the amount of humanitarian assistance required dur<strong>in</strong>g the relief phase of adisaster. Likewise, the less an area has <strong>in</strong>vested <strong>in</strong> DMP, the greater the amount ofassistance required. Therefore, DMP, humanitarian assistance, and developmentare <strong>in</strong>herently l<strong>in</strong>ked. By this logic, if more money is spent on developmentprogrammes and preparedness, lives and money can be saved <strong>in</strong> the long run.Noth<strong>in</strong>g exists <strong>in</strong> a vacuum; noth<strong>in</strong>g is by itself. Mitigation and preparedness needto be coupled with immediate aid and development to be effective (Haroff-Tavel,2003, Beck, 2005). Additionally, natural disasters have the capacity to set backdevelopment efforts, aggravat<strong>in</strong>g the human and economic losses directly relatedto the disaster. Subsequently, <strong>in</strong>vestment possibilities may be hampered <strong>in</strong> thewake of a disaster; the problem becomes circular (Govt. of <strong>India</strong>, 2002). However,some economists argue <strong>in</strong> favour of the opposite, suggest<strong>in</strong>g that the post-disasterboom associated with the ensu<strong>in</strong>g construction, technology <strong>in</strong>flux, and improved<strong>in</strong>frastructure actually facilitates positive economic development (ODI, 2005).2.2 Natural hazards: the <strong>India</strong>n context2.2.1 Natural Hazards <strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong><strong>India</strong> is highly vulnerable to a variety of natural disasters <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g droughts,widespread and destructive flood<strong>in</strong>g from monsoon ra<strong>in</strong>s, epidemics, severestorms, landslides/avalanches, and earthquakes. In fact, out of the 35 states thatconstitute the Republic of <strong>India</strong>, 24 are disaster-prone (Sharma, 2004). This, <strong>in</strong>comb<strong>in</strong>ation with poor social and economic conditions, makes <strong>India</strong> one of thecountries most vulnerable to disasters worldwide (Mounta<strong>in</strong> Forum Himalayas,2007). Between 1992 and 2000 Asia has accounted for 83% of the globalpopulation affected by natural disasters; with<strong>in</strong> Asia 24% of deaths related tonatural disasters occurred <strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong> (Govt. of <strong>India</strong>, 2002, p. 5).Institutional arrangements for response to natural disasters are <strong>in</strong> place <strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong>through tra<strong>in</strong>ed professionals (ie. police, paramilitary, etc.). However, theGovernment's Tenth Five Year Plan highlighted some of the shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs ofThe Role of NGOs <strong>in</strong> Disaster Mitigation and Response – A <strong>Case</strong> <strong>Study</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Uttarakhand</strong>, <strong>Northern</strong> <strong>India</strong> 19
disaster management <strong>in</strong> the country, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that plann<strong>in</strong>g for disaster rema<strong>in</strong>sto be massively improved <strong>in</strong> the future. It is also suggested to set up a commandcenter that provides data l<strong>in</strong>ks to each state and a national standby team (exprofessionalarmy, police etc), and that urban search and rescue tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g efforts be<strong>in</strong>creased <strong>in</strong> light of the overwhelm<strong>in</strong>g lack of tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g noted <strong>in</strong> the wake of theGujarat earthquake <strong>in</strong> 2001. An extract from the Government of <strong>India</strong>’s Tenth FiveYear Plan document outl<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong>stitutional arrangements that are <strong>in</strong> place for DMP<strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong>. Section 7.17 (2002, p. 6) states: "the country with its Federal system ofgovernment has specific roles for Central and State governments. However, thesubject of disaster management does not specifically f<strong>in</strong>d mention <strong>in</strong> any of thethree lists <strong>in</strong> the 7 th schedule of the <strong>India</strong>n Constitution, where subjects under theCentral and State governments as also subjects that come under both arespecified. On the legal front there is no enactment either of the Central or any Stategovernment to deal with the management of disasters of various types <strong>in</strong> acomprehensive manner”.Respond<strong>in</strong>g to natural disasters <strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong> is the responsibility of the StateGovernment; funds are funneled through Central Government. Events at thedistrict level are handled through the District Magistrate of Deputy Commissioner.At the local village level the Panchayat is the l<strong>in</strong>k to the community (Gupta, 2006).Other stakeholders <strong>in</strong>clude police, paramilitary, fire brigade, and NGOs.Devastat<strong>in</strong>g disasters such as the Gujarat (2001) and Kashmir (2005) earthquakes,or the 2004 tsunami, have <strong>in</strong>stilled a sense of urgency for an <strong>in</strong>creased culture ofpreparedness and disaster management plann<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>India</strong>. As is often the case, asudden event will alert people to the hazards they face, usually spark<strong>in</strong>g a hurriedeffort to develop Early Warn<strong>in</strong>g Systems and other mechanisms <strong>in</strong> the region.Despite these knee-jerk reactions to prepare communities, more and moreemphasis needs to be placed on activities <strong>in</strong> research and development,education, and result<strong>in</strong>g improved technologies for mitigat<strong>in</strong>g natural disasters and<strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g levels of awareness and preparedness from both top-down and bottomupperspectives. In light of this requisite, a number of recent reports highlight anThe Role of NGOs <strong>in</strong> Disaster Mitigation and Response – A <strong>Case</strong> <strong>Study</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Uttarakhand</strong>, <strong>Northern</strong> <strong>India</strong> 20
- 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 and 22: Chapter 2 - Theoretical Orientation
- Page 23 and 24: 2.1.2 VulnerabilityVulnerability is
- Page 25: of a disaster everyone knows how to
- 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:
The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitiga
- Page 95 and 96:
The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitiga
- 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