www.undmtp.org324

Chapter7Challenges for the future1.1 Sum up - challenges ahead1.2 Measurement of progress325

Photo: ISDR Secretariat

Challenges for the future7Challenges for the futureIDNDR mid-reviewin YokohamaThe mid-term reviewof IDNDR, at theWorld Conference onNatural DisasterReduction in Yokohama,May 1994,revealed in its assessmentthat “ awarenessof the potential benefitsof disaster reduction isstill limited to specialisedcircles and hasyet not been successfullycommunicated to allsectors of society…” Inaddition, it states that a“number of positiveresults have beenachieved…althoughunevenly and not in theconcerted and systematicway envisaged…”These are challengesstill to be addressed.As recognized by the IDNDR Programme Forum in 1999, a great dealof learning and experience was gained by individuals, communities, governmentsand specialists from different fields during the Decade. Manynational and local plans have benefited from progress made at all levels onemploying new institutional and technical tools for improving disasterreduction practices. Particularly valuable advances occurred in theincreasing use of risk assessments, specific methodologies and researchinitiatives, early warning systems, information, training, education andpublic awareness activities.Nevertheless, no formal evaluation of achievements or systematic monitoringof progress was carried out. Therefore, the ISDR secretariat hasembarked on developing a process for a continuous global review of disasterreduction initiatives. The aim is twofold: to gather and provideinformation on ongoing activities and the evolving “state of the art” ofdisaster risk reduction, and to initiate the development of a conceptualframework for monitoring progress made by governments, civil societyand other relevant organizations.This final chapter outlines some of the main conclusions and recommendationsstemming from the research and consultation effort undertaken forthis global review.Only by showing evidence of the benefits of reducing the vulnerability todisasters can future investment and priorities in this area be sustained.The continuous work of local and grass roots organizations, governments,the scientific and technical community, international and regionalorganizations remains essential to unite efforts in a common process toensure sustainable development. This is where the ISDR mechanismsshould make a difference.The process of reviewing disaster reduction initiatives is an essential functionof the ISDR, which will be gradually enhanced. This initial workreflected in Living with risk will contribute to the process of the ten-yearreview of achievements and shortcomings in the implementation of theYokohama Strategy and Plan of Action of 1994. This exercise, planned for2003, is expected to be completed in 2004. It should also contribute toshaping the growing international agenda for disaster risk reduction.This current issue of the global review is a preliminary version, intendedfor consultation and discussion. It is expected to spark an exchange ofideas and wider circulation of experiences among those interested in thesubject – scholars, practitioners, policy-makers, leaders, managers andprofessionals concerned with the enormous losses in lives and assetscaused by the lack of prevention and protection from disasters that slowsdevelopment and renders it more difficult and expensive. The globalreview will be elaborated and refined further based on the commentsreceived and additional experience disclosed by new developments.327

7Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSum up – challenges aheadThroughout this review it is often repeated thatthere is a need for disaster and risk reduction tobe an essential part of broader sustainable developmentconcerns. As discussed in chapter six, theinternational development targets set for the year2015 in the Millenium Declaration cannot bereached unless the heavy toll of disasters inhuman and economic terms is reduced. That isbecause risk and vulnerability to natural, technologicaland ecological hazards are driven bysocial, economic and environmental activities.The subject has emerged as a new area of concernfor governments in the preparatory process forthe World Summit for Sustainable Developmentin August 2002.It is important to remember that current developmentpractices do not necessarily reduce communities’vulnerability to disasters. Ill-advised andmisdirected development practices often increasethe risk to disasters. The challenge of influencingand enhancing development plans, programmesand projects pursued by countries is still great.The international community equally bears aresponsibility to motivate, and indeed to support,policies and actions in developing countriesthat pursue structured and evident disasterrisk reduction strategies. As long as the onlymessage that national governments receivefrom the international development "community"in connection with disaster risks is theequivalent of, "please prepare a consolidatedrelief appeal when there is a crisis", and that thecosts and associated responsibilities for poorlymanaged risks are transferred to the internationalcommunity, there will remain slightincentive for the seriously disaster-prone developingcountries to embrace significant, internal,commitments or responsiblility for sustaineddisaster risk management practices.In this respect there is a crucial role for internationalorganizations and the collective interestsof the United Nations system, in concertwith the influential bilateral and multilateraldevelopment assistance agencies to support,rather than undermining national initiativesand local efforts to develop capacities forChallenges for the Pacific islands – representative for many parts of the worldThe following future challenges to incorporating a Comprehensive Hazard And Risk Management (known as CHARM in thePacific) into national development planning were indicated in the regional ISDR review for the Pacific region, undertaken withSOPAC. These challenges are valid for most of the regions in the world and at a global scale and are therefore reproduced here.Accomplishing a paradigm shift from managing disasters to managing risks: A big educational drive is needed toinstil the distinctive concepts of hazards, vulnerability, risks and the value of managing risks. High-level advocacyand influential public champions are needed to promote risk reduction in their societies.Producing more adequate hazard and vulnerability assessments and improve presentation: More work is needed toproduce detailed hazards and vulnerability maps. Assessments should integrate community-derived perceptions andpriorities about vulnerability and risk analysis.Ensuring uniform and consistent approaches to a common problem: There are often several agencies delivering riskmanagement services to countries within a given region. This results in over-taxing capacities of recipient countriesand a potential confusion of purpose. In the Pacific specifically, a requirement would be agreed negotiations withmajor development partners to adopt a uniform approach and common standards to disaster risk management andconsolidated support for its continued implementation.Ensuring national integration and co-ordination: Agencies often create spheres of authority and accountability thatresult potentially in resistance or inflexibility. Formulating policy at 'whole-of-government' incorporating risk reductionprogrammes into national planning arrangements for sustainable development, enhancing information sharing,upgrading communications systems and training capabilities and providing adequate levels of resources can minimisesuch constraints.Land use systems and tenure: Social relationships, land rights and local prerogatives are particularly complicated andvaried across the Pacific region. Convincing, consistent and sustained public awareness and advocacy programmeshave to be institutionalised in order to gain acceptable levels of understanding and commitment.328

improved disaster risk reduction. The pesistentextravagance too often displayed in emergencyassistance following an " international " disaster,in contrast to the much smaller ongoingcommitments to support local endeavours ofdisaster risk reduction, is nothing less. There isaccordingly a serious need for internationalpolicy-makers to proceed beyond rhetoricalresolutions and to invest in considered, andsustained, measures of disaster risk reduction.This can, and indeed should, be reflected bythe incorporation of risk factors - starting withsystematic risk assessments - in both emergencyassistance grants and the more fundamentaldevelopment assistance programmesunderwritten by the international community.This approach, needs to be coupled with thedemanding task of accomodating the shorttermand immediate needs of developing countrieswhile still maintaining an appreciation ofthe value of medium and long-term objectivesdemanded by both disaster reduction and sustainabledevelopment. Too often these linkageshave been either obscured, or ignored, in practice.These issues become glaring in thosecountries where "development" is a fundamentalelement of simple, basic survival for themajority of the population. To be effective, disasterrisk reduction can only be integrated intoall relevant sectors of national social and economicinterest: health, education, environment,agriculture, transportation, infrastructure,communications, public administration,planning - even security. Responsible governance,in fact.The challenges and priorities noted in the conlusionsof previous chapters are not repeatedhere, but the overaching concerns for furtherstrengthening include:• Increasing the widespread understandingof disaster risk. This is a cross-cuttingneed related to all sectors. It includes ashift in approach towards the developmentof risk management as an essentialtool for planning and managing development.• Bringing the ecological sphere into disasterrisk reduction. Disaster reduction hasprimarily focused on physical protectionto hazards and the economic and socialspheres of sustainable development. Achallenge is to bring the ecological con-Challenges for the futurecerns and the considered management ofnatural resources more emphatically intodisaster risk reduction. Environmentaldegradation and global change call forthis.• Recognizing disaster risk reduction primarilyas national and local responsibilities.Increased evidence of national and localcommitment ir required, including institutionalstructures being in place. Cross-sectoraland policy cooperation is needed tobuild a culture of prevention linked to environmentaland socio-economic activities.• Continuing efforts to decentralize riskmanagement in practice. Community participationand local decision making isessential to promote increased nationalpublic commitment.• Enhancing policy development and integrationto ensure that all relevant sectorsinclude risk management as a basic toolunder the overall perspective and goals ofsustainable development.• Increasing education, information networkingand research on risk management,and developing tools to reduce gender andculture-sensitive risks, adapted to differentgeographical and cultural contexts.• Expanding partnerships at all levels,including those among the private sector,academic institutions and NGOs workingalong with government. This should beemphasized as a main objective of nationalplatforms to address disaster risk reductionin each country. For greater coherenceand impact, these efforts need to befocussed and supported by methodologicaltools to establish links among initiatives,systematize and unify processes.• Development of specific methodologies toreduce risk and vulnerability to disastersin such key areas as environmental management,land use planning, protection ofcritical facilities, financial tools and earlywarning. Take stock of existing tools andtechnologies and lessons-learnt.• Measurement of progress. The fundamentalchallenge is to achieve a reduction in fatalitiesand property loss from disasters in a growingnumber of communities and countries. Inorder to do this it is essential to show evidencethat disaster risk reduction is beingunderstood, measures are progressivelybeing put into practice and targets or benchmarksand indicators are developed.3297

7Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesMeasurement of progress –the benefits of reportingReduced losses from disasters, as well as reduced level of exposure tohazards, should become a more explicit development target in itsown right, both nationally and globally, as recognised in the MillenniumDevelopment goals and through the ISDR.At the outset of the task to conduct a global review ofdisaster reduction initiatives, the advisory panel forthis review recommended that it should embark onthe development of criteria to measure effectivenessof disaster risk reduction. These should ultimatelyreflect how lives and assets have been saved, as wellas where countries stand in accomplishing the objectivesof the ISDR.A number of experts, scholars and agencies hascalled for the determination and application of specificdisaster risk reduction baselines, targets andindicators. These could include commitment forintegrating risk reduction into national planningand educational systems. These must necessarilyvary taking account of each national context, hazardfrequency and annual losses. Global targets couldhowever aim at reducing the number of victims andeconomic losses by an agreed percentage over aspecified period of time. Targets could be more specificfor governments and local communities,reflecting local criteria and conditions or otherwisebased on performance.“Each country bears the primary responsibility for protectingits own people, infrastructure, and other nationalassets from the impact of natural disasters.”Principle nine of the Yokohama Strategy andPlanof Action for a Safer WorldThis task is obviously a difficult and complex one.Scientific and technical approaches in the past havefocused on indicators to suggest a hierarchy ofaccomplishment (number of risk assessments carriedout, existence of databases, number of decreesor legal acts, research programmes, educationalreforms, etc.). The quantitative measurement of theimpact of individual disaster risk reduction initiativesor projects that typically span a relativelyshorter time period, is difficult to achieve. If no disasterhas occurred after the measure has been put inplace it could be difficult to test the relative effectivenessof measures undertaken. One approach todealing with this dilemma would be to try and identifysituations where a “before and after” scenariowould apply.Measuring the qualitative advancement is even moredemanding as changes in perceptions, values, attitudesand behaviour are difficult to assess. However,these are the essential changes needed to move to ahigher phase in the pursuit of sustainable development.Benchmarks and indicators for reducing disasterrisk can also become valuable instruments tomonitor other sustainable development requirementsin fields such as education, community participation,local management and self reliance, sustainable livelihoods,environmental management, urban and ruralor land-use planning, and gender balance.Measuring the progress of disaster risk reduction ina country or region requires different frameworks atdifferent time-scales. In the long term, disasterinduced changes in the indicators of sustainabledevelopment, such as the Human DevelopmentIndex, GDP, poverty reduction, improved environmentalmanagement practices can reflect, to a degree,the extent to which a community has become moreresilient to disasters.The ISDR secretariat is working with its partners toaddress these needs. With UNDP, in particular, ithas initiated collaboration for the development ofcommon criteria to identify and assess the impacts ofdisaster risk reduction. UNDP chairs the workinggroup on vulnerability, risk and impact assessmentsof the Inter-Agency Task Force on Disaster Reduction,and is currently producing a Global Risk VulnerabilityIndex as part of the forthcoming WorldVulnerability Report. Collaboration is also takingplace with UN/DESA on sustainable developmentindicators and with a number of others such as theIFRC.ISDR aims to assess and monitor disaster risk reductionby focussing on measuring the multiple processesleading to a culture of prevention, including theparticipation of the national and local communities inthe application of the most up-to-date knowledge forrisk management. In order to assure credibility andacceptance, it is essential to engage in a transparentand participatory process for developing and evaluatingthe performance of an appropriate set of indicators.Examples for specific priority in the developmentof “performance targets” are suggested in varioussections of this global review.330

Building performance targetsIn order to develop and assess effective disaster riskreduction strategies, governments need to focus on aseries of performance targets or benchmarks.They need to be, among other things ”SMART”: sustainable,measurable, achievable, relevant and timely:• Sustainable over time.• Measurable, with defined criteria for success andspecific benchmarks.• Achievable within the time frame that governmentsset. This may extend over months or yearsdepending on available resources and nationalpriorities.• Relevant, to satisfy varied national situationsrelated to national hazards, vulnerabilities andcapacities and set within national governmentalstructures.• Timely, related to carefully time-framed tasks,with clear short and long term goals.They must also be:• Clearly defined.• Flexible, to enable on course corrections to bemade.• Adaptable to suit changing needs and perceptions.• Well integrated among sectors, line ministries ordepartments and between fields or disciplines.• Accepted by all contributing bodies both insideand outside governments.• Reflecting on international experience from countriesthat have succeeded in creating effective mitigationand preparedness strategies.Challenges for the futurewith the different aspects of disaster risk reduction thatall comprehensive strategies share.• Designated government authorities at bothnational and local levels of responsibility will ideallywork closely with specialized institutions andcommunity-based organizations to apply the formulasconsidered most appropriate for theirrespective requirements. By drawing on their ownlocal experiences though, they also can contributeto the broader search and progressive refinementof both methodologies and appropriate criteriathat may hold wider relevance and appeal.• Equally, international agencies representing bothbilateral and multilateral interests can contributeto this on-going assessment process as part ofrealizing their on-going development policies,programmes and projects.• Individual "centers of excellence" devoted todisaster reduction at local, national, regionaland international levels of activity can furtheraugment the process of identifying, compilingand circulating different approaches to evaluatethe various dimensions of disaster risk managementin practice.In this respect, ISDR's extended international framework,associated technical specialists and interestedinstitutions can contribute various examples or broadparameters of possible criteria within designated areasof interest. Working in concert, they can also facilitatethe wider distribution and progressive refinement orvalidation of different needs and experience. There arecrucial roles to compare, circulate and progressivelyconsolidate possible approaches to gauge globalprogress, with the overall aim of enhancing and utilizingmultiple capacities for a shared global purpose.7Performance targets need to be adapted to each specificgeographical and cultural context and testedaccordingly.A collaborative effort to measure accomplishmentWhile the motivation and the responsibility to evaluateprogress towards more effective risk reduction restswithin individual countries and local communities,there is a collective requirement that extends throughoutthe disaster risk reduction community to determinebroadly agreed terms of reference and to increaseknowledge about available methodologies. Specificperformance targets and priorities clearly will varyfrom country to country, but crucial areas of emphasiscan be tied to various functions and abilities associatedAn example of one such conceptual framework suitedto a particular set of circumstances is presented on thefollowing pages. It was developed through nationaland sub-regional collaboration in the PREANDINOprogramme involving Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador,Peru and Venezuela, with the encouragement of theISDR secretariat. While the expressed need for thisframework evolved within the countries concerned, itsinitial development also serves the purpose of thisglobal review by demonstrating one approach to a systematicand structured review process of accomplishmentsin disaster risk management practice. Theframework will continue to be refined as appropriatecriteria become fashioned through further developmentand the methodology is honed through practicaltesting, but it represents an important start to theprocess.331

7Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesElements for development of indicators or performance targets for an institutionalframework for disaster risk reduction and instilling a culture of preventionFocus area for performancetargetsImpact on institutionalframeworkImpact on theplanning processImpact on thecreation of a cultureof preventionat the level of theentire societyVariablePolitical will (incorporationof disaster prevention in thepolitical value system)Institutional development(for risk management)Risk reduction and/or disasterprevention plansIncorporation of risk assessmentsand disaster preventionmeasures in developmentplans and controlmechanismsSupport systems fordecision-makingEducation and capacitybuildingInformation andcommunicationCriteria for indicators(existence of…, number of…., level of…)• Official statements• Formal decisions on disaster prevention and risk management• High-level programmes for promoting disaster prevention and risk reduction• Organization - degree of organizational development• Legal and juridical support• Risk reduction law or legislative acts (in related areas)• Other regulations• Budget for institutional strengthening and other disaster reduction actionsExistence and development of risk reduction/prevention plans (within differentrelevant sectors)• Incorporation of risk assessments and risk reduction measures in developmentplans• Incorporation of risk assessments and prevention in land-use managementplans• Consideration of disaster risk assessments in projects (directly or in conjunctionwith environmental impact assessments)• Coordination mechanisms for plan design• Establishment of critical capabilities for protecting lives and assets andimplementing alternatives in disaster situations (such as, projects for controlof floods and other natural hazards and for protection against their impact,vulnerability reduction for health facilities, evacuation routes, alternativelife-lines, communication centres, airports, information management)• Information systems on risks and disasters• Impact measuring systems (indicators and methodologies)• Management assessment systems (management indicators)• Incorporation of hazard and risk management in the basic primary and secondarycurriculum (related to natural and social sciences and environmentaleducation)• Incorporation of specialized topics in higher education• Higher education courses in prevention and risk management (architecture,engineering, urban planning, medicine and public health, agriculture,sociology, economy, pedagogy, history, among others)• Risk management training programmes for public administration and otherstakeholders• Community training programmes• Formal prevention information and dissemination programmes• Channels of access to information (electronic and documentation centres)• Communication programmes aimed at the general population• Role of the media (permanent presentation of this type of information in weatherforecast broadcasts; links between the media and specialized informationproduction centres)332

Challenges for the future7Methodological approach developed in the context of the PREANDINO programme (Bolivia,Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela) and in collaboration with the ISDR secretariat.Focus area for performancetargetsImpact on knowledgeproductionfor risk reductionand managementImpact of the participationby thenational communityin preventionand risk reductioneffortsImpact of specificdisaster riskreduction measuresVariableProduction of knowledgeSupport infrastructureInstitutional development ofthe knowledge sectorPrivate sector participationCommunity action and participationDemonstrated applicationCriteria for indicators(existence of…, number of…., level of…)• Public awareness programmes (institutionalised)• Specialized information networks for risk reduction (public and private)• Research and analysis of hazards (natural, technological, environmental)• Vulnerability analysis and assessments (social, economic, physical and environmentalvulnerability)• Risk assessments (risk maps)• Socio-economic impact studies (methodologies, estimates, lessons learned)• Development of planning methodologies• Monitoring networks, remote sensing, GIS and other information technologycapacity• Communications network• Channels of coordination between researchers and/or monitors (inter-disciplinaryand multi sectoral)• Role of academic institutions in research• Links between knowledge institutions and information producers• Channels for the dissemination of scientific and applied information tocommunities• Type of information generated (degree to which it meets the demand;product supply and level of detail)• The insurance sector• Finance (criteria for approval of project financing)• Business and interest groups• Partnerships (public-private)• Specialized NGOs that can play a technical or awareness role in disasterprevention• Community based organizations• Mechanisms for community participation• Agreements between the governments (nationl and local) and civil society(NGOs, organized communities)• Use of technical knowledge in engineering and other applications forvulnerability reduction (protection of critical facilities)• Existence and application of technical construction standards• Control mechanisms of the application of technical standards• Development and application of urban planning standards• Control mechanisms for urban planning regulations• Control mechanisms for land-use management plans• Programmes for improving the application of prevention techniques• Early warning systems (application of technology, extension of the warningnetwork)333

7Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesA window of opportunityThe two Chinese characters, which together form the word crisis, separatelymean threat and opportunity. An etymology like this is a reminder that asconditions change, so can attitudes. In a world in which things seem sure to getworse, there is increasing incentive to make sure they do not.When old menaces seem to multiply, new thinking must provide the solutions.Communities must adopt the notion that disaster impacts can be reduced andtherefore not only wait for disasters to be managed. In some cases, it might bepossible to reduce hazards themselves. If not, then it would certainly bepossible to reduce human vulnerability to those hazards.The combination of science and history is instructive – it provides the assurancethat disasters that happen once can happen again and again. Earthquakes, forinstance, are a fact of life at tectonic plate boundaries and these have beenwell-mapped. Floods are a fact of life on flood plains, and their rich soils aredown-to-earth proof of it.To go from disaster management to disaster risk reduction is to exploithindsight and develop foresight through insight.Crisis =threat + opportunity334

Annexes1. Terminology: Basic terms of disaster riskreduction2. Directory: International, regional, nationaland specialized organizations involved in disasterreduction and related issues3. List of acronyms4. Bibliography335

Annexesa1Annex 1Terminology: Basic terms of disaster risk reductionThroughout this global review the ISDR secretariat presents main terms related to disaster riskreduction to practitioners and experts for their consideration and further refinement. They arebased on a broad collection of different international sources, with the purpose of developingcommon understanding of terminology on disaster reduction, useful for the public, authoritiesand practitioners. This is a continuing effort to be reflected in future reviews, responding to aneed expressed in several international venues, regional commentary and national responses tothe ISDR questionnaire.Acceptable riskThe level of loss a society or community considersacceptable given existing social, economic,political, cultural and technical conditions.In engineering terms, acceptable risk is also used todescribe structural and non-structural measuresundertaken to reduce possible damage at a level,which does not harm people and property, accordingto codes or “accepted practice” based, amongother issues, on a known probability of hazard.Biological hazardProcesses of organic origin or those conveyedby biological vectors, including exposure topathogenic micro-organisms, toxins and bioactivesubstances, which may cause the loss of lifeor injury, property damage, social and economicdisruption or environmental degradation.Examples of biological hazards: outbreaks of epidemicdiseases, plant or animal contagion, insectplagues and extensive infestations.Building codesOrdinances and regulations controlling thedesign, construction, materials, alteration andoccupancy of any structure for human safetyand welfare. Building codes include bothtechnical and functional standards.CapacityA combination of all the strengths andresources available within a community ororganisation that can reduce the level of risk,or the effects of a disaster.Capacity may include physical, institutional, socialor economic means as well as skilled personal orcollective attributes such as leadership and management.Capacity may also be described as capability.Capacity buildingEfforts aimed to develop human skills withina community, organisation or institution neededto reduce the level of risk.In extended understanding, capacity building alsoincludes development of institutional, financial andother resources, such as technology at different levelsand sectors of the society.Climate changeRefers to a statistically significant variation ineither the mean state of the climate or in itsvariability, persisting for an extended period(typically decades or longer).Climate change may be due to natural internalprocesses or external forcing, or to persistentanthropogenic changes in the composition of theatmosphere or in land use (IPCC, 2001).Coping capacityThe manner in which people and organisationsuse existing resources to achieve variousbeneficial ends during unusual, abnormal,and adverse conditions of a disaster phenomenonor process.The strengthening of coping capacities usuallybuilds resilience to withstand the effects of naturaland other hazards.337

a1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCounter measuresAll measures taken to counter and reduce disasterrisk. They most commonly referred toengineering (structural) measures but can alsoinclude other non-structural measures andtools designed and employed to avoid or limitthe adverse impact of natural hazards andrelated environmental and technological disasters.DisasterA serious disruption of the functioning of acommunity or a society causing widespreadhuman, material, economic or environmentallosses which exceed the ability of the affectedcommunity/society to cope using its ownresources.A disaster is a function of the risk process. Itresults from the combination of hazards, conditionsof vulnerability and insufficient capacity or measuresto reduce the potential negative consequences ofrisk.Early warningThe provision of timely and effective information,through identified institutions, that allowindividuals at risk of a disaster, to take actionto avoid or reduce their risk and prepare foreffective response.Early warning systems consist of three elements (i)forecasting and prediction of impending events, (ii)processing and dissemination of warnings to politicalauthorities and population, and (iii) undertakingappropriate reaction to warnings.EcosystemA system of interacting living organismstogether with their physical environment.The boundaries of what could be called an ecosystemare somewhat arbitrary, depending on thefocus of interest or study. Thus the extent of anecosystem may range from very small spatial scalesto, ultimately, the entire Earth (IPCC, 2001).Disaster risk reduction (disaster reduction)The systematic development and applicationof policies, strategies and practices to minimisevulnerabilities and disaster risksthroughout a society, to avoid (prevention) orto limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverseimpact of hazards, within the broad context ofsustainable development.The disaster risk reduction framework, asdescribed in this review, is composed of:- Risk awareness and assessment includinghazard analysis and vulnerability/capacityanalysis;- Knowledge development including education,training, research and information;- Public commitment and institutional frameworks,including organisational, policy, legislationand community action;- Application of measures including environmentalmanagement, land-use and urbanplanning, protection of critical facilities, applicationof science and technology, partnershipand networking, and financial instruments;- Early warning systems including forecasting,dissemination of warnings, preparednessmeasures and reaction capacities.El Niño-southern oscillation (ENSO)An irregularly occurring pattern of abnormalwarming of the surface coastal waters offEcuador, Peru and Chile. This coupledatmosphere-ocean phenomenon is associatedwith the fluctuation of intertropical surfacepressure pattern and circulation in the Indianand Pacific oceans, called the Southern Oscillation.There have been a number of attempts to define ElNiño, both quantitatively and qualitatively, butnone has achieved universal recognition. This phenomenontriggers a shift in seasonal patterns ofweather systems over many subtropical and midlatitudeparts of the globe.La Niña is the opposite of an El Niño event, duringwhich waters in the west Pacific are warmerthan normal and trade winds are stronger.Emergency managementThe organisation, management of resourcesand responsibilities for dealing with all aspectsof emergencies, in particularly preparedness,response and rehabilitation.338

Emergency management involves the plans, structuresand arrangements which are established tobring together the normal endeavours of government,voluntary and private agencies in a comprehensiveand coordinated way to deal with thewhole spectrum of emergency needs. This is alsoknown as disaster management.Environmental impact assessment (EIA)Study undertaken in order to assess the effecton a specified environment of the introductionof any new factor, which may upset the ecologicalbalance.EIA is a policy making tool that serves to provideevidence and analysis of environmental impacts ofactivities from conception to decision-making. It isutilised extensively in national programming andfor international development assistance projects.An EIA must include a detailed risk assessmentand provide alternatives solutions.Environmental degradationProcesses induced by human behaviour andactivities (sometimes combined with naturalhazards), that damage the natural resourcebase or adversely alter natural processes orecosystems. Potential effects are varied andmay contribute to an increase in vulnerabilityand the frequency and intensity of naturalhazards.Some examples: land degradation, deforestation,desertification, wildland fires, loss of biodiversity,land, water and air pollution, climate change, sealevel rise, ozone depletion.ForecastDefinite statement or statistical estimate of theoccurrence of a future event (UNESCO,WMO).This term is used with different meaning in differentdisciplines, as well as “prediction”.Geological hazardNatural earth processes or phenomena, whichmay cause the loss of life or injury, propertydamage, social and economic disruption orenvironmental degradation. Geological hazardAnnexesincludes processes of a geological, neotectonic,geophysical, geomorphologic, geotechnicaland hydrogeological nature.Examples of geological hazards are: earthquakes,tsunamis; volcanic activity and emissions; massmovements (landslides, rockslides, rockfall, liquefaction,submarine slides, etc.); subsidence, surfacecollapse and geological fault activity.Geographic information systems (GIS)Computer programmes that combine a relationaldatabase with spatial interpretation andoutputs in form of maps. A more elaboratedefinition is that of a system for capturing,storing, checking, integrating, analysing anddisplaying data about the earth that is spatiallyreferenced. It is normally taken to include aspatially referenced database and appropriateapplications software.Geographical information systems are increasinglybeing utilised for hazard and vulnerability mappingand analysis, as well as for the application ofdisaster risk reduction measures and its management.Greenhouse gas (GHG)A gas, such as water vapour, carbon dioxide,methane, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) andhydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), thatabsorbs and re-emits infrared radiation,warming the earth’s surface and contributingto climate change (UNEP, 1998).HazardA potentially damaging physical event, phenomenonand/or human activity, which maycause the loss of life or injury, property damage,social and economic disruption or environmentaldegradation.Hazards can include latent conditions that mayrepresent future threats and can have different origins:natural (geological, hydrometeorological andbiological) and/or induced by human processes(environmental degradation and technologicalhazards). Hazards can be combined, sequential orcombined in their origin and effects. Each hazardis characterised by its location, intensity, frequencyand probability.a1339

a1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesHazard analysisIdentification, studies and monitoring of anyhazard to determinate its potentiality, origin,characteristics and behaviour.Hydrometeorological hazardsNatural processes or phenomena of atmospheric,hydrological or oceanographic nature,which may cause the loss of life or injury,property damage, social and economic disruptionor environmental degradation.Natural hazards can be classified by origin in:geological, hydrometeorological or biological.PreparednessActivities and measures taken in advance toensure effective response to the impact of disaster,including the issuance of timely andeffective early warnings and the temporaryremoval of people and property from a threatenedlocation.Examples of hydrometeorological hazards are:floods, debris and mud flows; tropicalcyclones, storm surges, thunder/hailstorms,rain and wind storms, blizzards and othersevere storms; drought, desertification, wildlandfires, heat waves, sand or dust storms;permafrost and avalanches.La Niña(see El Niño-southern oscillation).PreventionActivities to provide outright avoidance of theadverse impact of hazards and related environmental,technological and biological disasters.Depending on social and technical feasibility andcost/benefit considerations, investing in preventivemeasures is justified in areas frequently affected bydisasters. In the context of public awareness andeducation, prevention refers to changing attitudeand behaviour towards a “culture of prevention”.340Land-use planningBranch of physical planning that determinesthe most desirable way land should be used.Involves land-use studies and mapping, analysisof data acquired, formulation of alternativeland-use decisions and design of a long-rangeland-use plan for different geographical andadministrative scales.Land-use planning can help to mitigate disastersand reduce risks by discouraging settlements andconstruction of key installations in hazard proneareas, control of population density and expansion,and the siting of service routes in transport,power, water, sewerage and other criticalfacilities.MitigationStructural and non-structural measuresundertaken to limit the adverse impact of naturalhazards, environmental degradation andtechnological hazards.Natural hazardsNatural processes or phenomena occurring inthe biosphere that may constitute a damagingevent.Public awarenessThe processes of informing the general population,increasing their levels of consciousnessabout risks and how to take action to reducetheir exposure to hazards. This is particularlyimportant for public officials in fulfilling theirresponsibilities to save lives and property inthe event of a disaster.Public awareness activities support a change inbehaviour leading towards a culture of prevention.This involves public information, dissemination,education, radio or television broadcasts and theuse of printed media, as well as, the establishmentof disaster information centres and networks.Public informationInformation, facts and knowledge provided orlearned as a result of research or study, whichis public, open to the people as a whole.RecoveryDecisions and actions taken after a disasterwith a view to restoring the living conditionsof the stricken community, while encouragingand facilitating necessary adjustments toreduce disaster risk.

Recovery (rehabilitation and reconstruction) is anopportunity to develop and apply disaster riskreduction measures.the same perceptions of risk and their underlyingcauses.Annexesa1Relief / responseThe provision of assistance and/or interventionduring or immediately after a disaster tomeet the life preservation and basic subsistenceneeds of those people affected. It can beof an immediate, short-term, or protractedduration.Resilience / resilientThe capacity of a system, community or societyto resist or to change in order that it mayobtain an acceptable level in functioning andstructure. This is determined by the degree towhich the social system is capable of organisingitself, and the ability to increase its capacityfor learning and adaptation, including thecapacity to recover from a disaster.Retrofitting (or upgrading)Reinforcement of structures in order to bemore resistant to the forces of natural hazards.Retrofitting involves consideration of changes inthe mass, stiffness, damping, load path and ductilityand can involve radical changes such as theintroduction of energy absorbing dampers and baseisolation systems. Examples of retrofitting includesthe consideration of wind loading to strengthen andminimize the wind force, or in earthquake proneareas, the strengthening of structures by addingshear walls.RiskThe probability of harmful consequences, orexpected loss (of lives, people injured, property,livelihoods, economic activity disrupted orenvironment damaged) resulting from interactionsbetween natural or human inducedhazards and vulnerable/capable conditions.Conventionally risk is expressed by the equationRisk = Hazards x Vulnerability /Capacity.Beyond expressing a probability of physical harm,it is crucial to appreciate that risks are always createdor exist within social systems. It is importantto consider the social contexts in which risks occurand that people therefore do not necessarily shareRisk assessment/analysisA process to determine the nature and extentof risk by analysing potential hazards andevaluating existing conditions of vulnerability/capacitythat could pose a potential threator harm to people, property, livelihoods andthe environment on which they depend.The process of conducting a risk assessment is basedin a review of both technical features of hazardssuch as their location, intensity, frequency, andprobability, and also the analysis of the physical,social and economic dimensions of vulnerability,while taking particular account of the coping capabilitiespertinent to the risk scenarios.Risk reduction measuresThe development and application of policies,procedures and capacities of the society andcommunities to lessen the negative impacts ofa possible impact of natural hazards and relatedenvironmental and technological disasters.This includes structural and non structuralmeasures to avoid (prevention) or to limit(mitigation and preparedness) adverse impactof hazards, as well as the development of copingcapabilities.Risk managementThe systematic management of administrativedecisions, organisation, operational skills andresponsibilities to apply policies, strategies andpractices for disaster risk reduction.Structural measuresEngineering measures and construction ofhazard-resistant and protective structures andinfrastructureSustainable developmentDevelopment that meets the needs of thepresent without compromising the ability offuture generations to meet their own needs. Itcontains within it two key concepts: the conceptof “needs”, in particular the essentialneeds of the world’s poor, to which overridingpriority should be given; and the idea of limi-341

a1Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativestations imposed by the state of technology andsocial organization on the environment’s abilityto meet present and the future needs.(Brundtland Commission, 1987).Sustainable development is based on socio-culturaldevelopment, political stability and decorum, economicgrowth and ecosystem protection, which allrelate to disaster risk reduction.Technological hazardsDanger originating from technological orindustrial accidents, dangerous procedures,infrastructure failures or certain human activities,which may cause the loss of life or injury,property damage, social and economic disruptionor environmental degradation.VulnerabilityA set of conditions and processes resultingfrom physical, social, economical, and environmentalfactors, which increase the susceptibilityof a community to the impact of hazards.Positive factors, that increase the ability of peopleand the society they live in, to cope effectively withhazards, that increase their resilience, or that otherwisereduce their susceptibility, are considered ascapacities.Wildland fireAny unplanned and uncontrolled fire regardlessof ignition, that may damage or benefitland of recognised value to a society.Some examples: industrial pollution, nuclearactivities and radioactivity, toxic wastes, damfailures; transport, industrial or technological accidents(explosions, fires, spills).342

Annexesa2Annex 2Directory: International, regional, national, and specializedorganizations involved in disaster reduction and related issuesThis list contains brief descriptive information and contact details of the academic and research institutions,specialized governmental and non-governmental organizations mentioned in the Global Review.Additional information about the United Nations is listed in Chapter 6.2 "UN agencies and scope ofactivities". The ISDR Secretariat is preparing a more comprehensive directory focusing on internetsources on disaster reduction and related issues. This directory, compiled in a database, will be availableon the ISDR Website www.unisdr.org.aThe ISDR secretariat would be pleased to receive your comments, corrections or additional informationfor future versions.African Center of Meteorological Applications for Development (ACMAD), Niamey, NigerACMAD is the focal point in fostering regional cooperation among the fifty-three African states with the rest of theworld in climate and environmental concerns with regard to sustainable social and economic development. The centercoordinates the activities of the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) of these countries.http://205.156.54.206/ia/acmad.htm http://www.acmad.ne/uk/African UnionThe African Union is the successor to the Organization of African Unity launched in Durban, South Africa in July,2002. http://www.africa-union.org/Agence européenne pour le Developpement et la Santé (AEDES)The European Agency for the Development and Health focuses on public health policies, food security and socialprogrammes such as gender policy. http://www.aedes.be/Agency of Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), JapanThe National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), is an Independent AdministrativeInstitution under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry . On April, 2001 the new AIST began operations. Itcomprises 15 research institutes previously under the former Agency of Industrial Science and Technology (the formerAIST) in the Ministry of International Trade and the Weights and Measures Training Institute. AIST is Japan’slargest public research organization. http://www.aist.go.jp/index_en.htmlAlliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)AOSIS is a coalition of small island and low-lying coastal countries that share similar development challenges andconcerns about the environment, especially their vulnerability to the adverse effects of global climate change. It functionsprimarily as an ad hoc lobby and negotiating voice for small island developing states (SIDS) within the UnitedNations system. AOSIS has a membership of 43 states and territories, drawn from all oceans and regions of theworld: Africa, Caribbean, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean, Pacific and South China Sea. Thirty-seven are members ofthe United Nations, close to 28 percent of developing countries, and 20 percent of the UN’s total membership.Together, SIDS communities constitute some five percent of the global population. Member States of AOSIS worktogether primarily through their New York diplomatic Missions to the United Nations. http://www.sidsnet.org/aosisASEAN Experts Group on Disaster Management (AEGDM)ASEAN cooperation on natural and man-made disasters is coordinated by AEGDM, which was established in 1976,and which meets every two years to discuss and share experiences of the region’s disaster management and mitigationactivities. http://www.adpc.ait.ac.th/pdr-sea/newsletter/issue3/pdr-update.htmlASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)ARF is a regional platform of ASEAN countries and dialogue partners for confidence building and dialogue onregional security concerns. It was established in 1994. It draws together 23 countries which have an impact on or areinvolved in the security of the Asia Pacific region. It comprises the 10 ASEAN member states (Brunei, Cambodia,Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam); the 10 ASEAN dialogue partners(Australia, Canada, China, the European Union, India, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Russia and theUnited States); the one ASEAN observer (Papua New Guinea); as well as the Democratic Peoples Republic of Koreaand Mongolia.http://www.dfat.gov.au/arf/arfintro.htmlAsian Development Bank (ADB), Manila, PhilippinesADB is a multilateral development finance institution dedicated to reducing poverty in Asia and the Pacific.http://www.adb.org/343

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesAsian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC), Bangkok, ThailandADPC is a regional resource center established in 1986 dedicated to disaster reduction for safer communities and sustainabledevelopment in Asia and the Pacific. It is recognized as an important focal point for promoting disaster awareness and developingcapabilities to foster institutionalized disaster management and mitigation policies. http://www.adpc.ait.ac.th/Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC), Kobe, JapanADRC was established in July 1998 to promote multilateral cooperation for disaster reduction and to network the various playersin the region. It has held annual meetings to network the focal points in governments of its member countries. Its activities focuson information sharing, capacity building and cooperation. It has developed several successful capacity building programmeswith its member countries. www.adrc.or.jpAsian Institute of Technology (AIT), Bangkok, ThailandAIT is an international graduate institution of higher learning with a mission to develop highly qualified andcommitted professionals who will play a leading role in the sustainable development of the region and itsintegration into the global economy. http://www.ait.ac.th/Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), SingaporeIts goal is to advance economic dynamism and sense of community within the Asia-Pacific region.APEC has established itself as the primary regional vehicle for promoting open trade and practical economic and technical cooperation.http://www.apecsec.org.sg/Association of Caribbean States (ACS), Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, West IndiesThe Convention Establishing the ACS was signed on 24 July 1994 in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, with the aim of promoting consultation,cooperation and concerted action among all the countries of the Caribbean, comprising 25 Member States and three AssociateMembers. Eight other non-independent Caribbean states are eligible for associate membership. Its current focus is on cooperation intrade, transport, sustainable tourism and natural disasters. http://www.acs-aec.org/Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), Bangkok, ThailandThe ASEAN Declaration states that the aims and purposes of the Association are: (i) to accelerate the economic growth, socialprogress and cultural development in the region through joint endeavours in the spirit of equality and partnership in order tostrengthen the foundation for a prosperous and peaceful community of Southeast Asian nations, and (ii) to promote regional peaceand stability through abiding respect for justice and the rule of law in the relationship among countries in the region and adherenceto the principles of the United Nations Charter. http://www.aseansec.org/Auckland Local Authority Hazard Liaison Group, New ZealandIt was established by the Auckland Regional Council to enhance communication between local authorities in hazard managementissues and to facilitate intra-council communication. The Group was set up to recognize the link between hazard mitigation andland use planning, and the need to develop tools in areas to successfully manage risk, and to improve communication between thoseworking in the area of sustainable development and environment management.http://www.ema.gov.au/5virtuallibrary/pdfs/vol16no4/pardy.pdfAustralian Emergency Management Institute (AEMI), Victoria, Australia (See : EMAI)AEMI was an arm of Emergency Management Australia (EMA), which is the federal agency responsible for reducing the impactof natural and man-made disasters on the Australian community. AEMI as a registered training organisation, annually conductinga range of Commonwealth-funded activities designed to improve Australia’s capability to cope with disasters. http://www.emergency.nsw.gov.au/AEMI.htmAustralian Geological Survey Organization (AGSO)Geoscience Australia is the national agency for geoscience research and information. It contributes to enhance economic, social andenvironmental benefits to the community - by providing input for decisions that impact upon resource use, management of the environment,and the safety and well-being of Australians. Its major planned outcomes are: enhanced global attractiveness of Australia’soffshore and onshore exploration, improved resource management and environmental protection, safer communities and transportation.http://www.agso.gov.au/bBenfield Greig Hazard Research Centre (BGHRC), University College London, United KingdomThe BGHRC is an academic research centre which comprises three groups: Geological Hazards, Meteorological and Space Hazards,and Disaster Management. The BGHRC provides a conduit for the transfer of cutting-edge natural hazard and riskresearch, practice, and innovation from the academic environment to the business world and government and international agencies.www.bghrc.comBureau de la protection des infrastructures essentielles et de la protection civile, Canada(BPIEPC). Also Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness (OCIPEP)Its mission is to enhance the safety and security of Canadians in their physical and cyber environment.http://www.ocipep-bpiepc.gc.ca/index.html344

Annexesa2Business and Industry Council for Emergency Planning and Preparedness (BICEPP)In 1983, the Mayor of Los Angeles and a group of business leaders met to discuss disaster preparedness. This group subsequentlybecame a steering committee and formed the Business and Industry Council for Emergency Planning and Preparedness (BICEPP). Itwas established as a private sector, self- help association funded by annual sponsorship donations. BICEPP later evolved into a non-profitcorporation, lead by an Executive Committee and a Board of Directors. It goal is to provide a forum for information exchange, toenhance emergency preparedness and contingency planning within the business community.http://www.bicepp.org/cCanadian International Development Agency (CIDA)CIDA supports sustainable development activities in order to reduce poverty and to contribute to a more secure, equitable and prosperousworld. http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/index.htmCaribbean Community (CARICOM)Its mission is :”To provide dynamic leadership and service, in partnership with Community institutions and Groups, toward the attainmentof a viable, internationally competitive and sustainable Community, with improved quality of life for all.” http://www.caricom.org/Caribbean Development Bank (CDB), St. Michael, BarbadosCDB intends to be the leading Caribbean development finance institution, working in an efficient, responsive and collaborativemanner with its borrowing members, leading towards the systematic reduction of poverty in member countries, through social andeconomic development. http://www.caribank.org/Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency (CDERA), St. Michael, BarbadosCDERA is an intergovernmental, regional disaster management organization with 16 participating states, headquartered in Barbados.CDERA’s main function is to launch an immediate and coordinated response to any disastrous event affecting any participatingstate, once the state requests such assistance. www.cdra.orgCentral American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI), HondurasCABEI, as a development bank and the financial arm of integration, has as its mission to promote progress and integration in the Isthmus,to foment economic growth with equity and to respect the environment, by means of supporting public and private projects andprograms that create productive employment and contribute to improve productivity and competitiveness, as well as to increase thehuman development indices of the region. Headquartered in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, CABEI was founded on December 13, 1960, bythe Republics of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica to promote regional integration and development. Thebank’s membership has since grown to include the extra-regional members of Mexico, the Republic of China (Taiwan), Argentina and,most recently, Colombia. http://www.bcie.org/Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control (CCFSC), Viet NamThe CCFS Control is responsible for emergency responses to disastrous events in Viet Nam.Central European Disaster Prevention Forum (CEUDIP)This Forum has been established in 1999 by decision of the Central European Committees for the International Decade for Natural DisasterReduction of the United Nations (IDNDR). This was done in order to continue the efforts initiated during the Decade by thecountries of Central Europe (Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) in activities requiring collaboration ofneighbouring countries in all types of disasters, in particular in floods on rivers which are shared by these countries. The main focus wason early warning, but other important issues are being mutually considered, including the media’s role, disaster prevention and mitigationand legislation on states of emergency . http://www.unisdr.org/unisdr/dirregional.htmCentre International de Formation des Acteurs locaux (CIFAL), France (International Training Centre for Local Actors)The objectives of the center are: to contribute to crisis management by UN agencies; to focus on the role of local community for emergencyhumanitarian response and aids for reconstruction and to establish partnership with UN agencies and other international actors.http://www.unitar.org/cifal/Center for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), United KingdomThe Centre for Ecology and Hydrology’s site at Wallingford is home to the hydrology research centre for the United Kingdom (the formerInstitute of Hydrology), as well as the British Geological Survey’s hydrogeology research group, the publishing office of the InternationalAssociation of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS Press) and a section of the Natural Environmental Research Council’s (NERC) centralIT Solutions and Services Group.www.nerc-wallingford.ac.uk www.ceh.ac.ukCenter for Integration of Natural Disaster Information (CINDI), United States Geological SurveyCINDI is a research and operational facility that explores methods for collecting, integrating, and communicating informationabout the risks posed by natural hazards and the effects of natural disasters.http://mac.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/factsheets/fs00301.html345

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCenter on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP), Dhaka, BangladeshCIRDAP is a regional, intergovernmental and autonomous institution established in July 1979 by the countries of Asia and the Pacificregion. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, which had the support of several other UN bodies anddonor countries and agencies such as Japan, and the Swedish International Development Agency took the initiative for its creation. Themember countries of CIRDAP are Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan,Philippines, Sri Lanka,Thailand, and Vietnam. http://www.cirdap.org.sg/Centre européen de prévention des risques (CEPR), FranceThe CEPR is a center on applied sciences in the field of prevention. Its work is founded on the expertise of insurers, researchers, andmanufacturers of products and services. http://www.cepr.tm.fr/fr/index.htmCentre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), Catholic University ofLouvain, Brussels, Belgium Although the main focus of the Centre is on safeguards, public health and the sanitary aspects of disasters,CRED also studies the socio-economic and long-term effects of these large-scale disasters. Increasingly, preparedness, principally at thelevel of human resource development as well as problems linked to the management of crises, have gained a higher profile withinCRED’s activities. It maintains the OFDA/CRED international disaster database EM-DAT. http://www.cred.be/Centre Régional AGRHYMET, Niamey, NigerCreated in 1974, AGRHYMETis a specialized hydro-meteorological institute of the Permanent Interstate Committee for DroughtControl in the Sahel (CILSS http://www.agrhymet.ne/AGRHYMETCentro de Coordinacion para la Prevención de Desastres Naturales en América Central(CEPREDENAC), Republic of Panama (Coordinating Centre for the Prevention of NaturalDisasters in Central America)CEPREDENAC was established in 1988 as a coordination center for strengthening the capacity of the region as a whole to reducethe vulnerability of the population to the effects of natural disasters. In May 1995, CEPREDENAC became an official organizationset up to foster the Central American Integration System (SICA)with the Governments of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras,Nicaragua and Panama as members. www.cepredenac.org/Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (CENAPRED), Mexixo (National Center for Disaster Prevention)The National Centre for Disaster Prevention was created by an Agreement of Cooperation between the governments of Mexicoand Japan for the use and transfer of technology for the prevention of disasters. http://www.cenapred.unam.mx/Centro Peruano Japonés de Investigaciones Sísmicas y Mitigación de Desastres(CISMID), (Peruvian-Japanese Centre for Seismic Research and Disaster Mitigation)http://www.cismid.uni.edu.pe/Centro Regional de Informacion de Desastres (CRID), San José, Costa Rica (Regional DisasterInformation Centre)CRID is an initiative sponsored by six organizations that decided to join efforts to ensure the compilation and dissemination of disaster-relatedinformation in Latin America and the Caribbean. Its mission is to promote the development of a prevention culture in theLatin American and Caribbean countries, through the compilation and dissemination of disaster-related information, and the promotionof co-operative efforts to improve risk management in the region. www.crid.or.crCenter for Disease Control and prevention (CDC) Atlanta, United StatesCDC is recognized as the lead federal agency for protecting the health and safety of people – at home and abroad, providing credibleinformation to enhance health decisions, and promoting health through strong partnerships. CDC serves as the national focus for developingand applying disease prevention and control, environmental health, and health promotion and education activities designed toimprove the health of the people of the United States. http://www.cdc.gov/Comité permanent Inter-Etats de Lutte Contre la Sécheresse dans le Sahel (CILSS), Ouagadougou,Burkina Faso (Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel)Its mission is to be involved in the research of food security and to combat the effects of drought and desertification for better ecologicalstability. http://www.cilss.org/Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (CCAD), El Salvador (Central AmericanCommission for Environment and Development)It is called to protect and, at the same time, give value to the regional patrimony, which is characterized by its biological diversity andecosystems. Accordingly, it is also called to be a bridge of collaboration between the countries of the region seeking the adoption of thethemes of sustainable development by soliciting the collaboration of all the parties that work in the field of development. It is the regionalinstitution in Central America responsible for the coordination of Corridor activities and other regional environment and developmentinitiatives in Central America. http://ccad.sgsica.org/346

Annexesa2Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias (CNE), Costa Rica(National Risk Prevention and Emergency Response Commission)The National Commission for Risk Prevention and Emergency Management is the entity responsible for the coordination of preventionwork on risk and for the mitigation and response to emergency situations (Article 19 of the Legislature). The development of the NationalLaw for Emergencies, on the 14 th of August, 1969, was the foundation for the National Commission. www.cne.go.crComisión Permanente de Contingencias (COPECO), Honduras (The Permanent Commission for Contingencies)Presently, the Executive Council is organizing the lobbying of a new law which will make the management of contingencies more efficientand which will support the creation of a National System for the prevention, mitigation and management of disasters and emergencies.http://www.copeco.hn/Commission for the Geological Map of the World (CGMW)The CGMW’s aims are to promote, coordinate and publish synthetic Earth sciences maps, at small scale, of continental and / or oceanicareas of the World. It is a non-profit scientific and pedagogic body governed by French law.http://ccgm.free.fr/ccgm_gb.html-World Geological Maps Search System : http://www.aist.go.jp/RIODB/g-mapi/welcome.htmlCommittee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS)CEOS is an international organization charged with coordinating international civil spaceborne missions designated to observe and studyplanet Earth. Comprising 41 space agencies and other national and international organizations, CEOS is recognized as the major internationalforum for the coordination of Earth observation satellite programs and for interaction of these programs with users of satellite dataworldwide.http://www.ceos.org/Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), United NationsThe Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space was set up by the United Nations General Assembly in 1959 to review thescope of international cooperation in peaceful uses of outer space, to devise programmes in this field to be undertaken under UnitedNations auspices, to encourage continued research and the dissemination of information on outer space matters, and to studylegal problems arising from the exploration of outer space. http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/COPUOS/copuos.htmlConsejo Regional de Cooperación Agricola (CORECA) para America Central, Mexico y la Republica Dominicana (Regional Councilfor Agricultural Cooperation in Central America, Mexico and the Dominican Republic).The development of Regional Council for Agricultural Cooperation (CORECA) began in 1980 when a meeting of the International andRegional Committee on Agronomic Security, under the guidance of Panama and the Dominican Republic, put forward the idea of establishinga political forum at the Ministerial level for the agricultural sector. The Council’s principal objective was to serve as a permanentforum for consultation and cooperation between the various political parties of the regions’ agricultural sectors. Particularly, it wouldfocus on raising the quality of life for farmers, improving the environment, initiating technological development and offering wide-rangingcooperation. The Member States of CORECA include : Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua,Panama, and the Dominican Republic. http://www.sagarpa.gob.mx/Dgai/coreca.htmConsultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)The CGIAR was created in 1971, when its first formal meeting was held at the World Bank. Its mission is now to contribute, throughits research, to promoting sustainable agriculture for food security in developing countries. Membership of the Group has increased fromeighteen to fifty-eight, the number of CGIAR centers has grown to sixteen, and their research interests have been diversified.http://www.cgiar.org/Coordinadora Nacional para la Reducción de Desastres (CONRED), Guatemala (National Coordinator for Disaster Reduction)http://www.conred.org/Coordinating Committee for Coastal and Offshore Geoscience Programmes in East and SoutheastAsia (CCOP), Bangkok, ThailandCCOP is an Intergovernmental Organization focused on regional geo-scientific aspects. It consists of 11member countries i.e., Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea,The Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam and is supported by 14 cooperating countries and severalinternational organizations. http://www.ccop.or.th/Coordinating Council for Disaster Management (CCGC), MozambiqueThe Co-ordinating Council for Disaster Management (CCGC) is the government body responsible for policy decisions relating to disasters.The Prime Minister chairs the CCGC and his deputy is the Minister of Foreign Affairs & Co-operation.Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere (CARE)CARE, an NGO, consists of 11 member organizations, working as a global force dedicated to achievinglasting victory over poverty. http://www.care.org/Corporación Andina de Fomento (CAF), Caracas, Venezuela (Andean Development Corporation)The CAF is made up of Latin American and Caribbean shareholders (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru,Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago and 22 private347

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesdbanks in the Andean region). It has the mission of backing the sustainable development of its shareholder countriesand of integration by raising funds to provide a range of financial services.http://www.comunidadandina.org/ingles/who/caf.htmCouncil for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), South AfricaConstituted as a Science Council by an Act of Parliament, the CSIR operates as a market-oriented contract and consortium researchpartner to its clients and stakeholders. CSIR focuses on building Africa’s capacity in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)project management. CSIR Water, Environment and Forestry Technology (Environmentek) has been involved in the developmentand presentation of EIA capacity building courses for the past 10 years. www.csir.co.zaCouncil of Europe – EUR-OPA Major Hazards AgreementThe Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has set up the Open Partial Agreement in 1987. This intergovernmentalAgreement is a platform for cooperation in the field of major natural and technological disasters between Eastern Europe, theMediterranean area and Western Europe concerning knowledge about prevention, risk management, post-crisis analysis andrehabilitation.http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/Disasters/http://ps.superb.net/icod/OPA.HTMCranfield Disaster Management Center, University of Cranfield, United KingdomThe Disaster Management Centre was founded in 1985. Its aim is to save lives and livelihoods at risk from disaster impactthrough the promotion of risk and vulnerability reduction, preparedness and effective disaster response. The Disaster ManagementCentre believes that disaster risks and vulnerabilities can be reduced through the application of sound management principlesand practice. http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/deptsshr.htmDepartment of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM), NepalDHM is an organisation under the Ministry of Science and Technology. The department with headquarters in Kathmandu hasfour basin offices: Karnali Basin Office in Surkhet, Narayani Basin Office in Pokhara, Bagmati Basin Office in Kathmandu, andKosi Basin Office in Dharan. DHM has a mandate from to monitor all the hydrological and meteorological activities in Nepal.The scope of work includes the monitoring of river hydrology, climate, agrometeorology, sediment, air quality, water quality, limnology,snow hydrology, glaciology, and wind and solar energy. General and aviation weather forecasts are the regular servicesprovided by DHM. As a member of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), DHM contributes to the globalexchange of meteorological data on a regular basis. DHM actively participates in the programs of relevant international organisations,such as, UNESCO’s International Hydrological Program (IHP) and WMO’s Operational Hydrology Program (OHP).http://www.dhm.gov.np/Department of International Development (DFID), United KingdomDFID is a United Kingdom Government department, working to promote sustainable development and eliminateworld poverty. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Deutsches Forschungsnetz Naturkatastrophen (DFNK), Germany (German Research Network forNatural Disasters)The German Research Network for Natural Disasters is an initiative of German research programmes and institutions. The Network’sgoal is to collect, organize and disseminate information from research, knowledge and methodology on the topic of natural disasterstaken from technical, environmental and social research sources working in this field. http://dfnk.gfz-potsdam.de/index.htmlDeutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Germany (German Agency forTechnical Cooperation)GTZ is a government-owned corporation for international cooperation with worldwide operations. Inmore than 120 partner countries, GTZ is supporting many development projects and programmes, chieflyunder commissions from the German Federal Government. GTZ’s aim is to improve the living conditionsand perspectives of people in developing and transition countries. http://www.gtz.de/Deutsches Komite für Katastrophenvorsorge e.V. (DKKV) (German Committee for Disaster Reduction)The tasks of the DKKV for disaster reduction are numerous and to a degree very particular: From technical projects researching theeffects of disasters on society to political programmes encouraging the growth of disaster reduction initiatives. http://www.dkkv.org/Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU), ZambiaIn 1998, the Government of Zambia established the DMMU as part of the Vice President’s Office to coordinate disaster relatedactivities. The DMMU is supported by a Technical Committee, which includes the Ministry of Agriculture’s Office of EarlyWarning Systems (EWS), the Ministry of Agriculture Food and Fisheries, the Central Statistical Office, and key line ministriessuch as Health, Finance and Economic Development.348

Annexesa2Disaster Management Center, University of Wisconsin, USA.The center’s goal is to help improve the emergency management performance of non-governmental organizations, local and nationalgovernments, and international organizations, through a comprehensive professional development program in disaster management.Distance learning is the principal approach for this international program. http://dmc.engr.wisc.edu/about/edlinks.htmlDisaster Management Facility (DMF), World Bank, Washington D.C., USADMF aims to reduce human suffering and economic losses caused by natural and technological disasters. Making sure that disaster preventionand mitigation are integral parts of development requires action, the DMF takes action by providing technical support to WorldBank operations, promoting capacity-building, and establishing partnerships with the international and scientific community working ondisaster issues. http://www.worldbank.org/dmf/mission.htmDisaster Management Institute of Southern Africa. (DMISA), South AfricaDMISA is an organisation where everyone involved in Disaster Management can relate to others with similar interests, and createsopportunities for the improvement of disaster management in Southern Africa.http://www.cmc.gov.za/pht/DMISA.htmDisaster Management Technical Council (CTGC), MozambiqueThe CTGC provides technical back-up to the National Disaster Management Institute (INGC), an autonomous institution underthe Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation.Disaster Management Unit, (DMU), Standing Office of the Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control(CCFSC), VietnamThe Vietnam Disaster Management Unit (DMU) is the mechanism chosen by the Government of Vietnam andUNDP to join together over 1000 years of Vietnamese flood protection culture with twenty-first century westerntechnology to better protect the entire population of Vietnam against the annual natural disasters that ravage thecountry. http://www.undp.org.vn/dmu/index.htmlDisaster Recovery Business Alliance (DRBA)DRBA is an organization, a process and a product that is designed to provide an improvement in a community’s ability to deal with disasterrecovery by the formation of an effective alliance between the private and public sectors of a community. It offers a tested model toassist local leaders in forming and facilitating a lifeline-based planning organization to serve a local community. It was established andfunded by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and co-founded by the Department of Energy, and the Association of ContingencyPlanners (ACP). DRBA has formed partnerships with many public and private sector organizations such as the Central UnitedStates Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC), National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), the Institute for Business andHome Safety (IBHS) and many others. http://www.acp-international.com/drba/Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware, USADRC, is a social science research center devoted to the study of disasters. It was established at Ohio State University in 1963 and movedto the University of Delaware in 1985. The center conducts field and survey research on group, organizational and community preparationfor, response to, and recovery from natural and technological disasters and other community-wide crises. DRC researchers have carriedout systematic studies on a broad range of disaster types, including hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, hazardous chemicalincidents, plane crashes. http://www.udel.edu/DRC/nodhtml.htmlDrought Monitoring Centre (DMC), Harare, Zimbabwe and Nairobi, KenyaThe Drought Monitoring Centres (DMCs) for Eastern and Southern Africa are charged with the responsibility of monitoring ofdrought and other climatic conditions in a timely manner with respect to intensity, geographical extent, duration and impact upon agriculturalproduction and to give early warning for the formulation of appropriate strategies to combat any anticipated adverse effects.http://www.meteo.go.ke/dmc/contact.html http://lion.meteo.go.ke/dmc/eEarthquake Disaster Mitigation Research Center (EDM), Miki, JapanThe main purpose of the EDM is to produce “Frontier Research on Earthquake Disaster Mitigation for Urban Regions.” The majorresearch activities are performed by three research teams: the disaster process simulation team, the disaster information system team andthe structural performance team. http://www.edm.bosai.go.jp/english.htmEarthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), Oakland, California, USAThe objective of EERI is to reduce earthquake risk by advancing the science and practice of earthquakeengineering, by improving understanding of the impact of earthquakes on the physical, social, economic,political and cultural environment,and by advocating comprehensive and realistic measures for reducing the harmful effects of earthquakes. http://www.eeri.org/349

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEMERCOM RussiaMinistry of Civil Defense and Emergencies. http://emercom.on.ufanet.ru/Emergency Management Australia (EMA)EMA provides national leadership in the development of measures to reduce risk to communities and manage the consequencesof disasters. It is the Federal Agency responsible for reducing the impact of natural and man-made disasters on the Australian community.http://www.ema.gov.au/Emergency Management Australia Institute (EMAI), Mt. Macedon, AustraliaEmergency Management Australia’s research and training centre at Mt Macedon was renamed the “Emergency Management AustraliaInstitute” (EMAI) in January, 2002 . The change was made to better reflect the Institute as an integral part of EMA’s corebusiness and to stress the holistic nature of the organisation’s operations across its sites in Canberra and Mt. Macedon Victoria.EMAI conducts a program of activities which includes the National Studies Program, education and training activities, resourcedevelopment to support the curriculum and the provision of information through the Australian Emergency Management InformationCentre. EMAI is the education and information arm of Emergency Management Australia (EMA).http://www.ema.gov.au/fs-education.htmlEmergency Preparedness Canada (EPC)see: Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness (OCIPEP).http://www.ocipep-bpiepc.gc.ca/home/index_e.htmlEnvironment and Society Institute (ESI), State University of New York, Buffalo, USAIt offers courses on engineering and applied sciences and hosts the National Centre for Geographic Information and Analysis(NCGIA), the Center for Urban Studies. The Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) is an affiliatedresearch center. http://www.buffalo.edu/European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO)The European Union’s mandate to ECHO is to provide emergency assistance and relief to the victims of natural disasters or armedconflict outside the European Union. The aid is intended to go directly to those in distress, irrespective of race, religion or political convictions.http://europa.eu.int/comm/echo/en/index_en.htmlEuropean Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen, DenmarkThe EEA aims to support sustainable development and to help achieve significant and measurable improvement in Europe’s environmentthrough the provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reliable information to policy making agents and thepublic.http://www.eea.eu.int/European Directorate General Joint Research Centre (JRC)The Joint Research Centre (JRC) Directorate-General is an integral part of the European Commission. It provides independentscientific and technical advice to the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and EU Member States insupport of European Union (EU) policies. Its main aim is to help to create a safer, cleaner, healthier and more competitive Europe.Its seven scientific institutes carry out research of direct concern to EU citizens. It provides technical know-how both directly andthrough co-ordinating and contributing to numerous broader networks linking industry, universities and national institutes. TheJRC is playing an important role in helping establish the European Research Area (ERA). http://www.jrc.org/European Laboratory for Structural Assessment – Earthquake Engineering (ELSA), Ispra, ItalyThe construction of bridges, viaducts, buildings or tunnels, which can withstand earthquakes, involves using particularly sophisticatedsimulation laboratories. The most prestigious of these is ELSA, which is a technological flagship for the European Commission’sJoint Research Centre. http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/success/en/env/0071e.htmlEuropean Research Area (ERA)On 18, January 2000 the European Commission adopted this Communication “Towards a European Research Area” which ismeant to contribute to the creation of better overall framework conditions for research in Europe. ERA is regrouping all Communitysupports for the better coordination of research activities and the convergence of research and innovation policies, at national andEU levels. http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/era/index_en.htmlEuropean Union (EU)The European Union (EU) was set through the process of European integration was launched on 9 May 1950 when France officiallyproposed to create ‘the first concrete foundation of a European federation’. Six countries (Belgium, Germany, France, Italy,Luxembourg and the Netherlands) joined from the very beginning. Today, after four waves of accessions (1973: Denmark, Irelandand the United Kingdom; 1981: Greece; 1986: Spain and Portugal; 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden) the EU has 15 MemberStates and is preparing for the accession of 13 eastern and southern European countries. Its main agencies are: European Parliament,Council of the Union, European Commission, Court of Justice, Court of Auditors, European Central Bank, European Economicand Social Committee, Committee of the Regions, European Investment Bank, European Ombudsman.http://www.europa.eu.int/350

Annexesa2Experimental Climate Prediction Center (ECPC), USAECPC is developing an integrated regional climate prediction capability by undertaking basic research to identify coupled landatmosphere-oceanlinkages. ECPC models are being used to make routine experimental forecasts, which are continually evaluated inorder to demonstrate their utility to various sectors on temporal scales ranging from seasonal to interannual but also touching upondaily and decadal to centennial time scales. Once ECPC has demonstrated the usefulness of various forecast tools and methodologies,its goal is to transfer these experimental methodologies to NCEP, IRI and various regional application centers.http://ecpc.ucsd.edu/fFacultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLASCO), (Latin American Social ScienceFaculty)The faculty’s creation is based on the recommendation of UNESCO and the governments of Latin America and the Caribbean. Itsobjective is to promote education, research and technical cooperation in the field of social sciences for the entire region. www.flacso.clFederal Highway Administration (FHWA), US GovernmentThe Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation, headquartered in Washington,D.C., with field offices across the United States. Its mission is to provide leadership, expertise, resources and information in cooperationwith partners to enhance the country’s economic vitality, the quality of life, and the environment. The FHWA directly administersa number of highway transportation activities including standards development, research and technology, training, technical assistance,highway access to federally owned lands and Indian lands, and commercial vehicle safety enforcement. Further, FHWA has asignificant role, working through partnerships, programs, policies, and allocating resources which facilitate the strategic developmentand maintenance of State and local transportation systems as effective and efficient elements of the national intermodal transportationsystem. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)FICCI was established in 1927, on the advice of Mahatma Gandhi, to garner support for India’sindependence and to further the interests of the Indian business community. Today, after five decades ofIndian independence, FICCI is in the vanguard of nation building and is moving ahead to integratethe Indian economy with the global mainstream. http://www.ficci.com/ficci/index.htmFondo para la Reconstruccion y el Desarrollo Social del Eje Cafetero (FOREC), Armenia, ColombiaThe Fund for Reconstruction and Social Development in the Coffee Region is a specialized agency with its headquarters in Armeniaadministered by a legal staff under financial and political autonomy. Its objective is to promote the necessary work on economic, socialand ecological reconstruction in the Andean region affected by the earthquake of 25January, 1999. FOREC’s mission is to manage thepublic commitment of national institutions and agencies in the reconstruction work with honesty, clarity, will and efficiency in the use ofthe public resources and technological assistance offered for this work. FOREC received the UN Sasakawa Award for Disaster Reductionin 2000. http://www.forec.gov.co/Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources (FANR) - Development Unit, Harare, ZimbabweThe Southern African Development Community (SADC) is promoting regional Cooperation in economicdevelopment. It has adopted a Programme of Action covering cooperation in various sectors, includingfood security and natural resources management. In order to enhance food security for all in the region,SADC established a Food Security Programme. Its secretariat is formed by the Food, Agriculture andNatural Resources (FANR) Development Unit. http://www.sadc-fanr.org.zw/Foundation for International Community Assistance (FINCA)FINCA has been helping families to create their own solution to poverty since 1984. FINCA provides financial services to theworld’s poorest families so they can create their own jobs, raise household incomes and improve their standard of living.http://www.villagebanking.org/Foundation for the Support of Women’s Work (FSWW)The FSWW established in 1986 by a group of women from different backgrounds, is a non-profit NGO. It aims to build social,economic and community assets for and by grassroots women, and support their leadership throughout Turkey in improving thequality of their lives and of the community. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/env_manage/documents/EP11-2001Nov07.pdfFundación Nacional para el Desarrollo (FUNDE), El Salvador (National Development Foundation)FUNDE’s mission is to offer critical thinking, analysis and proposals for sustainable development and to engage the different partiesand leading institutions of the country with research and assistance in order to better the quality of life and opportunities of the marginalized.http://www.funde.org/Fundación para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Communal (CORDES), El Salvador (Development Corporation)Founded in 1988, CORDES is a non-governmental organization dedicated to the management of socio-economic development of therural communties in El Salvador, where the poverty and destruction from the war have affected human settlements by forcing the peopleout of their land. http://www.geocities.com/lia_hernandez/Perfil.html351

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesFundación Salvadoreña para la Asistencia Integral (FUSAI), El Salvador (SalvadorianFoundation for Integral Assistance)Its mission is to support the socioeconomic integration of sectors, regions and parties marginalized in society with the benefits ofdevelopment http://www.fusai.org/gGeoHazards International (GHI), California, USAGHI was established in 1993 as a nonprofit organization to reduce death and injury caused by earthquakes in the world’s mostvulnerable communities. In particular, GHI makes a community safer by raising awareness of its risk, building local institutions tomanage that risk, and strengthening schools to protect and train the community’s future generations. http://www.geohaz.org/Geological Survey of Japan (GSJ)GSJ is one of the 15 research institutes of the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST).http://www.aist.go.jp/GSJ/General Directorate of Civil Protection, Governorate of Grand Alger, AlgeriaThe General Directorate has carried out significant training activities on disaster prevention and the organization of internationalforums on disaster prevention.Global Fire Monitoring Center (GFMC), Freiburg, GermanyThe Global Fire Monitoring Center (GFMC) was been established in 1998 at the Fire Ecology and Biomass Burning ResearchGroup, a subdivision of the Biogeochemistry Department of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry (Mainz, Germany). Foundedin the 1970s at Freiburg University (Germany) the Fire Ecology Research Group was incorporated into the Max Planck Institute forChemistry in 1990. http://www2.ruf.uni-freiburg.de/fireglobe/Gujarat State Disaster Management Authorities (GSDMA), IndiaThe Government of Gujarat established the Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority in February, 2001 to co-ordinate thecomprehensive earthquake recovery program. The GSDMA is registered as a society with a vision to go beyond reconstruction andmake Gujarat economically vibrant, agriculturally and industrially competitive with improved standards of living and with a capacityto mitigate and manage future disasters. http://www.gsdma.org/hHigh Powered Committee (HPC) on Disaster Management Plans, Government of IndiaHPC has been constituted to review existing arrangements for preparedness and mitigation of natural and manmade disasters includingindustrial, nuclear, biological and chemical disasters; recommend measures for strengthening organizational structures, and recommenda comprehensive model plan far management of these disasters at National, State and District Level.http://www.ndmindia.nic.in/committee/hpcomm.htmlHungarian National Directorate General for Disaster Management (HNDGDM), BudapestFrom January, 2000 an integrated organization, the National Directorate for Disaster Management, Ministry of Interior has beenestablished in Hungary as the central organ of the integral national disaster management. It was established on the basis of the legalpredecessors, that is, the Civil Protection and the Fire Service. The system of protection against disasters is divided into three levels: international, national, the level of municipalities.iIbero-American Association of Civil Defense and Civil Protection, SpainThe Ibero-American Association for Civil Defense and Protection emerged from a 1-5 July 1996 meeting organized in Santiago, Chile,by the Pro Tempore Secretariat of the Space Conference of the Americas and Chile’s ONEMI. The subject of the meeting was the useof aerospace technology in disaster prevention and mitigation.http://www.proteccioncivil.org/asociacion/aigo0.htmhttp://www.crid.or.cr/crid/EIRD/DIRDNINF/No1_a1_2000/INGLES/pagina30.htmInstitute for Business Home Safety (IBHS), Boston, USAThe Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) is a nonprofit association sponsored by the insurance industry that engages incommunication, education, engineering and research. Its mission is to reduce deaths, injuries, property damage, economic losses andhuman suffering caused by natural disasters. http://www.ibhs.org/Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN). JapanRIKEN carries out high level experimental and research work in a wide range of fields, including physics,chemistry, medical science, biology, and engineering extending from basic research to practical application.http://www.riken.go.jp/Instituto Nacional de Gestao de Calamidades (INGC), Mozambique (National Disaster ManagementInstitute)Day-to-day management of matters relating to disasters is the responsibility of the National Disaster Management Institute. This is anautonomous institution under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Cooperation.352

Annexesa2Instituto Nicaraguense de Estudios Territoriales (INETER), Managua, Nicaragua, (Nicaraguan Institute for Territorial Studies)INETER is the technical and scientific body of the State that provides its services to the entire population in such areas as basicinformation (Cartography, Meteorology, Hydrology, etc.) as well as projects and studies of the environment which contribute tosocio-economic development and the lowering of vulnerability to natural disasters, continuously tracking dangerous natural phenomena.http://www.ineter.gob.ni/Inter-American Committee for Natural Disaster Reduction (IACNDR)The IACNDR is the main forum of the OAS and the Inter American System for the analysis of policies and strategies aimed at naturaldisaster reduction in the context of the sustainable development of member states. The OAS General Assembly established theIACNDR based on the need to strengthen the role of the OAS in natural disaster reduction and emergency preparedness.Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), Washington , DC, USAThe IADB is the oldest and largest regional multilateral development institution. It was established in December1959 to help accelerate economic and social development in Latin America and the Caribbean.http://www.iadb.org/Inter-departmental Disaster Management Committee, South AfricaIn April 1999, the Interim Disaster Management Centre was replaced with the Inter-departmental Disaster Management Committee todeal with disasters and other phenomena and to give advice to the Committee. The National Disaster Management Centre came intooperation on 1 April 2000. http://www.gov.za/structure/disaster.htmIntergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), Djibouti, Republic of Djibouti (AutoritéIntergouvernementale pour le développement)IGAD’s vision is based on determination of the Governments of the Sub-region to pool resources and co-ordinatedevelopment activities in order to tackle the present and future challenges more efficiently, and enable the subregionto interact and compete in the global economy. www.igadregion.orgIntergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), Paris, FranceThe Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO was founded in 1960 on the basis of therecognition that “the oceans, covering some seventy percent of the earth’s surface, exert a profound influence on mankind and even on allforms of life on Earth... In order to properly interpret the full value of the oceans to mankind, they must be studied from many points ofview. While pioneering research and new ideas usually come from individuals and small groups, many aspects of oceanic investigationspresent far too formidable a task to be undertaken by any one nation or even a few nations.” http://ioc.unesco.org/iocweb/default.htmIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)In 1988, UNEP and WMO jointly established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) asconcern over climate change became a political issue. The purpose of the IPCC was to assess the state ofknowledge on the various aspects of climate change including science, environmental and socio-economicimpacts and response strategies. The IPCC is recognized as the most authoritative scientific and technicalvoice on climate change, and its assessments had a profound influence on the negotiators of the UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol. The IPCCcontinues to provide governments with scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant toevaluating the risks and developing a response to global climate change.http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/16.htm www.ipcc.chInter-ministerial Committee for Disaster Management (IMC), South AfricaThe IMC provides leadership for the development and implementation of national policy on disaster management. Under the leadershipof the IMC, the Department of Constitutional Development published the Green Paper on Disaster Management for SouthAfrica for comment in February 1998. After consultation with key role players and comments from both the private and public sectorsaround the Green Paper, the White Paper evolved.www.polity.org.zaInternational Association of Earthquake Engineering (IAEE), JapanThe IAEE aims to promote international cooperation among scientists and engineers in the field of earthquake engineering throughinterchange of knowledge, ideas, and results of research and practical experience. http://www.iaee.or.jp/International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth’s Interior (IASPEI)The purpose of IASPEI is to promote the study of problems relating to earthquakes, to the propagation of seismic waves, and to theinternal structure, properties and processes of the Earth; to initiate and co-ordinate the conduct of researches which depend oncooperation between different countries, and to provide for their scientific discussion; to facilitate particular researches on scientificand applied seismology, such as the comparison of instruments used in different countries, researches on blasting andgenerally all matters to which seismology is related. http://www.seismo.com/iaspei/home.html353

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesInternational Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior (IAVCEI)The Association represents the primary international focus for: (1) research in volcanology, (2) efforts to mitigate volcanic disasters,and (3) research into closely related disciplines, such as igneous geochemistry and petrology, geochronology, volcanogenic mineraldeposits, and the physics of the generation and ascent of magmas in the upper mantle and crust. http://www.iavcei.org/International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), The World BankEstablished in 1945, IBRD aims to reduce poverty in middle-income and creditworthy poorer countries by promoting sustainabledevelopment, through loans, guarantees, and other analytical and advisory services.International Center for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), NepalICIMOD is committed to developing an economically and environmentally sound ecosystem and improving livingstandards of mountain communities, mainly in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas area. http://www.icimod.org.sg/International Center for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), Trieste, ItalyFounded in 1964 by Abdus Salam (Nobel Laureate), ICTP operates under the aegis of two United Nations Agencies: UNESCO andIAEA and is regularised by agreement with the Government of Italy which provides the major part of the Centre’s funding. One of themain aims of ICTP is to foster the growth of advanced studies in developing countries. http://www.ictp.trieste.it/International Center for Disaster Mitigation Engineering (INCEDE), University of Tokyo, JapanEstablished in 1991 as a national contribution of Japan towards the United Nations IDNDR, INCEDE serves as a forum fornational and international researchers in disaster-mitigation engineering and as an information clearance house.http://incede.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp/International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR), (Internationalen Kommission zum Schutz des Rheins (IKSR))Nobody is more aware of the fact that water protection is an international affair than the Dutch. The Rhine pollution has always shownparticularly negative effects in the Netherlands. That is why the Netherlands united the Rhine-bordering countries (Switzerland, France,Luxembourg, Germany) to discuss problems of water protection and to look for common solutions. The “International Commission forthe Protection of the Rhine against Pollution” (ICPR) was founded in Basel on July, 1950. http://www.iksr.org/index.htmInternational Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)ICRC is an impartial, neutral and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignityof victims of war and internal violence and to provide them with assistance. It directs and coordinates the international reliefactivities conducted by the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in situations of conflict. It also endeavours to prevent sufferingby promoting and strengthening humanitarian law and universal humanitarian principles. http://www.icrc.org/International Council of Science (ICSU), Paris, FranceICSU is a non-governmental organization, founded in 1931 to bring together natural scientists in international scientific endeavour. Itcomprises 98 multidisciplinary National Scientific Members (scientific research councils or science academies) and 26 international, singlediscipline Scientific Unions to provide a wide spectrum of scientific expertise enabling members to address international, interdisciplinaryissues which none could handle alone. www.icsu.orgInternational Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), SwitzerlandThe International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), founded in 1962, is a global network of humanrights, humanitarian, and development NGOs, which focuses its information exchange and advocacy effortsprimarily on humanitarian affairs and refugee issues. http://www.icva.ch/International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), 1990-1999An International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, beginning on 1 January 1990, was launched by the United Nations, followingthe adoption of Resolution 44/236 (22 December 1989). The Decade was intended to reduce, through concerted internationalaction, especially in developing countries, loss of life, poverty damage and social and economic disruption caused by naturaldisasters. To support the activities of the Decade, a Secretariat was established at the United Nations Office in Geneva, in closeassociation with UNDRO.International Development Association (IDA), The World BankThe International Development Association, IDA, is the World Bank’s concessional lending window. It provides long-term loans atzero interest to the poorest of the developing countries. IDA helps build the human capital, policies, institutions, and physical infrastructurethat these countries urgently need to achieve faster, environmentally sustainable growth. IDA’s goal is to reduce disparitiesacross and within countries, especially in access to primary education, basic health, and water supply and sanitation and to bringmore people into the mainstream by raising their productivity. http://www.worldbank.org/ida/354

Annexesa2International Drought Information Center, University of Nebraska, USAThe University of Nebraska at Lincoln established the International Drought Information Center (IDIC) to better understand theproblem of drought. IDIC strives to improve communication about prediction, monitoring, impact assessment, adjustment and adaptation,and planning and response to drought.http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/hazard/resource/methaz/drtinfoa.htmlwww.enso.unl.edu/agmet/centers.htmInternational Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)IFRC is the world’s largest humanitarian organization, providing assistance without discrimination as to nationality, race, religiousbeliefs, class or political opinions. http://www.ifrc.org/International Institute for Disaster Risk Management (IDRM), Manila, PhilippinesThe IDRM promotes international standards and best practices in disaster and risk management. It works onprinciples of continuous learning, organizational and individual professional development. IDRM experts andpartners are committed to applying appropriate, innovative and inexpensive solutions to development and disasterrisk management. http://www.idrmhome.org/International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, IranThe main goal of IIEES is seismic risk reduction and mitigation both in Iran and the region by promoting research and educationin science and technology related to seismotectonic, seismology and earthquake engineering. IIEES activity in research covers allaspects of earthquakes from tectonic study to retrofitting complex structure; and in education from public education to Ph.D programin earthquake engineering. http://www.iiees.ac.ir/English/eng_index.htmlInternational Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Winnipeg, Manitoba, CanadaIts mission is to champion innovation, enabling societies to live sustainably. It advances policy recommendations on internationaltrade and investment, economic policy, climate change, measurement and indicators, and natural resource management to makedevelopment sustainable. By using the Internet it covers and reports on international negotiations and brokers knowledge gainedthrough collaborative projects with global partners, resulting in more rigorous research, capacity building indeveloping countries anda better dialogue between North and South. IISDnet identifies issues, sets goals, and compiles information on sustainable growth.www.iisd.org/default.aspInternational Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, SwitzerlandISO is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies from some 140 countries, one from each country. ISO is a non-governmentalorganization established in 1947. The mission of ISO is to promote the development of standardization and related activitiesin the world with a view to facilitating the international exchange of goods and services, and to developing cooperation in the spheresof intellectual, scientific, technological and economic activity. ISO’s work results in international agreementswhich are published as International Standards. www.iso.orgInternational Research Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI), NY, United StatesIRI was established as a cooperative agreement between US NOAA Office of Global Programs and Columbia University. IRI is a unitof the Columbia Earth Institute located at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. The vision of the IRI is that of an innovative scienceinstitution working to accelerate the ability of societies worldwide to cope with climate fluctuations, especially those that cause devastatingimpacts on humans and the environment, thereby reaping the benefits of decades of research on the predictability of El Niño-SouthernOscillation phenomenon and other climate variations. By orchestrating a wide network of collaborations and comprehensive programsthat couple physical science research and applications research with capacity building, the IRI is a unique institution in the internationaldevelopment of applications of climate prediction. http://iri.ldeo.columbia.edu/Internationale Kommission zum Schutz des Rheines, (IKSR), Germany. See: International Commissionfor the protection of the Rhine(ICPR). http://www.iksr.org/International Tsunami Information Center (ITIC), Honolulu, HawaiiITIC was established on 12 November 1965 by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic UNESCO. In 1968, IOC formed an InternationalCoordination Group for the Tsunami Warning System in the Pacific (ICG/ITSU). ITIC monitors the activities of the TsunamiWarning System in the Pacific.http://www.shoa.cl/oceano/itic/frontpage.htmlInstituto Nacional de Gestao de Calamidades, (INGC), Mozambique (National Institute for DisasterManagement)The National Institute for Disaster Management was created in June 1999, under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation.It has an executive role in preventive actions and assistance for victims and areas at risk or affected by disasters. http://www.teledata.mz/ingc/default_eng.htm355

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesjJapan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)JICA is responsible for the technical cooperation aspect of Japan’s Official Development Assistance (ODA) programs. Technical cooperationand a variety of programmes are aimed at the transfer of technology and knowledge that can serve the socio-economic developmentof the developing countries. http://www.jica.go.jp/Japan Meteorology Agency (JMA)The major activities of JMA are: (1) to issue warnings, advisories and forecasts in short-range, one-week and long range ; (2) to dealwith the global environmental issues such as global warming and ozone depletion; (3) to provide information on earthquake and volcanicactivities. http://www.kishou.go.jp/english/index.htmllmLa Red de Estudios Sociales en Prevención de Desastres en América Latina (LA RED), (The LatinAmerican Network for the Social Study of Disaster Prevention)Initially conceived as a mechanism to facilitate comparative research of natural disasters from a social perspective, LA Red has developedinto the focal point for hundreds of individuals and institutions working in the field of disaster and risk management in the differentcountries of Latin America and the Caribbean. http://www.desenredando.org/Médecins sans Frontiéres (MSF)MSF is an international humanitarian aid organization that provides emergency medical assistance to populations in danger in morethan 80 countries. In countries where health structures are insufficient or even non-existant, MSF collaborates with authorities suchas the ministries of health to provide assistance. MSF works in rehabilitation of hospitals and dispensaries, vaccination programmesand water and sanitation projects. MSF also works in remote health care centres, slum areas and provides training oflocal personnel. All this is done with the objective of rebuilding health structures to acceptable levels. http://www.msf.org/Megacities 2000 Foundation, NetherlandsThe Megacities Foundation in the Netherlands was started as a direct result of an initative taken by UNESCO which asked theInternational Academy of Architecture (IAA) to focus attention on the problems of the explosively growing megalopolises. TheMegacities Foundation was created in December 1994 and has since organised the following events: Step-up conference, May 1995in Rotterdam: “Megacities 2000” First Megacities Lecture, February 1997 in The Hague: Peter Hall, “Megacities, world citiesand global cities” Second Megacities Lecture, November 1998 in The Hague: Saskia Sassen, “Urban Economy and Fading Distance,Cities in the Unlimited Space of a Global Network” (workingtitle) http://www.megacities.nl/main.htm_Mekong River Commission (MRC), CambodiaMRC promotes and co-ordinates sustainable management and development of water and related resources among countries borderingthe Mekong River in Southeast Asia. http://www.mrcmekong.org/Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (MARN), El Salvador (Ministry ofEnvironment and Natural Resources)Its mission is to direct an effective management of the environment through the clear policies and all-encompassing initiatives whichhelp sustain development of the Salvadorian society. http://www.marn.gob.sv/Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT), VenezuelaIts mission is : To develop policies, strategies and plans which support the creation of a scientific and technical entity that carries outresearch and initiatives in pursuit of satisfying the needs of the population and promoting the national industry; To strengthen researchand development initiatives for the improvement of innovations and national production; To support postgraduate programmes thatfoment scientific, technical and humanitarian development in the country; To collaborate with the Ministry of Commerce and Industryand other regional organizations in the support of the national industry; To support and strengthen the scientific and technical communityas an important tool for socio-economic development. http://www.mct.gov.ve/Multi-disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER), Buffalo, NY, USAMCEER’s overall goal is to enhance the seismic resiliency of communities through improved engineering and management tools forcritical infrastructure systems (water supply, electric power, hospitals, transportation systems). Seismic resilience (technical, organizational,social and economic) is by reduced probability of system failure, reduced consequences due to failure, and reduced time to systemrestoration. MCEER works toward this goal by conducting integrated research, outreach, and education activities in partnershipwith the users of the center products. http://mceer.buffalo.edu/Munich Reinsurance, GermanyMunichRe is not only a world leader in reinsurance but it has also strategically strengthened its business with strong involvement in primaryinsurance and in asset management. Knowledge and expertise, client services and preferred partner in risk: these are the attributeswhich characterize Munich Re. It covers a range of special subjects such as: risk management and industrial insurance, alternative risktransfer. In “Topics”, a publication which appears twice a year, Munich Re experts look at the current situation of natural disastersthroughout the world and current topics and trends in the insurance industry. “Topics” also presents new Munich Re products andservices, as well as the world map on natural catastrophes.http://www.munichre.com/index.html356

Annexesa2Musokotwane Environment Resource Centre for Southern Africa (IMERCSA), ZimbabweIMERCSA is a unit established in 1994, within the Southern African Research and Documentation Centre (SARDC). IMERCSA hasbibliographic databases with more than 6,000 records on the environment and disaster management issues. Its contacts databases, whichlist individual experts and organizations involved in environment and disaster management issues in the SADC region, have a total ofabout 2,600 entries. The centre also has a public library with reading facilities for policy planners, researchers, diplomats, journalists, andothers interested in issues with a regional perspective. IMERCSA provides in- house training for young documentalists and journalists.In collaboration,with regionally-based organizations, IMERCSA also carries out training workshops mainly formenvironmental journalistsin southern Africa. Although the centre does not carry out primary research, it responds to information requests from researcherswho are involved in this activity. IMERCSA has produced several books and environmental articles, factsheets and reports on topicalenvironmental issues in the SADC region. http://www.sardc.net/imercsa/nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USASince its inception in 1958, NASA has accomplished many great scientific and technological feats in air and space. NASA technologyalso has been adapted for many non-aerospace uses by the private sector. NASA remains a leading force in scientific research and instimulating public interest in aerospace exploration, as well as science and technology in general. http://www.nasa.gov/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, Colorado, United StatesIt is NCAR’s mission to plan, organize, and conduct atmospheric and related research programs in collaboration with the universitiesand other institutions, to provide state-of-the-art research tools and facilities to the atmospheric sciences community, to support andenhance university atmospheric science education, and to facilitate the transfer of technology to both the public and private sectors.Created in 1960, the Center is operated by the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) under a cooperative agreementwith the National Science Foundation.http://www.ncar.ucar.edu/ncar/index.htmlNational Center for Disaster Management (NCDM), New Dehli, IndiaNCDM has been established by the Government of India and located in the Indian Institute of Public Administration with the objectivesof providing training programs for senior and middle level administrative government officials which sensitize them for disastermitigation; coordinating the research activities in different aspects of disaster management at national level.National Committee for Disaster Management (NCDM), Phnom Penh, CambodiaIn 1995, as a result of the country’s experience with regularly occurring disasters, the Royal Government of Cambodia establishedNCDM. Its responsibilities are defined in terms of, not only providing timely and effective emergency relief to the victims of disasters,but also developing preventive measures to reduce loss of lives and property. This is accomplished by applying scientific and technicalknowledge to mitigate disasters. www.cred.be/centre/research/ncdm.pdfNational Disaster Management Centre (NDMC), Pretoria, South AfricaIts mission is to improve knowledge, awareness and understanding of disasters, and to coordinate and facilitate Access to informationand resources in order to promote and support comprehensive, integrated and effective disaster management in South Africa.http://sandmc.pwv.gov.za/National Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission (DPPC), Addis Ababa, EthiopiaFormely known as the Relief and Rehabilitation Commission. It was first established in June 1974 following the outbreak of famine inthe two northern provinces of Ethiopia. In August 1995, it was re-established as the DPPC. The objectives of the Commission coverprevention, preparedness and response aspects of disaster management.National Directorate of Water (DNA), Mozambique, (Direcçao Nacional de Aguas)DNA is responsible for water policy and its implementation, strategic and integrated planning on the management of water resources aswell as water supply and sanitation services. The Directorate is a government agency working under the Ministry of Public Works andHousing. http://www.dna.mz/National Institute for Meteorology, Mozambique (INAM), (Instituto Nacional de Meteorologia)Its mission is to minimize the impacts of hydrometeorological hazards and contribute to sustainable development and the reductionof poverty. http://www.inam.gov.mz/National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), JapanAIST is an Independent Administrative Institution under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. On April, 2001, the NationalInstitute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology began operations. It comprises 15 research institutes previously under the formerAgency of Industrial Science and Technology in the Ministry of International Trade and Industry and the Weightsand Measures Training Institute. http://www.ais..t.go.jp/index_en.htmlNational Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Hyderabad, IndiaNIRD is India’s apex body for undertaking training, research, action research and consultancy functions in the rural development sector.It works as an autonomous organization supported by the Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment, Government of India.www.nird.org357

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesNational Emergency Management Association (NEMA), USANEMA is the professional association of state, Pacific and Caribbean insular state emergency management directors committed to providingnational leadership and expertise in comprehensive emergency management. It serves as a vital information and assistanceresource for state and territorial directors and their governors, while forging strategic partnerships to advance continuous improvementsin emergency management. http://www.nemaweb.org/index.cfmNational Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Washington DC, USANOAA’s mission is to describe and predict changes in the Earth’s environment, and conserve and wisely manage the Nation’s coastaland marine resources. NOAA’s strategy consists of seven interrelated strategic goals for environmental assessment, prediction and stewardship.http://www.noaa.gov/National Science Foundation (NSF), Washington DC, USANSF is an independent agency of the US Government, established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950. Its mission is topromote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense.http://www.nsf.gov/National Society for Earthquake Technology (NSET), Kathmandu, NepalNSET strives to assist all communities in Nepal to become earthquake safer by developing and implementing organized approaches tomanaging and minimizing earthquake risks. http://www.nset.org.np/home.htmNatural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, University of Colorado, Boulder,Colorado, USAThe Center is a national and international clearinghouse that provides information on natural hazards andhuman adjustments to these risks. The center’s prime goal is to increase communication amonghazard and disaster researchers and individuals, agencies, and organizations who are actively working toreduce disaster damage and suffering. The Natural Hazards Center carries out its mission in four principalareas: information dissemination, an annual workshop, research, and library services.http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/intro.htmlNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), United StatesNRC is an independent agency established by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to regulate civilian use of nuclear materials.http://www.nrc.gov/who-we-are.htmloOffice Fédéral de l’Environnement, des Forêts, et du Paysage (OFEFP), Suisse (Swiss Agency for theEnvironment, Forests and Landscape, (SAEFL), Switzerland)SAEFL is the responsible federal office for environment. It is integrated into the Federal Department of Environment, Transportation,Energy and Communication. http://www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/buwal/fr/index.htmlhttp://www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/buwal/eng/index.htmlOffice for Foreign Disaster Assistance/U.S. Agency for International Development(OFDA/USAID)OFDA/USAID has been the principal US agency to extend assistance to countries recovering fromdisaster, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms. USAID is an independent federalgovernment agency that receives overall foreign policy guidance from the Secretary ofState. http://www.usaid.gov/hum_response/ofda/Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management (ODPEM), Kingston, JamaicaThe Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management is committed to taking pro-active and timely measures to prevent orreduce the impact of hazards in Jamaica, its people, natural resources and economy through its trained and professional staff, the use ofappropriate technology and collaborative efforts with national, regional and international agencies. http://www.odpem.org.jm/Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, FranceThe OECD groups 30 member countries sharing a commitment to democratic government and the market economy. With active relationshipswith some 70 other countries, NGOs and civil society, it has a global reach. Best known for its publications and its statistics,its work covers economic and social issues from macroeconomics, to trade, education, development, science and innovation.http://www.oecd.org/Organization of American States (OAS), (Organización de Estados Americanos), Washington, DC, USAThe nations of the Americas are working more closely together than ever before –strengthening democracy, advancing human rights,promoting peace and security, expanding trade and tackling complex problems caused by poverty, drugs and corruption. Togetherthey are building a better future for the next generation. At the outset of a new century and a new millennium, the challenge is how toturn citizens’ high expectations into reality. OAS is playing a central role in working toward many of the goalsthat are shared by the countries of North, Central and South America and the Caribbean.http://www.oas.org/358

Annexesa2Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), Castries, St LuciaThe OECS came into being on 18 June, 1981, when seven Eastern Caribbean countries signed a treaty agreeing to co-operate witheach other and promote unity and solidarity among the Members. It is composed of 9 Member States: Antigua and Barbuda,Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and 2 Associated Member States:Anguilla, British Virgin Islands. http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/decdo/oecs.htm http://oecs.orgOrganization of Rural Associations for Progress (ORAP), ZimbabweORAP was founded in 1981 by a small group of people in Matabeleland Province to discuss development options following theindependence war which ended in 1980. ORAP aims at creating employment and greater self reliance through promoting culturallyrelevant self-help activities. The organisation also aims at encouraging grassroots programme development and promoting economicand financial autonomy.http://iisd1.iisd.ca/50comm/commdb/desc/d41.htmOverseas Development Institute (ODI), United KingdomIts mission is to inspire and inform policy and practice which lead to the reduction of poverty, the alleviation of suffering and theachievement of sustainable livelihoods in developing countries. It does this by locking together high-quality applied research, practi-policy advice, and policy-focused dissemination and debate. It works with partners in the public and private sectors, in both devel-pcaloping and developed countries. http://www.odi.org.uk/Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre (PTWC), Honolulu, HawaiiEstablished in 1949, the PTWC in Ewa Beach, Hawaii, provides warnings for tsunamis to most countries in the Pacific Basin aswell as to Hawaii and all other U.S interests in the Pacific outside of Alaska and the U.S West Coast. Those areas are served by theWest Coast / Alaska Tsunami Warning Center (WC/ATWC) in Palmer, Alaska. PTWC is also the warning center for Hawaïi’s localand regional tsunamis. http://www.prh.noaa.gov/pr/ptwc/Philippine Commission on Higher Education (CHED)CHED is mandated to undertake the following tasks: 1. Promote quality education; 2. Take appropriate steps to ensure that educationshall be accessible to all; and 3. Ensure and protect academic freedom for the continuing intellectual growth, the advancementof learning and research, the development of responsible and effective leadership, the education of high level professionals, and theenrichment of historical and cultural heritage. www.info.com.ph/~chedcoPhilippine Institute for Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS), Quezon City, PhilippinesThe principal goal of PHIVOLCS is to formulate up-to-date and comprehensive disaster preparedness and loss reduction actionplans for volcanic eruption, earthquake occurrences and related geotectonic processes/phenomena (e.g. faulting, landslides andtsunamis) which imprint significant impacts on man and his environment. A corollary goal is to exploit the positive aspects of theseprocesses to uplift of the people’s quality of life. In line with its role in the promotion of science and technology in thecountry, PHIVOLCS undertakes activities geared towards making people aware of volcanoes and volcanology, earthquakes and seismology,and to understand why, where and how natural disasters of volcanic and seismic origins occur in the Philippines.http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/Phnom Penh Regional Platform on Sustainable Development for Asia and the Pacific, Phnom Pehn,CambodiaThe High-level Regional Meeting for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) reviewed the progress in the implementationof Agenda 21 in the region and identifies key policy issues, priorities, goals, constraints and actions in preparation for the WSSD.http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/prep_process/asiapacific.htmlPLANAT (Swiss National Platform for Natural Hazards), Bern, SwitzerlandThe Federal Council aims to improve prevention in the field of natural hazards. To this end, it created the national PLAtform forNATural hazards - PLANAT. This consultative body of the Confederation is organized as an extra parliamentary commission.Whilst taking care to avoid a duplication of efforts, it also ensures a better use of the existing structures.http://www.planat.ch/e/index.htmPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam, GermanyThe founding of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in 1992 arose out of the growing need among political decisionmakersto be informed about the consequences of Global Change. Of particular importance in this respect was thequestion of increasing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere and the effect this would have on climate, the environment and society.Since then PIK has been involved in investigating the ecological, geophysical and socioeconomic aspects of worldwide climatic change,and climate-impact research has become part of a comprehensive Earth system analysis. http://www.pik-potsdam.de/ProVention Consortium (Disaster Management Facility, World Bank)Its mission is “to help developing countries build sustainable and successful economies and to reduce the human suffering that too oftenresults from natural and technological catastrophes”. The ProVention Consortium is a global coalition of governments, internationalorganizations, academic institutions, the private sector, and civil society organizations aimed at reducing disaster impacts in developingcountries. The Consortium functions as a network to share knowledge and to connect and leverage resources to reducedisaster risk. It focuses on synergy and coordination so that efforts, and benefits, are shared. http://www.proventionconsortium.org/359

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesrRegional Consultative Committee (RCC) in Disaster Management, Bangkok, ThailandWithin the framework of the Advisory Council, an ADPC Consultative Committee on Regional Cooperation in Disaster Managementhas been established. The Committee comprises members of the ADPC Board of Trustees/Advisory Council who are working in keyGovernment positions in the National Disaster Management systems of countries of the Asian region. The role of RCC is to providean informal consultative mechanism for development of action strategies for disaster reduction in the region andpromotion of cooperative programs on a regional and sub-regional basis; so as to guide ADPC’s work.http://www.adpc.ait.ac.th/pdp/consultative.htmlRegional Early Warning Unit (REWU), SADC, Harare, ZimbabweThe SADC Regional Early Warning Unit is an institution of the Southern African Development Community financially supportedthrough contributions from Member States. The SADC Regional Early Warning System operates as an integrated project, comprising aRegional Early Warning Unit (REWU), based in Harare, and autonomous National Early Warning Units in each of the ten originalSADC member states.http://www.sadc-fanr.org.zw/rewu/rewu.htmRegional Remote Sensing Unit (RRSU), SADC, Harare, ZimbabweThe main objective is to strengthen national and regional capabilities in the area of remote sensing and GIS for use of early warning forfFood security and natural resources management. http://www.sadc-fanr.org.zw/rrsu/rrsu.htmRegional Unit for Technical Assistance (RUTA), (Unidad regional de assistencia técnica), Costa RicaRUTA is the collaboration between governments and international development agencies in the sustainable development of rural areasin Central America. Its mission is to contribute to sustainable rural growth in order to reduce rural poverty in the Central Americanregion by means of national and regional development agendas – a common effort between governments, civil societies and social agen-www.ruta.org scies.Save the Children Fund, United Kingdom (SCF-UK)SCF-UK is the leading United Kingdom charity working to create a better world for children. http://193.129.255.93/Secretaría General de Planificación (SEGEPLAN), Guatemala (Planning Secretariat)The Secretariat of Planning and Programming (SEGEPLAN) is an institution that supports decision making, within the Presidencyand other centers of public policy formulation in the Executive Branch, by providing specific social-economic information that facilitatesinformed decisions related to the country’sdevelopment. http://www.segeplan.gob.gt/Sistema de Integración Centroamericana (SICA)SICA, and its secretariat, is a regional organization created by the Central American Presidents in the Declaration of Tegucigalpa withthe purpose of offering its technical services as well as political expertise to the initiatives of regional integration, and particularly to thedevelopment of the Centroamerican Union.http://www.sicanet.org.sv/Sistema Nacional para la Prevención, Mitigación y Atención de Desastres (SNPMAD), Nicaragua(National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Attention)On March, 2000, the “Legislation 337” was approved for the establishment of the National System for the Prevention, Mitigation of,and Attention to Disasters (the System). The National Committee is the administrative entity of the System, whose role it is to define thepolicies and plans of the System, as well as to assist the President of the Republic with the declaration of a State of Emergency andapprove the annual budget directed to the National Fund for Disasters. In order to meet its objectives in terms of the prevention, mitigationof, and attention to disasters, the System has established Commisions for Sectorial Initiatives for the execution of the plans adoptedby the National System. Legislation 337 stipulates that the Commissions shall be organized and coordinated at the Ministerial level.http://www.sosnicaragua.gob.ni/Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil (SINAPROC), Panama (National Civil Protection System)SINAPROC is an infrastructure of programmes, institutional relationships, methodologies and processes, which coordinates the commonefforts of the institutions of the three governmental hierarchies, as well as the public and private social agencies, to protect societyagainst the dangers of natural risks and disasters.http://www.c-com.net.pa/~snpce/South African Qualifications Authorities (SAQA)The South African Qualifications Authority is a body of 29 members appointed by the Ministers of Education and Labour. The membersare nominated by identified national stakeholders in education and training. Its National Qualifications Framework is the set of principlesand guidelines by which records of learner achievement are registered to enable national recognition of acquired skills and knowledge,thereby ensuring an integrated system that encourages life-long learning.http://www.saqa.org.za/360

Annexesa2South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Kathmandu, NepalSAARC was established when its Charter was formally adopted on 8 December, 1985 by the Heads of State or Government ofBangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. SAARC provides a platform for the peoples of South Asiato work together in a spirit of friendship, trust and understanding. It aims to accelerate the process of economic and social developmentin Member States. http://www.saarc-sec.org/South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), FijiIts mission is to improve the well being of the peoples of Pacific Island developing states through the application of geoscience to themanagement and sustainable development of their non-living resources. SOPAC member countries include: Australia, CookIslands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, French Polynesia (Associate), Guam, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, New Caledonia(Associate), Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.www.sopac.org.fj/Southern Africa Development Community (SADC), Gaborone, BotswanaThe primary role of SADC is to help define regional priorities, facilitate integration, assist in mobilizing resources and to maximizethe regional impact of projects. The approach is to address national priorities through regional action. The SADC Programme ofAction is made up of all the programmes and projects approved by the Council of Ministers. www.sadc.int http://www.sadcreview.com/- SADC Food and Natural Resources Coordination Unit (See FANR)- SADC Environmental and Land Management Coordination United NationsThe SADC Environment and Land Management Sector (ELMS) has been given the responsibility to catalyse the transitiontowards environmentally sustainable development within the SADC countries. Thus the overall objective of the sector, like itsmandate, is long term and conforms to the SADC Treaty “to achieve sustainable utilisation of natural resources and effective protectionof the environment.”http://www.sadcreview.com/sectoral%20reports%202001/environmentandland.htm- SADC Water Resources Coordination UnitIn view of the importance of the role that water plays in ensuring the well-being of the peoples of SADC, a distinct Water Sectorwas established by the community in 1996. The day-to-day oordination activities of the sector are undertaken by a dedicated unitknown as the SADC Water Sector Coordinating Unit (SADC WSCU), located in the Ministry of Natural Resources, in Lesotho.The vision of the SADC Water Sector is, “to attain the sustainable, integrated planning, development, utilisation and managementof water resources that contribute to the attainment of SADC’s overall objectives of an integrated regional economy on the basis ofbalance, equity and mutual benefit for all member States”. http://www.sadcwscu.org.ls/Southern Alliance for Indigenous Resources (SAFIRE), Harare, ZimbabweSAFIRE was founded in October 1994 and since then it has steadily evolved to become one of the larger environmental NGOs inSouthern Africa, and is associated particularly with natural products development, forestry related issues in communal lands, andwith participatory approaches to community based natural resource management. http://www.safireweb.org/Southern African Research and Documentation Center (SARDC), Harare, ZimbabweSARDC’s objective is to improve the base of knowledge about economic, political, cultural and social developments, and their implications,by making information accessible to governments and policy makers, non-governmental organizations, the private sector,regional and international organizations, development agencies, parliaments, and the media. http://www.sardc.net/Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) AgreementThe Treaty establishes a Common Market between the Argentine Republic,. the Federal Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguayand the Eastern Republic of Uruguay. http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/mrcsr/mrcsrtoc.aspSustainable Environment and Ecological Development Society (SEEDS), New Delhi, IndiaSEEDS, a non-profit voluntary organization, is a collective endeavor of young professionals drawn from development related fields. Itoriginated as an informal group of like-minded people, getting together for the purpose of creative research projects of academic interest.The group was later formalized in early 1994 and has been active in the field ever since. It is involved in research activities in communitydevelopment, disaster management, environmental planning, transport planning, and urban and regional planning. Activities are carriedout on behalf of government, semi-government and international development agencies. Independent programs on vital issues are alsotaken up. http://www.gdrc.org/uem/seeds.htmlSwedish International Development Agency (SIDA)SIDA creates the preconditions for change and sustainable development. http://www.sida.org/361

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesSwiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), (Agencia Suiza para el desarrollo y la cooperacion (COSUDE))SDC is part of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Its mandate is based on the Federal Law on InternationalDevelopment Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid enacted on 19 March 1976, and on a federal decree of 24 March 1995 oncooperation with the countries of Eastern Europe. In order to make the greatest contribution, SDC concentrates its long-termefforts on cooperating in development in specific sectors and with a limited number of countries in Africa, Asia, Latin Americaand Eastern Europe. In Latin America, the Swiss Cooperation has chosen to focus its efforts on Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador andCentral America, particularly Nicaragua. http://www.eda.admin.ch/lima_emb/s/home/devcop.htmlhttp://194.230.65.134/dezaweb2/frame_ie.asp?bgstyle=bg_homepageSwiss Reinsurance Company (SwissRE), Zurich, SwitzerlandSwiss Re - the global reinsurer: With more than 70 offices in 30 countries. The Financial Services Business Group brings togetherworld-class capital management expertise and risk-taking capabilities. Swiss Re’s success in business is attributable to two factors: intelligentrisk management and, at its heart, an in-depth analysis of the nature of risk. The product of the first is a contract; the product ofthe second is published work (top topics, Sigma). http://www.swissre.com/tTechnicon, University of Technology, Free State, South AfricaThe research mission of the Technikon Free State, a South African university of technology is in line with the higher education missionof teaching, research and community service: To advance, transfer and sustain knowledge and understanding, through theconduct of career teaching, research and scholarship, as well as community capacity building and services, at the highest internationalstandards, for the benefit of national and international communities and that of the Free State Province in particular.http://www.tofs.ac.za/index.aspThird World Academy of Sciences (TWAS), ItalyThe Third World Academy of Sciences is an autonomous international organization, founded in Trieste, Italy, in 1983 by a distinguishedgroup of scientists under the leadership of the late Nobel laureate Abdus Salam of Pakistan. It was officially launched bythe then Secretary General of the United Nations in 1985. Since 1986, TWAS has been supporting research work of scientific meritin 100 countries in the South through a variety of programmes. In addition, joint activities have been developed with UNESCO,the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), ICSU, the International Foundation for Science (IFS) andthe International Science Programme (ISP).Tropical Cyclone Regional Specialized Meteorological Centres (RSMCs), World MeteorologicalOrganization (WMO)RSMCS is a network of five centres designated by WMO as Tropical Cyclone Regional SpecializedMeteorological Centres (RSMCs) and located in:La Réunion, www.meteor,fr/temps/domtom/La_Reunion/trajGP/data/home_trajGPMiami , www.nhc.noaa.gov/productsNadi (Fiji), www.met.gov.fj/advisoriesNew Delhi , www.imd.ernet.in/services/cyclone/cyclone-warning-servicesTokyo, http://ddb.kishou.go.jp/typhoon/cyclone/cyclone.htmland six specialized tropical cyclone warning centres with regional responsibility to carry outactivities coordinated at the global and regional levels by WMO through its World Weather Watch andTropical Cyclone Programmes. They are located in:Brisbane, www.bomgov.au/weather/qld/cycloneDarwin, www.bom.gov.au/weather/nt/inside/cyclone/cyclone.shtmlPerth, www.bom.gov.au/weather/waWellington, www.metservice.co.nz/forecasts/high_seas.aspPort Moresby,and Honolulu, www.nws.noaa.gob/pr/hnl/cphc/pages/cphc.htmlTurkana Drought Contingency Planning Unit (TDCPU), KenyaThe Early Warning System of Turkana was set up in 1987. It operates at the sub-national level, for the district of Turkana in the northernpart of Kenya. It is run by local government, by the TDCPU. It provides information on how early warning data can be translatedand communicated to decision makers.uUganda’s Seismic Safety Association (USSA)In 1997, following the WSSI High Level Meeting in Kampala, the Uganda Seismic Safety Association was formed.USSA is anon-profit professional organization some of whose members are affiliated to the Uganda Institution of Professional Engineers,International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Government Ministries, NGOs, insurance industry, communityleaders, and members from the general public.Ukuvuka – Operation Firestop, South AfricaOperating within the scope of the authority of the local municipal authorities and the Cape Peninsula National Park, the UkuvukaCampaign intends to accomplish the work identified by a public awareness campaign, through management support, funding, communication,monitoring and facilitation. http://www.ukuvuka.org.za/362

Annexesa2Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment of the Organization of American States(USDE/OAS), Washington DC, USAThe Unit for Sustainable Development and Environment is the principal technical arm of the OAS General Secretariat for respondingto the needs of member states on issues relating to sustainable development within an economic development context. Technicalissues addressed by the USDE include transboundary management of water resources, reduction of vulnerability to naturalhazards, public participation in decision-making, climate change, sea-level rise, coastal-zone management, renewable energy planning,and biodiversity. http://www.oas.org/usde/USDE.htmUnited Nations Center for Regional Development/Disaster Management Planning Hyogo Office(UNCRD/DMPHO), JapanUNCRD/DMPHO was established in Kobe in 1999 after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995. While applying the lessonslearned from the experience of the earthquake of 1995, the Hyogo office has formulated integrated projects for ‘SustainableDevelopment through Disaster Management’. The office has three basic research programs: 1) Design of community based projectsfor disaster management planning, 2) School earthquake safety project, and 3) Disaster management capacity building program tointroduce best practices case studies on disaster management in developing countries.http://www.hyogo.uncrd.or.jp/ws2002/index_e.htmlUnited States Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington DC, USAUSAID is an independent federal government agency that receives overall foreign policy guidance from the Secretary of State. Theagency works to support long-term and equitable economic growth and advancing U.S. foreign policy objectives by supporting: economicgrowth, agricultural and trade; global health; and, democracy, conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance.http://www.usaid.gov/United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington DC, USAFEMA is an independent agency of the federal government, reporting to the President. Its mission is to reduce loss of life and propertyand to protect the nation’s critical infrastructure from all types of hazards through a comprehensive, risk-based, emergency managementprogram of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. www.fema.govUnited States Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia, USAThe USGS provides reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property fromnatural disasters; manage water, biological, energy and mineral resources and enhance and protect the quality of life.http://www.usgs.gov/Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Peru (National University)Peru’s National University at Trujillo operates as the Technical Secretariat for the General Coordination of EDUPLAN in Latin Americaand the Caribbean. http://www.unitru.edu.pe/University of Cape Town, South AfricaThe Environmental Evaluation Unit and the Disaster Mitigation for Sustained Livelihoods Project (DIMP) are associated with thedepartment and operate from the Shell Environmental and Geographical Science building. The staff of these units consult on a widerange of practical environmental issues and problems, and also contribute to the teaching and research activities of the academicdepartment. http://www.uct.ac.za/University of Potchefstroom, South AfricaThe university is in the process of establishing an African Centre for Disaster Studies (ACDS).(http://www.puk.ac.za/fakulteite/lettere/sosialestudies/acds/)http://www.puk.ac.za/Other universities dealing with disaster management and related issuesUniversidad de Costa Rica (UCR), (University of Costa Rica) http://www.ucr.ac.cr/Universidad del Valle, Bogota, Colombia http://www.univalle.edu.co/Universidad del Valle, Guatemala http://www.uvg.edu.gt/Universidad de los Andes, Bogota, Colombia http://www.uniandes.edu.co/home-visitantes/Universidad Nacional de Cuyo, Mendoza, Argentina http://www.uncu.edu.ar/nueva/index.htmlUniversidad Nacional de Nicaragua (UNAN), (National University of Nicaragua) http://www.unan.edu.ni/Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica (UNA), (National University, Heredia, Costa Rica) www.una.ac.crUniversity of Cranfield, United Kingdom http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/University of the Free State, South Africa http://www.uovs.ac.za/University of Mutare, Zimbabwe http://www.carbon.org/AfricaUniv.htmUniversity of Nairobi, Kenya http://www.uonbi.ac.ke/University of Witwatersrand, South Africa http://www.cs.wits.ac.za/363

a2Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativeswWetlands InternationalWetlands International is a leading global non-profit organisation dedicated solely to the crucial work of wetland conservation andsustainable management. Well-established networks of experts and close partnerships with key organisations provide WetlandsInternational with the essential tools for catalysing conservation activities worldwide. Activities are based on sound science and havebeen carried out in over 120 countries. Its mission is to sustain and restore wetlands, their resources and biodiversity for future generationsthrough research, information exchange and conservation activities,worldwide. http://www.wetlands.org/World Consevation Union (IUCN), SwitzerlandIUCN’s mision is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of natureand to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. http://www.iucn.org/World Organization of Volcano Observatories (WOVO),The World Organization of Volcano Observatories was established as the result of a meeting of representatives from world-wide volcanoobservatories, held in Guadeloupe in 1981. WOVO became the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of theEarth’s Interior Commission in the following year. http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/wovo/World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmonywith nature, by:conserving the world’s biological diversity ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainablepromoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. Since it was founded in 1961, WWF has become one of theworld’s largest and most effective independent organizations dedicated to the conservation of nature. http://www.panda.orgzZambesi River Authority (ZRA)The bi-national Zambesi River Authority (ZRA) was established through an agreement between Zambia and Zimbabwe. ZRA nowhas the responsibility for operation and maintenance of the Kariba Dam, while the two power plants are operated by power companiesof the respective countries.Zentrum für Naturrisiken und Entwicklung (ZENEB), Germany (Center for Natural Hazards and Development)The objective of ZENEB is the creation of a “culture of a prevention” for the advancement of sustainable development. Accordingly,initiatives in the reduction of vulnerability of natural hazards are being made in cooperation with issues of science and policy.http://www.giub.uni-bonn.de/zeneb/364

Annexesa3Annex 3aList of ACRONYMSACCACMADACSADBADMINADPCADRCADRRNAEDESAEGDMAEMIAGISAGMPAGRHYMETAGSOAIDISAISTAITALIDESALITEAOSISAPECAPELLARFARPDMARTEMISASEANAUAUDMPAusDINbAVHRRBCPRBGHRCBIBEXBICEPPBITcBPIEPCCABEICAMICACCAFCARDINCARECARICOMCBDCBDMAdministrative Committee on Coordination (now CEB)African Center of Meteorological Applications for Development (Centre africain des applicationsde la météorologie pour le développement), Niamey, NigerAssociation of Caribbean StatesAsian Development Bank, Manila, PhilippinesAustralian Disaster Management Information NetworkAsian Disaster Preparedness Center, Bangkok, ThailandAsian Disaster Reduction Center, Kobe, JapanAsian Disaster Reduction and Response NetworkAgence Européenne pour le Developpement et la SantéASEAN Experts Group on Disaster ManagementAustralian Emergency Management Institute (now EMAI)Agriculture Geo-referrenced Information SystemAgricultural Meteorology Programme, WMOSpecialized hydrometeorological institute of the Permanent Interstate Committee forDrought Control in the SAHEL (CILSS). See also : CILSS, Comité permanent InterEtats de Lutte Contre la Sécherresse dans le SAHEL.Australian Geological Survey OrganizationAsociación Interamericana de Ingeniería sanitaria y Ambiental (Panamerican EngineeringAssociation for the Public Health and Environment)Agency of Industrial Science & Technology, JapanAsian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, ThailandAlianza para el Desarrollo Sostenible (Alliance for Sustainable Development), CentralAmericaAugmented Logistics Intervention Team for Emergencies, WFPAlliance of Small Islands StatesAsia-Pacific Economic CooperationAwareness and Preparedness for Emergencies at the Local Level (UNEP Program)ASEAN Regional Forum (for Regional Cooperation in Disaster Management)ASEAN Regional Program on Disaster ManagementAdvanced Real Time Environmental Information Monitoring System, FAOAssociation of South East Asian NationsAfrican UnionAsian Urban Disaster Mitigation Program, ADPC, ThailandAustralian Disaster Information NetworkAdvanced Very High Resolution RadiometerBureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery, UNDP (formely Emergency Response Division,ERD)Benfield Greig Hazard Research Centre, University College London, United KingdomBiomass Burning ExperimentBusiness and Industry Council for Emergency Planning and PreparednessBandung Institute of Technology, IndonesiaBureau de la protection des infrastructures essentielles et de la protection civile, Canada. SeeAlso: OCIPEP, Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency PreparednessCentral American Bank for Economic IntegrationCentral American Mitigation Initiative (Iniciativa Centroamericana para la Mitigación)Consejo Agricola Centroamericano (Central American Agricultural Advisory Board)Corporación Andina de Fomento (Andean Development Corporation)Caribbean Disaster Information NetworkCooperative for Assistance and Relief EverywhereCaribbean CommunityUnited Nations Convention on Biological DiversityCommunity Based Disaster Management365

a3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesCCAsCCADCCFSCCCGCCCOPCCPCDBCDCCDERACDMCDMPCDPCCDRNCEBCEHCENAPREDCEOSCEPREDENACCEPCEPALCEPRCEUDIPCGIARCGMWCHARMCHEDCIDACIFALCIMDENCILSSCINDICIRDAPCISCISMIDCLIVARCNCIDRCNCNDRCNDRCNECNHAPCOENCOHGCONREDCOPCOPECOCOPUOSCORDESCORECACOSTCOSUDECPACCCPPCommon Country AssessmentsComisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (Central American Commission forEnvironment and Development)Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control,VietnamCoordinating Council for Disaster Management, MozambiqueCoordinating Committee for Coastal and Offshore Geoscience Programmesin East and Southeast AsiaCluster Cities ProjectCaribbean Development BankCenter for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USACaribbean Disaster Emergency Response AgencyClean Development Mechanism,UNFCCCCaribbean Disaster Mitigation ProjectCranfield Disaster Preparedness Center, United KingdomCitizen’s Disaster Response Network, PhilippinesUnited Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (formerly ACC)Center for Ecology and Hydrology, United KingdomNational Center for Disaster Prevention, MexicoCommittee on Earth Observation SatellitesCentro de Coordinación para la Prevención de Desastres Naturales en America Central(Coordinating Centre for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America)Caribbean Environment Program, UNEPComisión Económica para America Latina (Economic Commission for Latin America)Centre européen pour prévention des risques (European Center for Risk Mitigation), FranceCentral European Disaster Prevention ForumConsultative Group for International Agricultural ResearchCommission for the Geological Map of the WorldComprehensive Hazard and Risk Management Program (Pacific Island States)Philippine Commission on Higher EducationCanadian International Development AgencyInternational Training Centre for Local Actors, Divonne-les-Bains, FranceCenter for Disaster Research and Mitigation, GuatemalaComité permanent Inter Etats de Lutte Contre la Sécherresse dans le SAHEL (Permanent InterstateCommittee for Drought Control in the SAHEL)Center for Integration of Natural Disaster Information (USGS)Center on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific, Dhaka, BangladeshCommonwealth of Independent StatesCentro Peruano Japonés de Investigaciones Sísmicas y Mitigación de DesastresClimate Variability and Predictability, Project, World Climate Research ProgrammeChina National Committee for International Disaster ReductionChina National Center for Natural Disaster ReductionCorporate Network for Disaster ReductionComisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, Costa Rica(National Risk Prevention and Emergency Response Commission)Canadian Natural Hazards Assessment ProjectComite de Emergencia Nacional, El Salvador (Committee for National Emergency)Conference of Heads of Governments of the Caribbean CommunityCoordinadora Nacional para la Reducción de Desastres, Guatemala (National Coordinator forDisaster Reduction)Conference of the PartiesComisión Permanente de Contingencias, Honduras (Permanent Commission Contingency)United Nations Committee for Peaceful Use of Outer SpaceCorporación para el Desarrollo, El Salvador (Development Corporation)Consejo Regional de Cooperación Agricola (Central American Advisory Board for AgriculturalCooperation)European Cooperation in the Field of Scientific and Technical ResearchAgencia Suiza para el desarrollo y la cooperación (COSUDE), (Swiss Agency for Developmentand Cooperation (SDC))Caribbean Planning for Adaptation to Global Climate Change (project)Cyclone Preparedness Program (Bangladesh Red Crescent Society)366

Annexesa3CREDCRIDCSDCSDSCSIRCSTCSWCTGCdDAPSADAWDDMFCDEPHADEPIDESADESINVENTARDEWADFIDDFNKDG JRCDHADHMDiMPDIPECHODISMACDKKVDMCDMFDMISDMISADMMUDMTDMTPDMUDNADPCCNDPCSSDPPCDRBAeDRRPDSDEANHMPEAPAPECAECEECHOECLACECOSOCECPCEDMEEAEERIEEZCentre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, Catholic University of Louvain, Brussels,BelgiumCentro Regional de Información sobre Desastres, América Latina y El Caribe, Costa Rica(Regional Disaster Information Centre, Latin America and the Caribbean)Commission on Sustainable Development, United NationsCountries in Special Development SituationsCouncil for Scientific and Industrial Research, South AfricaUNCCD’s Committee on Science and TechnologyCommission on the Status of Women , United NationsDisaster Management Technical Council, MozambiqueDepartment of Early Warning and Food Security, MozambiqueDivision for the Advancement of Women , United NationsDepartment of Dyke Management and Flood Control, VietnamData Exchange Platform for the Horn of AfricaDivision for Environment Policy Implementation, UNEPUnited Nations Department of Economic and Social AffairsInventario de Desastres, LA RED, (Disaster Inventory)Division for Early Warning and Assessment, UNEPDepartment for International Development, United KingdomDeutsches Forschungsnetz Naturkatastrophen (German Research Network for Natural Disasters)Directorate General Joint Research CentreDepartment of Humanitarian Affairs (now UN/OCHA)Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, NepalDisaster Mitigation for Sustainable Livelihoods Programme, University of Cape Town, SouthAfricaDisaster Preparedness, European Community Humanitarian OfficeDisaster Management Committee at National Divisional and Districts levels, FijiDeutsches Komitee für Katastrophenvorsorge e.V. (German Committee for Disaster Reduction)Drought Monitoring Centre (Harare, Zimbabwe and Nairobi, Kenya)Disaster Management Facility, IBRDDisaster Management Information System, IFRCDisaster Management Institute of Southern Africa, South AfricaDisaster Management and Mitigation Unit, ZambiaDisaster Management TeamsDisaster Management Training Programme, United NationsDisaster Management Unit,VietnamNational Directorate of Water, MozambiqueDepartment for the Prevention and Control of Natural Disasters, MozambiqueDisaster, Post-Conflict and Safety Section, UN-HABITATDisaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission, EthiopiaDisaster Recovery Business AllianceDisaster Reduction and Recovery Programme, UNDPDivision for Sustainable Development, United NationsEastern Asia Natural Hazards Mapping ProjectEnvironment Assessment Program for Asia-Pacific(Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand)Economic Commission for Africa, United Nations, Addis Ababa, EthiopiaEconomic Commission for Europe, United Nations, Geneva, SwitzerlandEuropean Community Humanitarian OfficeEconomic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, United Nations, Santiago, ChileUnited Nations Economic and Social CouncilExperimental Climate Prediction Centre, USAEarthquake Disaster Mitigation Research Center, Miki, JapanEuropean Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DenmarkEarthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, California, USAExclusive Economic Zone367

a3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesEHP/USGSEIAELMSELSAEMAEMAIEM-DATEMIEMSENSOEPCEPOCHEQTAPERAERDERWINESBESCAPESCWAESPRITETSEUEUR-OPAEWARNEWSsfFANRFAOFAO/AGLFDRFEMAFEMIDFEWSFEWSNETFHWAFICCIFINCAFIVIMSFLACSOFORECFSWWFUNDEgFUSAIGAGADRGAVGCOSGDINGDPGEFEarthquake Hazards Program of the United States Geological SurveyEnvironmental Impact AssessmentEnvironment and Land Management Sector of SADC, Southern AfricaEuropean Laboratory for Structural Assessment – Earthquake EngineeringEmergency Management AustraliaEmergency Management Australia Institute (former AEMI)Emergency Events Database (CRED,Catholic University of Louvain)Earthquake and Megacities InitiativeEnvironmental Management SystemsEl Niño Southern OscillationEmergency Preparedness CanadaEuropean Programme on Climatology and Natural HazardsEarthquake and Tsunami Disaster Mitigation Technologies in the Asia-Pacific RegionEuropean Research AreaEmergency Response Division, UNDP (now BCPR)Early Warning System for tropical cyclone, Cook IslandsEmergency Services Branch, UN/OCHAEconomic and Social Commission of Asian and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand, United NationsEconomic and Social Commission for Western Asia, Beirut, Lebanon, United NationsEuropean Strategic Programme for Research and Information TechnologyEmergency Telecommunications Service, ITUEuropean UnionMajor Hazards Agreement of the Council of EuropeEarly Warning and Response Network, Southern SudanEarly Warning SystemsFood, Agriculture and Natural Resources Sector of SADC, Southern AfricaFood and Agriculture Organization, United NationsFood and Agriculture Organization/Land and Water Development DivisionFire Danger RatingFederal Emergency Management Agency, US GovernmentFortalecimiento de Estructuras Locales para la Mitigación de Desastres (Strengthening ofLocal Structures for Disaster Mitigation)Famine Early Warning SystemFamine Early Warning System NetworkFederal Highway Administration, US GovernmentFederation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and IndustryFoundation for International Community AssistanceFood Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems, FAOFacultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Latin American Social Science Faculty)Fondo para la Reconstruccion y el Desarrollo Social del Eje Cafetero, Manizales, ColombiaFoundation for the Support of Women’s WorkFundación Nacional para el Desarrollo (National Development Foundation)Fundación Salvadoreña para la Asistencia Integral, El Salvador (Salvadorian Foundation forIntegral Assistance)General Assembly, United NationsGlobal Alliance for Disaster Reduction, USAVulnerability Analysis GroupGlobal Climate Observing SystemGlobal Disaster Information NetworkGross Domestic ProductGlobal Environmental Facility (implemented by UNDP, UNEP and the World Bank)368

GEOGESIGFMCGHIGIEWSGISGLIDESGLO-DISNETGLOFGMESGMGSGNPGOOSGPHINGPSGRIDGROOTSGSDMAGSJGSHAPGTOSGTZhHAZ TAIWANHAZUSHDRHIV/AIDSHNDGDMHOMSHPC-DMPHYCOSGlobal Environment Outlook Report,UNEPGlobal Earthquake Safety Initiative, Hyogo Office, JapanGlobal Fire Monitoring Center, GermanyGeoHazards International, California, USAGlobal Information Early Warning System, FAOGeographic Information SystemsGLobal IDEntifier numberGlobal Disaster Information NetworkGlacial Lake Outburst FloodGlobal Monitoring for the Environment and Security (EU initiative)Groupe Maghrébin de Génie SismiqueGross National ProductGlobal Ocean Observing SystemGlobal Public Health Intelligence NetworkGlobal Positioning SystemGlobal Resource Information Database, UNEPGrass Root Organization Operating in SisterhoodGujarat State Disaster Management Authority, IndiaGeological Survey of JapanGlobal Seismic Hazard Assessment ProgramGlobal Terrestrial Observing SystemDeutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit(German Agency for Technical Cooperation)Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology, TaiwanNatural Hazard Loss Estimation Methodology, FEMAHuman Development Report, UNDPHuman Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency SyndromeHungarian National Directorate General for Disaster ManagementHydrological Operational Multipurpose System of WMOHigh Powered Committee on Disaster Management Plans, IndiaHydrological Cycle Observing SystemAnnexesa3iIACNDRInter-American Committee for Natural Disaster ReductionIADBInter-American Development Bank. See also: IDB.IAEAInternational Atomic Energy Agency, United NationsIAEEInternational Association of Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, JapanIASCInter-Agency Standing CommitteeIASPEIInternational Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth’s InteriorIATFInter-Agency Task Force (ISDR)IAVCEIInternational Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s InteriorIBHSInstitute for Business and Home Safety, USAIBRDInternational Bank for Reconstruction and Development, World BankICAOInternational Civil Aviation OrganizationICETIntergovernmental Conference on Emergency TelecommunicationsICIMODInternational Center for Integrated Mountain Development, NepalICRCInternational Committee of the Red CrossICSUInternational Council of Science, Paris, FranceICTPInternational Center for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, ItalyICVAInternational Council of Voluntary AgenciesICWEInternational Conference on Water and the Environment, United NationsIDAInternational Development Association, World BankIDAACAInternational Distributed Active Archive Centre for AfricaIDBInter-American Development Bank (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo). See also: IADBIDFInstitutional Development Fund, World BankIDMCInter-departmental Disaster Management Committee, South AfricaIDNDR International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, 1990-1999369

a3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesIDPsIntegrated Development PlansIDRMInternational Institute for Disaster Risk Management, Manila, PhilippinesIERMPIran Earthquake Risk Mitigation ProgramIFADInternational Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentIFFMIntegrated Forest Fire Management (Project, Indonesia)IFP/CrisisIn-Focus Programme on Crisis Response and Reconstruction, ILOIFRCInternational Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent SocietiesIGACInternational Global Atmospheric ChemistryIGADIntergovernmental Authority on Development, Republic of DjiboutiIGADD Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (now IGAD since 1996)IGBPInternational Geosphere-Biosphere ProgrammeIGCPInternational Geological Correlation Programme, UNESCOIGOSIntegrated Global Observing StrategyIHPInternational Hydrological Programme, UNESCOIIEESInternational Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, IranIIPAIndian Institute of Public AdministrationIISDInternational Institute for Sustainable Development, CanadaIKSRInternationale Kommission zum Schutz des Rheines, Germany (International Commission for theProtection of the Rhine (ICPR))ILOInternational Labour Organization, United NationsIMCInter-ministerial Committee for Disaster Management, South AfricaIMERCSA Musokotwane Environment Resource Centre for Southern Africa, ZimbabweIMFInternational Monetary FundIMOInternational Maritime OrganizationINAMNational Institute for Meteorology, MozambiqueINCEDEInternational Centre for Disaster Mitigation Engineering, University of TokyoINDECINational Civil Defence System, PeruINGCInstituto Nacional de Gestao de Calamidades, Mozambique (National Institute for the Managementof Calamities)INETERInstituto Nicaraguense de Estudios Territoriales (Nicaraguan Institute for Territorial Studies)IOCIntergovernmental Oceanographic CommissionIOMInternational Organization for MigrationIPCCIntergovermental Panel on Climate ChangeIRCENInternational Research Centre for the El Niño Phenomenon, Guayaquil, EcuadorIRIInternational Research Institute for Climate Prediction, Columbia University, USAISDRInternational Strategy for Disaster Reduction, United NationsISOInternational Organization for Standardization, SwitzerlandISPIntegral Sustainable Production UnitsITICInternational Tsunami Information Center , Honolulu, HawaiiITUInternational Telecommunication Union, United NationsThe World Conservation UnionIWRMIntegrated Water Resources ManagementIUCNjJICAJMAKBDIKVERMPJapan International Cooperation AgencyJapan Meteorological AgencyKeetch-Byram Drought IndexKathmandu Valley Earthquake Risk Management Project, NSET, NepallLA REDLCASLDCsLIDERESLILACSLa Red de Estudios Sociales en Prevención de Desastres en América Latina (The LatinAmerican Network for the Social Study of Disaster Prevention)Logistics Capacity Assessments, WFPLeast Developed CountriesCurso Internacional para Gerentes sobre la salud, desastres y desarrollo (PAHO)Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature370

Annexesa3mMABMADERMANDISAMARNMATEMCEERMCTMDSPMEERMEGSMERCOSURMOSTMOUMRCnMSFMSPNaDiVANANADISK-NETNASANASGNCARNCDMNDCNDMCNDMONDMSNDRPNDVINEAPNEDIESNEMANEMONEPADNEWUNFIPNICTNIRDNMHSsNOAANOVIBNRANRCNSANSFoNSETOASOCIPEPODAODIODPEMOECDOECSMan and Biosphere Programme, UNESCOMinistry of Agricultural and Rural Development, MozambiqueMonitoring, Mapping and Analysis of Disaster Incidents in South AfricaMinisterio de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, El Salvador (Ministry of Environmentand Natural Resources)Ministère de l’Aménagement du Territoire et de l’Environnement, France (Ministry of landuse planning and environment)Multi-disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, USAMinistry of Science and Technology, VenezuelaMinister of sustainable development and planning, BoliviaMarmara Earthquake Emergency Reconstruction ProjectMaharashtra Employment Guarantee SchemeSouthern Common Market, South AmericaManagement of Social Transformations Programme, UNESCOMemorandum of UnderstandingMekong River Commission, CambodiaMédecins sans FrontièresMulti-stakeholder processesNational Disaster Vulnerability Atlas, South AfricaNational Natural Disaster Knowledge Network, IndiaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration, USANorth African Scientific GroupNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USANational Committee for Disaster ManagementNational Development Commission, El Salvador (Comisión Nacional de Desarrollo)National Disaster Management Centre, South AfricaNational Disaster Management OfficeNational Disaster Mitigation Strategy, CanadaNational Disaster Reduction Plan, People’s Republic of ChinaNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexNational or regional Environmental Action PlanNatural and Environmental Disaster Information Exchange SystemNational Emergency Management Association, USANetwork of State Hazard Mitigation Officers, USANew Partnership for Africa’s DevelopmentNational Early Warning Unit, AfricaNational Flood Insurance Program, USANew Information and Communication TechnologiesNational Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad, IndiaNational Meteorological and Hydrological Services, WMONational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USANetherlands Organisation for International Development CooperationNational Resource AccountsNuclear Regulatory CommissionNational Systems for Environmental AccountingNational Science Foundation, USANational Society for Earthquake Technology, NepalOrganization of American States (Organización de Estados Americanos),Washington, DC, USAOffice of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness, Canada. Also see:BPIEPC, Bureau de la protection des infrastructures essentielles et de la protection civileOfficial Development AssistanceOverseas Development Institute, United KingdomOffice of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management, JamaicaOrganization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, FranceOrganization of Eastern Caribbean States, Castries, Santa Lucia371

a3Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesOFDA/USAIDOFEFPOGP/NOAAOHAOHCHROOSAORAPOSDMApOSIRISPACDPAHOPBSPPHIVOLCSPICCAPPIKPLANATPPP 2000PRAPREANDINOPRECLIFPREVACPTWSrPTWCPWSRADIUSRADIXRCBRCCRCCsRCOFsRDMPREISRELEMRRELSATRESCDAMREWSREWURIKENRRSURSMCssRTDRUTASAARCSADCSADCCSAFIRESARSAQAOffice for Foreign Disaster Assistance/US Agency for International DevelopmentOffice Fédéral de l’Environnement, des Forêts, et du Paysage, Suisse (Swiss Agency for theEnvironment, Forests and Landscape, Economics and Climate Section).Office of Global Program/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USAOffice of the Humanitarian Adviser, WFPOffice of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human RightsOffice for Outer Space Affairs, United NationsOrganisation of Rural Associations for Progress, ZimbabweOrissa State Disaster Mitigation Authority, IndiaOperational Solutions for the Management of Inundation Risks in theInformation Society (project)Plan of Action to Combat DesertificationPan American Health Organization (Organización Panamericana para la Salud), Washington,DC, USAPhilippine Business for Social Progress, Manila, PhilippinesPhilippine Institute for Volcanology and SeismologyPacific Island Climate Change Assistance ProgramPostsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, GermanyNational Platform for Natural Hazards, SwitzerlandPublic Private Partnership – 2000, Washington DC, USAParticipatory Rapid AppraisalsAndean Regional Programme for Risk Prevention and Reduction, Caracas, VenezuelaProject for the Local Prevention and Control of Forest Fires, GuatemalaPrograma de Prevención de Desastres en América Central (Disaster Prevention Program inCentral America)Pacific Tsunami Warning SystemPacific Tsunami Warning Centre, HawaiiPublic Weather Services, WMORisk Assessment Tools for Diagnosis of Urban Areas against Seismic DisastersRadical Interpretation of DisasterResponse Coordination Branch, UN/OCHARegional Consultative Committee on regional cooperation in disaster management, AsiaRegional Climate Centers, WMORegional Climate Outlook ForumsRisk Disaster Management Programme, UN-HABITATRegional Environmental Information SystemReduction of Earthquake Losses in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (project)Strengthening of local structures and early warning systems (project)Development of rescue actions based on dam-break flood analysis (project)Regional Early Warning System, AfricaRegional Early Warning Unit, SADC, ZimbabweInstitute of Physical and Chemical Research, JapanRegional Remote Sensing Unit, SADC, ZimbabweWorld Meteorological Organization Specialized Regional Meteorological CentersResearch and Technological Development, EURegional Unit for Technical Assistance (Project UNDP/World Bank)South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, Kathmandu, NepalSouthern Africa Development CommunitySouthern African Development Coordination ConferenceSouthern Alliance for Indigenous ResourcesSynthetic Aperture RadarSouth African Qualifications Authority372

Annexesa3SARCOFSARDCSARECSBOSCF-UKSCHRSEAGASEEASEEDSSEGEPLANSEISMEDSERMPSESAMESESISETSANSICASIDSSIDS-POASIDASINAPROCSNPMADSNETSOPACSOPAC-DMUSPDRPSPFSSPPOSPREPSSPSwissREtuTEFERTDCPUTRMTWASUCRUNAUNAIDSUNANUNCCDUNCEDUNCHSUNCRDUNCRD/DMPHOUNCTADUNDACUNDAFUNDCPUNDGUNDHA-SPOUNDPUNDP-SPOUNDROUNEPSouthern Africa Region Climate Outlook ForumSouthern African Research and Documentation Center, ZimbabweSwedish Agency for Research Cooperation with Developing CountriesSchool Building Organization, GreeceSave the Children Fund, United KingdomSouthern Centre for Human Rights, USASocio-Economic and Gender AnalysisSystem for Environmental Economic AccountingSustainable Environment and Ecological Development Society, IndiaSecretaría General de Planificación, Guatemala, (Planning Secretariat)Co-operative Project for Seismic Risk Reduction in the Mediterranean RegionSuva Earthquake Risk Management Scenario Pilot Project, FijiSecure European System for Applications in a Multi-vendor EnvironmentSchool Earthquake Safety Initiative, UNCRD/DMPHOSecretariat for Food Security and Nutrition, MozambiqueSistema de Integración Centroamericana (Central American Integration System)Small Island Developing StatesSmall Island Developing States Program of ActionSwedish International Development AgencySistema Nacional de Protección Civil, Panama (National Civil Protection System)Sistema Nacional de Prevención, Mitigación y Atención de Desastres, Nicaragua (NationalSystem for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Attention)Servicio Nacional de Estudios Territoriales, El Salvador(National Service for Territorial Studies)South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission, FijiSouth Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission B Disaster Management UnitSouth Pacific Disaster Reduction Program (UNDP South Pacific Office)Special Programme for Food Security, FAOSouth Pacific Program OfficeSouth Pacific Regional Environmental Programme, UNEPSwayam Shiksam Prayong, IndiaSwiss Reinsurance CompanyTurkish Emergency Flood and Earthquake RecoveryTurkana Drought Contingency Planning Unit, KenyaTotal Disaster Risk Management (RCC strategy)Third World Academy of Sciences, ItalyUniversidad de Costa Rica (University of Costa Rica)Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica (National University, Heredia, Costa Rica)Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDSUniversidad Nacional de Nicaragua (National University of Nicaragua)United Nations Convention to Combat DesertificationUnited Nations Conference on Environment and DevelopmentUnited Nations Centre for Human Settlements (now UN-HABITAT)United Nations Center for Regional DevelopmentUnited Nations Center for Regional Development/Disaster Management Planning HyogoOffice, JapanUnited Nations Conference on Trade and DevelopmentUnited Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination teamUnited Nations Development Assistance FrameworkUnited Nations International Drug Control ProgrammeUnited Nations Development GroupUnited Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs-South Pacific OfficeUnited Nations Development ProgrammeUnited Nations Development Programme-South Pacific OfficeOffice of the United Nations Disaster Relief CoordinatorUnited Nations Environment Programme373

a3UNEP/DEPIUNEP/DEWAUNESCOUNFCCCUNFIPUNFPAUNHCRUN-HABITATUNICEFUNISPACEUNIDOUNIFEMUNITARUN-OCHAUNOPSUNRWAUNSCUNSOUNUUNVUPUUSAIDUSDE/OASUSGSUSSAUWIvVCAwVAGVAMVATVEIVHFWAICENTWBWCPWFPWHOWIPOWMOWOVOWOVOdatWRCUWSSDWSSIWTOWVRWWAP/WWDRWWFzWWRPWWWZRAZENEBZFFHCLiving with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesUnited Nations Environment Programme/Division of Environmental Policy ImplementationUnited Nations Environment Programme/Division of Early Warning and AssessmentUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeUnited Nations Fund for International PartnershipsUnited Nations Population FundUnited Nations High Commissioner for RefugeesUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme (Previously UNCHS)United Nations Children’s FundUnited Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer SpaceUnited Nations Industrial Development OrganizationUnited Nations Fund for WomenUnited Nations Institute for Training and ResearchUnited Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian AffairsUnited Nations Office for Project ServicesUnited Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near EastUnited Nations Staff CollegeOffice to Combat Desertification and Drought, UNDP (Now Drylands Development Centre)United Nations UniversityUnited Nations VolunteersUniversal Postal UnionUS Agency for International DevelopmentUnit for Sustainable Development and Environment of the Organization of American StatesUnited States Geological SurveyUganda’s Seismic Safety AssociationUniversity of the West Indies, JamaicaVulnerability Analysis GroupVulnerability Assessment and Mapping, WFPVulnerability Assessment and TechniquesVulnerability and Capacities AssessmentVolcanic Explosivity IndexVery High FrequencyWorld Agricultural Information Centre, FAOWorld BankWorld Climate Programme, WMOWorld Food Programme, United NationsWorld Health Organization, United NationsWorld Intellectual Property Organization, United NationsWorld Meteorological Organization, United NationsWorld Organization of Volcano ObservatoriesWorld Organization of Volcano Observatories’ databaseWater Resources Coordination Unit, SADC, Southern AfricaWorld Summit on Sustainable DevelopmentWorld Seismic Safety InitiativeWorld Trade OrganizationWorld Vulnerability Report, UNDPWorld Water Assessment Programme/World Water Development ReportWorld Wide Fund for NatureWorld Weather Research Programme, WMOWorld Weather Watch, WMOZambesi River AuthorityZemtrum für Naturrisiken und Entwickung, Germany (Centre for Natural Risks and Development)Zimbabwe Freedom from Hunger Campaigns374

Annexesa4Annex 4aBibliographyAbramovitz, Janet. Unnatural disasters. Worldwatch Paper 158, 2001.Adams, Robin and Spence, Robin. 1999. Earthquake. p. 54, Ingleton, J. (Ed.).Affeltranger, Bastien. 2002. User-based design of socially efficient flood warnings: Concept paper for the Lower Mekong Basin.Final paper, March 2002. Mekong River Commission Meeting on Flood Forecasting and Early Warning Systems, 24 February-1March 2002, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.Agencia Suiza para el Desarrollo y la Cooperacion (COSUDE)/Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Oficinade Coordinacion en América Central. Program for Disaster Prevention in Central America (PREVAC). 2000.Agencia Suiza para el Desarrollo y la Cooperación (COSUDE), Cuerpo Suizo de Socorro en Caso de Catástrofe – División AyudaHumanitaria, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD). Caracas, Mayo 2001. Proyector PREVENE:Aporte a la Prevención de Desastres “Naturales” en Venezuela (Cooperación: Venezuela – Suiza – PNUD (ProyectoVEN/00/005) Agosto 2000 – Mayo 2001).Allard, Patrick, Dr. (Laboratoire Pierre Süe, CNRS-CEA, Saclay, France), Baxter, Peter, Dr. (University of Cambridge, UnitedKingdom), Halbwachs, Michel, Prof. (Université de Savoie, Chambéry, France), Komorowski, Jean-Christophe, Dr. (Institutde Physique du Globe de Paris, France). February 6, 2002. The January 2002 Eruption of Nyiragongo Volcano (Dem. Repub.Congo) and Related Hazards : Observations and Recommendations. Final Report of French-British Scientific Team.Anderson, Mary B. and Woodrow, Peter J. Rising from the Ashes: Development Strategies in Times of Disaster. Westview Press,Boulder, 1989, reprinted in 1999 by Intermediate Technology, London.Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, Bangkok. 1999. Managing Disasters in Asian and the Pacific. A Review of Lessons Learnedduring the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction.Auckland Regional Council Technical Publication. Hazard Guideline 1: Hazard Identification and Information Management forLocal Authorities. No. 106. June 1999.bBasabe, Pedro and Bonnard, Christophe. Instability management in Ecuador – from policy to practice.Australian Assessment of Personal and Community Resilience and Vulnerability Study and Guidelines (Report EMA Project15/2000 by Philip Buckle, Graham Marsh, Sydney Smale, Emergency Management Australia, May 2001).Balancing the environment and the economy: approaches for mitigation. S01-13, Natural Hazards Center Research and ApplicationsWorkshops, session summaries, August 2001.Basic Facts About the United Nations. Sales No.E.00.I.21.Bender, S., “Regional Development Planning: Toward the 21st Century”, UNCRD, Regional Development Forum for LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, Santa Fe de Bogotà, Colombia, December, 1997.Bender, S., Bello, E. 1993. GIS Applications for Natural Hazard Management in Latin America and the Caribbean, Departmentof Regional Development. Organization of American States, Washington D.C.Benfield Greig Hazard Research Centre (BGHRC), University College London, United Kingdom. Communication During VolcanicEmergencies. Manual.Benn, D. and Hall, K. (editors). 2000. Globalization, A Calculus of Inequality. Published by Ian Randle Publishers, Jamaica.Benson, C. 2002. “Disaster Management”. Pro-poor Infrastructure Provision. Keysheet 2. Draft. Series in development by theOverseas Development Institute, London, on behalf of the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development,London: Overseas Development Institute.Bergkamp, G. and Brett, Orlando. October 1999. Wetlands and climate change. Exploring collaboration between the Conventionon Wetlands and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Background paper from IUCN.Blaikie, P., Cannon,T., Davis, I. and Wisner, B. 1996. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters. Routledge,London and New York.375

a4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesBoroschek, K., Ruben, Centro Colaborador de la OMS sobre mitigación de desastres en establecimientos de salud. April, 2001. “Efectosde los terremotos del 13 de Enero y 13 de Febrero y el sistema de salud de El Salvador”.Bradbury, Raymond J. “Involving Citizens in Hazard Mitigation Planning: Making the right choices”. Australian Journal of EmergencyManagement, Volume. 16, No. 3, p.45. Spring 2002.Bruce, James P., Burton, Ian, Egener, I.D. Mark. 1999. Disaster Mitigation and Preparedness in a Changing Climate: A synthesispaper prepared for Emergency Preparedness Canada, Environment Canada, and the Insurance Bureau of Canada.Buckle, Philip; Marsh, Graham; Smale, Sydney. Australian Assessment of Personal and Community Resilience and Vulnerability Study,and Guidelines. Report, EMA Project 15/2000. Emergency Management Australia. May 2001.Building Codes. Glossary “Etablissements humains” (EFS), Habitat, Nairobi & UNOG – 1992/1998.Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC). 1999. Vulnerability Atlas of India. A Tool to natural disaster prevention,preparedness and mitigation for housing and related infrastructure. Ministry of Urban Development, Government ofIndia, G-Wing, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, 110011.Burhenne, W. 2002. Prospective International Agreements for Mountain Regions. Thematic Paper for UNEP / Bishkek GlobalMountain Summit (draft).cBurton, I., Kates, R., White, G.F. The Environment as Hazard. The Guildford Press, New York. 2nd Edition. 1993.Central American Commission for Environment and Development (CCAD). May 1999. Strategy for the Reduction of EnvironmentalVulnerability in Central America when Faced with Natural Disasters: Environmental Management and the Evaluation of Vulnerability.Structures to withstand Disasters. Institution of Civil Engineers. 1995(b). Thomas Telford, London.Christoplos, Ian; Mitchell, John and Liljelund, Anna. 2001. “Re-framing Risk: The Changing Context of Disaster Mitigation and Preparedness”.In Disasters. Volume 25, No.3, September 2001. p. 195.Comfort, L. K. 1999. Shared Risk: Complex Systems in Seismic Response. Pergamon: Amsterdam.Coping with the climate: a way forward. Preparatory report and full workshop report. A multi-stakeholder review of Regional ClimateOutlook Forums concluded at an international workshop, October 16-20, 2000, Pretoria,South Africa, IRI-CW/01/1.Cordery, I and Pilgrim, D.H. “The State of the Art of Flood Prediction”. In Floods, Volume 2,185-197. Edited by Parker, D. Routledge, London. 2000.Crucibles of Hazard: Mega-cities and Disasters in Transition. Mitchell, J. (Ed.). United Nations University Press, Tokyo. 1999.Cuerpo Suizo de Socorro en caso de catástrofe (CSS), Agencia Suiza para el Desarrollo y la Cooperación. 1998. Proyecto PRECUPA:Prevención de Desastres Naturales en la Cuenca del Paute.dCuny, Fred. Disasters and Development. Oxford University. 1983, reprinted 1998.Davis, Ian. 2001. Preliminary Notes for Chapter 2, ISDR-Global Review.——————. In Keynote Paper, Earthquake Mitigation for the 12the 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 9-13September 2002. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. Paper Reference 841.Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Union Government of India, High PoweredCommittee for Preparation of Disaster Management Plans: Interim Report II. New Delhi, India. February, 2001.Department of Local and Provincial Government. Integrated Development Plan Guide Pack. Pretoria, South Africa. 2001.Diallo, Hama Arbo. Secretary General of the UNCCD. Seventh world day to combat desertification and drought, on 17th of June2001.Disasters. Volume 25, No. 3, September 2001. Special Issue: Emerging Perspectives on Disaster Mitigation and Preparedness. Editedby Christoplos, I. and Mitchell, J.Disaster Management Bill. Pretoria, South Africa. Government Printer. 2001.376

Annexesa4eDisaster Relief. Worldwide Disaster Aid & Information via Internet: Disaster Dictionary.Disaster Risk and Vulnerability. Key Sheets for Poverty Reduction. United Kingdom’s Department for International Development(DFID), 2001.Eddie, Bernard. 1999. Tsunami. P.59. Edited by Ingleton, J.Emergency Management Australia. 1998. Canberra. Australian Emergency Management Glossary. Australian Emergency ManualsSeries, Part I, Manual 3.Emergency Management Australia Institute, Mt. Macedon, Victoria, Australia. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management.Environment Canada. Glossary.Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc (ESRI). 1998. Glossary of GIS Terms.Erdik, M., Aydinoglu, M. Lecture at UK National Conference on the development of disaster risk reduction: “Rehabilitation, recoveryand preparedness after 1999 Kocaeli and Duzce earthquakes”. London: Institute of Civil Engineers. 2000.fgFairbairn, Teo I.J. The economic impact of natural disasters in the South Pacific. UNDHA/SPPO SPDRP RAS/92/360, 111p,1997.Floods. Volumes 1 and 2. Edited by Parker, D J. Routledge, London. 2000.Food and Agriculture Organisation/ Land and Water Development Division (FAO/AGL). Management of Degraded Soils in Southernand East Africa, (MAS-SEA Network).Giesecke, A. 1999. Seismic Reinforcement of existing adobe housing in the Andean countries. In Ingleton, J. (Ed.). Natural DisasterManagement Leicester: Tudor Rose. pp. 246-248.Gilbert, Roy; Kreimer, Alcira. Learning from World Bank’s Experience of Natural Disaster Related Assistance. Disaster ManagementFacility of the World Bank, Urban and Local Government Working Paper Series N°2, 1999.Girot, Pascal O. Case study: Lessons from Hurricane Mitch: Natural Hazards, Vulnerability and Risk Abatement in Central America.University of Costa Rica, IUCN/CEESP Mesoamerica.Global Environmental Outlook (GEO-3 Report). A series of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2002.Government of Maharashtra. Earthquake-resistant construction and seismic strengthening of non-engineered buildings in rural areas ofMaharashtra. Mumbai: Maharashtra Emergency Earthquake Rehabilitation Programme. 1998.Governments of Canada and the United States. Living with the Red: A Report on Reducing Flood Impacts in the Red River Basin.International Joint Commission. November, 2000, ISBN: 1-894280-24-5.Granger, K., Jones, T., Leiba, M. Scott, G. and Australian Geological Survey Organization (AGSO).Community Risk in Cairns. Cities Project.Guzman, Manny. Towards Total Disaster Risk Management Approach. Commissioned by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center(ADRC) and the Office of the Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) (Draft as 15 of January 2002).Green Paper on Disaster Management. Pretoria, South Africa. Government Printer. 1998.Gulkan, P. 2000. “Rebuilding the Sea of Marmara Region: Recent Structural Revisions in Turkey to Mitigate”. In Disasters. Wharton-World Bank Conference: The Challenges in Managing Catastrophic Risks: Lessons for the United States and EmergingEconomies’, January 8-10, Washington DC. 2000 (a).——————- 2000. “Recent Natural Disasters in Turkey: An Overview of the National Technological Capacity and its Utilizationzation”.In Disasters. Management Research Centre, Middle Eastern Technical University, Ankara. 2000 (b).hHaque, C.E. 1998. Hazards in a Fickle Environment: Bangladesh. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht.Heijmans, A. and Victoria, L.P. 2001. Citizenry-Based and Development-Oriented Disaster Response: Experiences and Practices inDisaster Management of the Citizens’ Disaster Response Network in the Philippines. Center for Disaster Preparedness, QuezonCity.377

a4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesHewitt, K. 1996. Regions at Risk. Longman, London.High Powered Committee on Disaster Management. October, 2001. Report. Published by the National Centre for Disaster Management.Indian Institute of Public Administration in 2002.Hodgson, R., Seraj, S. and Choudhury, J. (Eds). 1999. Implementing hazard-resistant housing. Dhaka and Exeter Bangladesh Universityof Engineering and Technology and the University of Exeter.iIngleton, J. 1999. Natural Disaster Management. Tudor Rose, Leicester.Institution of Civil Engineers. Megacities. Thomas Telford, London. 1995 (a).Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). March 2000. Facing the Challenge of Natural Disasters in Latin America and theCaribbean: An Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) Action Plan.Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2001. Report of Working Group I. (Summary for Policymakers.)Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Report of Working Group II. (Working Group II addresses the vulnerabilityof socio-economic and natural systems to climate change, negative and positive consequences of climate change, and optionsfor adapting to it.)Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1998. The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: AnAssessment of Vulnerability. (WHO-UNEP). Published by IPCC. Cambridge University Press.International Center for Disasters – Mitigation Engineering (INCEDE). 1999. Seismic Risk Management for Countries of the AsiaPacific Region. Proceedings of the 2nd WSSI Workshop, January 18-20, 1999, Bangkok, Thailand. INCEDE Report - 1999-02,October 1999, Serial Number 14.International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR). 1999. Proceedings, IDNDR Programme Forum.International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR). 1995. The Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World.International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) Secretariat. 1999. Outcome of the RADIUS Initiative. RADIUS(Risk Assessment Tools for Diagnosis of Urban Areas Against Seismic Disasters).International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)/United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).2001. A participatory Action Research Study of Vulnerabilities and Capacities of the Palestinian Society in Disaster Preparedness.International IDNDR-Conference on Early Warning Systems for the Reduction of Natural Disasters, EWC’98, Potsdam. Programmeand Abstracts. Federal Republic of Germany, September 7-11, 1998.International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRCS). World Disasters Report. (1993-2002).International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, (IFRCS), Geneva, Switzerland. 1999. Vulnerability and CapacityAssessment.International Research Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI). November, 2001. The Drought and HumanitarianCrisis in Central and Southwest Asia: A Climate Perspective.International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR). Disaster Reduction and Sustainable Development. ISDR Background documentfor the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) N°5, 2002.International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR). United Nations Initiative towards Earthquake Safe Cities. RADIUS.jInternational Union for Conservation of Nature/International Institute for Sustainable Development (IUCN/IISD). 2001. ClimateChange, Vulnerable Communities and Adaptation.Jeggle, Terry. “The Evolution of Disaster Reduction as an International Strategy: Policy Implications for the Future”. Included in ManagingCrises: Threats, dilemmas, opportunities. Edited by Rosenthal, U., Boin, R.A., andComfort, L.K. Published by Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois, USA, 2001. (Chapter 20, pages 316-341).378

Annexesa4kKent,m lRandolph. 1987. Anatomy of Disaster Relief: The International Network in Action. Pinter.Khan, Abdul Latif. Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, Thailand. 2002. Case study on urban risk analysis in one of the municipal town inBangladesh. United Nations Environment and Development, United Kingdom (UNED-UK)/International Strategy for DisasterReduction (ISDR). Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future. (Week 2: Risk Assessment: Hazard mapping, vulnerability andcapacity analysis. What are the existing methodologies, applications and shortcomings at the national and local levels?).Kreimer, Alcira; Arnold, Margaret; Barham, Christopher, et. al. 1999. Managing Disaster Risk in Mexico.The World Bank, Washington.Krishna S. Vatsa and Frederick Krimgold. 2000. In: Managing Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies; “Financing Disaster Mitigationfor the Poor”. The World Bank.Lateltin, Olivier and Raetzo, H. 2001. Hazard assessment in Switzerland- Codes of practice for mass movements.Lavell, Allan. 1998. Education and Disasters (Educación y Desastres). www.desenredando.org.Lewis, J. 1999. Development in Disaster-prone Places: Studies of Vulnerabilities. Intermediate Technology Publications, London.Maskrey, A. Reducing Global Disasters. 1999. Keynote Paper, p. 86. Natural Disaster Management. Edited byIngleton, J. Tudor Rose, Leicester.McGregor, A.M. and McGregor, I.K.L. 1999. Disasters and Agriculture in the Pacific Islands. United NationsDisaster Management Programme - South Pacific Office (UNDMP-SPO), South Pacific Disaster ReductionProgramme (RAS/92/360).McGuire, R. 1993. The Practice of Hazard Assessment. International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth’s Interior andthe European Seismological Commission.Mileti, D.S. 1999. Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, Washington,DC.Monday, Jacqueline L. Building back better: Creating a sustainable community after a disaster. Natural Hazards Informer, N°3, January2002.Morduch, J. 1999. “Microfinance Promise”. Journal of Economic Literature: 37:1569-1614.———————-1998. “Between Market and State: Can Informal Insurance Patch the Safety Net? Net? Draft.MunichRe. 2001. Topics. Annual Review: Natural Catastrophes 2001.nMunichRe. 2000. Topics. Natural Catastrophes – The current position.National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Earth Observatory: Glossary.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Phoenix, Arizona – National Weather Service. Glossary.National Botanical Institute of South Africa. 1998. A National Review of Land Degradation in South Africa. http://www.nbi.co.za.Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center, Boulder, Colorado. 2001. Holistic Disaster Recovery: Ideas for buildinglocal sustainability after a natural disaster.oOffice Fédéral de l’Environnement, des Forêts, et du Paysage (OFEFP). 1999. La Fôret Suisse: un bilan.Nicholls, R. An analysis of the flood implications of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Second Assessment GlobalSea-Level Rise Scenarios. In Floods, Volume 2, 148-162. Edited by Parker, D J. Routledge, London. 2000.Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management (ODPEM). Glossary. Hazard Facts: Jamaica.Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Co-ordinator (UNDRO). Commemorative Issue: UNDRO 1972-1992. ISSN 0250-9377.Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Co-ordinator (UNDRO). 1992. Principal United Nations General Assembly Resolutionson Humanitarian Assistance in case of natural disaster and other emergency situations. UNDRO, IDNDR, 1971-1991.379

a4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesOgolla, Dan Bondi. Emerging trends in national environmental legislation and institutions in developing countries. Legal CapacityUnit, ELI/PAC, UNEP. Report of the Third Global Training Programme in Environmental Law and Policy, pp 19 to 30.Organization of American States (OAS). 1993. Manual sobre el Manejo de Peligros Naturales en la Planificación para el DesarrolloIntegrado. Capitulo V: Sistemas de Información Geogràfica en el Manejo de los Peligros Naturales. OAS, Washington, DC.Organization of American States (OAS). 1991. Primer on Natural Hazard Management in Integrated Regional Development Planning.prsOrganization of American States (OAS). 1984. OAS’ Experience. Integrated Regional Development Planning: Guidelines and CaseStudies.Platt, R.H. 1999. Disasters and Democracy. Island Press,Washington DC.Punongbayan, Raymundo S. and Newhall, Christopher G. 1998. ”Early Warning for the 1991 eruptions of Pinatubo volcano – a successstory”. In Programme and Abstracts, International IDNDR-Conference on Early Warning Systems for the Reduction of NaturalDisasters, EWC’98, Postdam, Federal Republic of Germany, September 7-11, 1998.Radford, Tim. 1999. Science Editor of The Guardian, writing Improving Awareness, “Natural Disaster Management”, Ingleton, J. Ed.Rosenthal, U., Boin, Arjen, Comfort, R. and L. 2001. Managing Crisis. Published by Charles Thomas. Springfield. USA.Sanahuja, Haris.1999. El Daño y la Evaluacion del Riesgo en America Central. Universidad de Costa Rica, Costa Rica.Simkin, T., Siebert, L.1994. “Historical Record: Trends and Cautions in Volcanoes of the World”. Geosciences Press, Inc. Tucson, Arizona.Smith, Keith. 1996. Environmental Hazards. Second Edition. Routledge, London and New York.South African Agriculture Research Council. 2000. Seeing Africa through the eyes of the United States’ National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration (NOAA). http://www.arc.agric.za/institutes/iscw/main/TopNews/NOAA.htm.Southern African Development Community (SADC) Secretariat, Gaborone. 2001. Disaster Management Strategy.Southern African Development Community (SADC). Strategy for flood and drought management in the SADC Region. SADC,Water Sector Coordinating Unit. Maseru, 2001.Southern African Development Community (SADC). Sub-Regional Consultations in Preparation for the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment.SADC/IUCN/SARDC, Maseru/Harare. Water in Southern Africa. Edited by Chenji, M. and Johnson, P. 1996.Southern African Research and Documentation Centre (SARDC), World Conservation Union ( IUCN), and Southern Africa DevelopmentCommunity (SADC). State of the Environment in Southern Africa. SARDC, Harare, Zimbabwe. 1994.Swiss Federal Office of Water & Geology. 1997. Recommandations: Prise en compte des dangers dus aux crues dans le cadre des activitésde l’aménagement du territoire.tThe Australian Journal of Emergency Management. Vol. 16, No. 4, Summer 2001-02.Swiss Federal Office of Water & Geology. 1997. Recommandations: Prise en compte des dangers dus aux mouvements de terrain dansle cadre des activités de l’aménagement du territoire.Tayag, Jean C. “Diverse responses to eruption warning transmitted via different channels”. In Programme and Abstracts, InternationalIDNDR-Conference on Early Warning Systems for the Reduction of Natural Disasters, EWC’98, Postdam, Federal Republic ofGermany, September 7-11, 1998.The Brundtland Commission. 1987. Report Our Common Future. Oxford University Press.The Economist. Righting Wrongs, Special Report: Human Rights, p. 19. 18 August 2001.The National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, July, 1998. Natural Hazards of North America Map.380

Annexesa4Thompson, C. 1993. Drought Management Strategies in Southern Africa: from relief through rehabilitation to vulnerability reduction.Tierney, Kathleen. “Trends in Research and Disaster Management in the United States”. In Natural Hazards Observer, Volume 26,Number 1, September 2001.Trujillo, M., Ordonez, A., Hernandez, C. Risk Mapping and Local Capacities: Lessons from Mexico and Central America Oxfam,Oxford. 2000.Twigg, John. Corporate Social Responsibility and Disaster Reduction: A Global Overview. United Kingdom’s Department for InternationalDevelopment (DFID)-funded study conducted by the Benfield Grieg Hazard Research Centre of the University CollegeLondon, November 2001. (available at www.bghrc.org/disaster_management ).uTwigg, John and Bhatt, Mihir R. 1998. Understanding Vulnerability: South Asian Perspectives. Intermediate Technology Publicationsand Duryog Nivaren, London and Columbo.Udry, C. 1994. “Risk and Insurance in a Rural Credit Market: An Empirical Investigation in Northern Nigeria.” Review of EconomicStudies. 61: 495-526.————— 1990. “Credit Markets in Northern Nigeria: Credit as Insurance in a Rural Economy.” The World Bank Economic Review.4 (3):251-69.1-69.United Kingdom National Coordination Committee for the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction. Forecasts and Warnings.IDNDR Flagship Programme. Edited by Lee, B. and Davis, I . Thomas Telford Publishing, London. 1998.United Nations. United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan. 1999. Introduction to the Secretary-General’s Annual Report on theWork of the Organization of the United Nations. A/54/1. 1999.United Nations. United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan. 1998. Message for the International Day for Natural Disaster Reduction,14 October, 1998.United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS/HABITAT).2001.The State of the World’s Cities.United Nations. Department of Humanitarian Affairs, Geneva, Switzerland. 1997. Floods: People at Risk, Strategies for Prevention.United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2001. Disaster Profiles of the Least Developed Countries. Third United NationsConference on Least Developed Countries. Brussels, 2001.United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report 2001 : making new technologies work for humandevelopment. 2001. New York.United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Meteorological Organization (WMO). InternationalGlossary of Hydrology. Third Edition.United Nations Environment and Development, United Kingdom (UNED-UK)/International Strategy for Disaster Reduction(ISDR). Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Bangladesh State-of-the-Environment Report, 2001.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2002. Global Environmental Outlook 3 - GEO3.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2000. Global Environmental Outlook 2 - GEO2, Chapter Two: The state of theenvironment - Africa - land and food.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1997. Global Environment Outlook-1. Oxford University Press.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1992. Hazard Identification and Evaluation in a Local Community. TechnicalReport No.12. UNEP IE/PAC’S APPELL Programmes. ISBN 92-807-1331-0.UNEP/UNU/WMO/NCAR/ISDR. 2001. Once burned, twice shy? Lessons Learned from the 1997-98 El Niño. Edited by Glantz,Michael H.United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). UNEP IE OzonAction Programme under the Multilateral Fund: Glossary ofOzone Protection Terms.381

a4Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesU.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Watershed management for Hurricane reconstruction and natural disaster vulnerabilityreduction. Contribution to the discussion of ecological and social vulnerability consultative group for the reconstructionand transformation of Central America. Stockholm, Sweden, May 25, 1999.vwUnited States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Global Warming Glossary.United States Geological Survey (USGS). Water Science Glossary of Terms.Vermeiren, Jan C. 1993. Disaster Risk Reduction as a Development Strategy. Unit of Sustainable Development and Environment,Organization of American States.White Paper on Disaster Management. Pretoria, South Africa. Government Printer. 1999.Wilhite, Donald A. 2001. Drought : Moving from crisis to risk management, ISDR input paper.Wisner, Ben. 2002. Forest fires in Vietnam. UNED/ISDR- Stakeholder Forum for Our Common Future: Week 1: Impact of natural hazardson development and how to reverse vulnerability to disasters.World Meteorological Organization (WMO). Early Warning Systems for Drought Preparedness and Drought Management.World Meteorological Organization (WMO), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), UnitedNations Environment Programme (UNEP), International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU). 1999. The 1997-1998 El NiñoEvent: A Scientific and Technical Retrospective.World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Southern African Development Community (SADC). 2001. Study on Contributions ofNational Meteorological and Hydrological Services to Natural Disaster Preparedness and Management in Southern Africa. Geneva,Switzerland.World Meteorological Organization (WMO). 1999. Comprehensive Risk Assessment for Natural Hazards. WMO/TD No. 955.World Bank. 2001. World Development Report 2000/2001: attacking poverty.382

The International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) is a global framework established within the UnitedNations for the promotion of action to reduce social vulnerability and risks of natural hazards and related technologicaland environmental disasters.Its main purpose is to facilitate, in an inter-agency effort, that Governments and communities in disaster-proneareas integrate the management of risk into their development policies, programmes and projects. The long-termgoal is to enable communities to become resilient to disasters saving lives as well as social, economic, and environmentalassets.By working through a network of international organizations, scientific and expert institutions, civil society, privatesector interests and government officials, the ISDR aims to increase public awareness about disaster reduction, tomotivate commitment from public authorities, and to stimulate inter-disciplinary and inter-sectoral partnershipsthat can improve the scientific knowledge on natural hazards and the causes of disasters.The Strategy was launched in January 2000, through United Nations General Assembly with the support of twointernational mechanisms:• an Inter-Agency Secretariat, in Geneva, Switzerland, and• an Inter-Agency Task Force on Disaster Reduction, that represents:- UN agencies, organizations and programmes: FAO, ITU, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, UN/HABITAT,WFP, WHO, WMO, and World Bank;- Regional entities: African Union, Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC), Asian DisasterReduction Center (ADRC), Interstate Council of the Commonwealth of Independent States, Councilof Europe, Ibero-American Association of Civil Defence and Civil Protection, Organization ofAmerican States/Inter American Committee for the Reduction of Natural Disasters (OAS/IACN-DR), South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), and.- Civil Society Organizations: Drought Monitoring Centre (DMC), Kenya; Global Fire MonitoringCentre (GFMC), Freiburg, Germany; International Council for Science (ICSU); InternationalFederation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), and Munich Reinsurance Company,Germany.For additional information about ISDR, see pages 19-20 ofthis volume and visit the website at www.unisdr.org.

“In recent years the world has witnessed an interminable succession of disasters -- floods, storms, earthquakes,landslides, volcanic eruptions and wildfires that have many thousands of claimed lives, caused material losses in thetens of billions of dollars, and inflicted a terrible toll on developing countries in particular, where disasters divertattention and resources needed desperately to escape poverty.……… Living with risk shows that we are far from helpless in the face of natural hazards. Early warning andrisk reduction measures have been important factors in helping to reduce significantly the number of people who losetheir lives to disasters. New planning and forecasting tools are helping to mitigate the devastation regularly wroughtby floods. We can and must build a world of resilient communities and nations. I hope that this publication reachesthe widest possible readership and rouses the international community to do its utmost to better equip peopleeverywhere for life in our hazard-filled planet.”Kofi A. Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations.Earthquakes are inevitable, but death in an earthquake is not. Floods are a fact of life, but they need notwash away health, hope and livelihoods. Living with risk- a global review of disaster reduction initiatives is apublication to guide and inspire practitioners in disaster and environmental management, and sustainabledevelopment, coordinated by the Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy for DisasterReduction of the United Nations. It focuses on the lessons from the past on how to reduce risk andvulnerability to hazards and on the challenges of tomorrow.Disaster and risk reduction need to become essential parts of sustainable development. That is becausevulnerability to natural, technological and ecological hazards are driven by social, economic andenvironmental activity. Natural hazards threaten everybody. But to live with them is also an imperative thatinvolves everybody, from villagers to heads of state, from bankers and lawyers to farmers and foresters,from meteorologists to media chiefs. The annual toll of climate related disasters has doubled in five years,and increased impacts are expected from climate change. Human pressure on the environment has neverbeen greater. Living with risk outlines the challenges ahead in a race against time.The ISDR Secretariat welcomes comments and sharing of experiences,which will be reflected in coming issues of this global review.United NationsInter-Agency SecretariatInternational Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR)Palais des NationsCH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerlandisdr@un.orgwww.unisdr.org