A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India - Geological & Mining ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2) A disaster will inevitably have repercussions on social and economicsystems, and in most cases this occurs abruptly when dealing with naturaldisasters.3) There is a qualitative difference between an incident and a disaster (anumber of attempts have been made to quantify disaster in certain terms;however the number of variables and parameters involved have renderedthese attempts unsuccessful (Foster, 1976; Burton et al., 1978).Nevertheless, as there needs to be some way of quantifying what qualifiesas a disaster, Alexander (1997) identified four elements that are typicallyused as benchmarks; they include: number of deaths, value of damage orlosses, impact on the social system and geophysical definitions.4) The effects of a disaster are not restricted to the immediate event. In fact thesecondary effects of a disaster may instigate an even harsher deteriorationof social well-being through, for instance, forced migration, disease, tradereductions, and environmental modifications (ECLAC, 2003). In this sensedisasters affect lives both directly and indirectly.5) There is generally more irreversible damage in developing countries, thepoorest and most vulnerable experience the greatest social, economic andenvironmental impact (ECLAC, 2003); in developed regions the availabilityof resources and higher level of technology reduce vulnerability and cannegate the impact, ex. Early Warning Systems (EWS).In summary, a natural disaster will inevitably entail a sudden and profound impacton the environment, which disrupts both in the immediate and chronic sense, socialand economic fabrics of humans. Essentially, there is no one-size-fits-all definitionof a disaster. Multi-disciplinary approaches that consider the overall social,economic, political, and environmental context are therefore crucial forunderstanding how to prepare for and respond to disasters.The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 15
2.1.2 VulnerabilityVulnerability is another term frequently used in the disaster discourse albeit withconfusing undertones. Alexander (1997) proposed that the term is often confusedwith risk. To clarify, risk can be considered as “the product of hazard (the physicalagent and its impact) and vulnerability as the susceptibility to damage or injury”(UNDRO, 1982).According to Parkash (2005), vulnerability is “a factor of weakness in differentelements when exposed to a given hazardous event and is defined as apercentage or fractions of all the elements in a particular set of elements that willbe affected by a specific event. Based on the elements at risk, vulnerability can beclassified as physical vulnerability, social vulnerability and attitudinal vulnerability”.There are many factors to consider as to what makes a community vulnerable inthe first place and to what extent. What circumstances or events have led tovulnerability to the disaster? Was this disaster socially constructed? Are somegroups more vulnerable than others? What are the politics behind the disaster?What is the frequency of disasters in the area? (Comfort et al., 1999; Beck, 2005;Houghton, 2005). An understanding of the various dimensions of vulnerability andcontext or background, preventative measures can be taken both pre-disaster (ex.Early Warning Systems), and post-disaster strategies have a better starting pointfrom which reconstruction and recovery can be facilitated. Understanding wherethe problems originate reduces the risk of repeating the same mistakes in areasprone to hazard where the risk of yet another disaster striking is infallible; often“vulnerability is reconstructed instead of being reduced “ (ECLAC, 2003). A cycle ofongoing risk assessment, vulnerability mapping, and needs assessments areimportant sources of information with which NGOs can make decisions for projectplanning and sustainable strategies (Houghton, 2005; Comfort et al.,1999).Therefore, mitigation towards disaster must also tackle the arduous challenge ofreducing vulnerability through sustainable measures that help to increase acommunity’s resilience to loss (Wisner, 1993).The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 16
Page 1 and 2: The Role of Non GovernmentalOrganis
Page 3 and 4: Table of contentsChapter 1 - Introd
Page 5 and 6: List of figuresFigure 1.1: Study re
Page 7 and 8: preparedness, and has potential to
Page 9 and 10: This case study investigates the im
Page 11 and 12: • What are homeowner perceptions
Page 13 and 14: Seismic activity in this area is du
Page 15 and 16: The study comprises two regions: St
Page 17 and 18: 1.4.1 - b Study Area B- Almora dist
Page 19 and 20: etc. operational). The study involv
Page 21: Chapter 2 - Theoretical Orientation
Page 25 and 26: of a disaster everyone knows how to
Page 27 and 28: disaster management in the country,
Page 29 and 30: Despite the apparent increased cons
Page 31 and 32: 2.3.1 Disaster Mitigation and Prepa
Page 33 and 34: save lives. This event marked a pri
Page 35 and 36: Systems technologies and education
Page 37 and 38: As suggested previously, there is a
Page 39 and 40: on the main agenda (Benson et al, 2
Page 41 and 42: Frame structureFramed structures ha
Page 43 and 44: The curriculum of the PSI workshops
Page 45 and 46: Figure 2.2a: Community based disast
Page 47 and 48: district irrespective of the fact t
Page 49 and 50: etrofitting, monitoring and homeown
Page 51 and 52: structures as an alarming forty-fiv
Page 53 and 54: Reponses for what features masons t
Page 55 and 56: trained masons in the Study Area A
Page 57 and 58: ecommended that a similar study be
Page 59 and 60: 3.1.2b Awareness and Dissemination
Page 61 and 62: It is interesting to note that when
Page 63 and 64: Community based disaster preparedne
Page 65 and 66: 3.1.3 - Section 3 Housing Impact As
Page 67 and 68: Load-bearing1.single steel rod in e
Page 69 and 70: The overall proportion of newly bui
Page 71 and 72: etween stirrups of 6-12 inches. Alt
Page 73 and 74:
Table 3.7: Percentage of safe house
Page 75 and 76:
3.2 DiscussionThe discussion segmen
Page 77 and 78:
In Study Area A the number of earth
Page 79 and 80:
2) mitigation measures were taken i
Page 81 and 82:
3.3 ConclusionsIn conclusion, the s
Page 83 and 84:
ReferencesAlexander, D., 1997. The
Page 85 and 86:
Guptasarma, D. 1996. Is the Seismic
Page 87 and 88:
Telford, J. and Cosgrave, J., 2007.
Page 89 and 90:
Annex I - Earthquake safe featuresT
Page 91 and 92:
The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitiga
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Annex 2 - Mason Interview ResultsSt
Page 99 and 100:
11. How to make such a course more
Page 101 and 102:
sloped roof 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 1 2.78s
Page 103 and 104:
17. Do homeowners request earthquak
Page 105 and 106:
light roof 1 0 1 2.78 0 0.00RCC 1 3
Page 107 and 108:
6. How long have you lived in the v
Page 109 and 110:
16. Do you have an emergency commun
Page 111 and 112:
26. What activities related to the
Page 113 and 114:
36. Would you prefer traditional ma
Page 115 and 116:
Appendix IV - Breakdown of earthqua
Page 117:
Appendix IV - Breakdown of earthqua
show all

A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India - Geological & Mining ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?