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

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