Disaster Risk Management - Working Concept - Division 4300
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Division 4300
Health, Education, Nutrition, Emergency Aid
Disaster Risk Management
Working ConceptPublished by:
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
Dag-Hammerskjöld-Weg 1-5
P.O.Box 5180
D-65726 Eschborn
Telephone: + 49 (0) 6196-79-0
Telefax: + 49 (0) 6196-79-6170
Internet: http://www.gtz.de
Activity Area Emergency and Refugee Aid
(Section 4334)
Person responsible:
Bernd Hoffmann, GTZ
Written by:
Wolfgang Garatwa, GTZ • Dr. Christina Bollin
Special advisers:
Dr. Roland F. Steurer, GTZ • Nadira Korkor,
GTZ • Network for Development-oriented
Emergency Aid (NDEA), GTZ
Layout and editorial revision:
Nadira Korkor, GTZ
Printed by:
O.K.KOPIE GmbH, 65719 Hofheim-Wallau
gtz
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Eschborn, April 2002 Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbHPREFACE Disaster risk management is a comparatively new area of social concern and prac- tice. However, it is a very relevant concern for development cooperation given that natural disasters have devastated an increasing number of regions, destroyed in- vestments and set back progress in development. Often, countries victim to the large-scale impacts of earthquakes, tornadoes, typhoons, floods or droughts are barely able to respond, and recovering can take years or decades. Following the United Nations initiative for an International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (1990-99), this theme has climbed much higher on the international agenda. An in- creasing number of development cooperation actors are trying to cater for more pre- vention in their activities. And, the more vulnerable countries of the South are also beginning to make efforts to protect their populations and national economies from future disasters. The link between disasters and development is now apparent to everyone, and dis- aster risk management is gaining increasing currency as an effective form of invest- ment. But, most developing countries are limited in their ability to effectively integrate a strategic approach to the theme into national policy. It is the poor populations in the disaster areas that are hardest hit by losses and setbacks. Development cooperation supports political, economic, ecological and social develop- ment worldwide. It helps improve living conditions and promotes sustainable de- velopment. Natural disasters do not just pose a challenge to southern hemisphere countries. They are also a challenge for development cooperation and therefore for the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ): Strategies must be developed and implemented to reduce the vulnerability of populations in partner countries, as well as measures to decrease disaster risk. GTZ aims to bridge the gap between the perceived challenges and the necessary practical steps for addressing them. The present working concept provides a review of current approaches and GTZ services in disaster risk management. Our intended audience includes relevant professionals, national and international institutions and organizations, and GTZ staff. Special thanks are due to the authors, Wolfgang Garatwa and Dr. Christina Bollin, who compiled the working concept, and other colleagues within and outside of GTZ who provided comments and suggestions. Bernd Hoffmann Dr. Roland F. Steurer Head of Division Senior Planning Officer April 2002
Contents
CONTENTS
List of abbreviations.....................................................................................................6
Summary........................................................................................................................8
GTZ – a service enterprise for international cooperation.........................................9
1. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development
cooperation ..................................................................................................10
1.1 Causes and effects........................................................................................12
1.2 Action needed................................................................................................14
1.3 Obstacles to implementation .........................................................................14
2. Approach and definitions ...........................................................................16
2.1 The growing risk ............................................................................................16
2.1.1 Hazard ...........................................................................................................17
2.1.2 Vulnerability ...................................................................................................18
2.1.3 Disaster risk management.............................................................................19
3. From disaster relief to disaster risk management ...................................20
3.1 The scope of disaster relief and the actors involved .....................................20
3.2 The international path towards integrated disaster risk management ..........21
4. GTZ activities in disaster risk management .............................................24
4.1 The political background in the Federal Republic of Germany .....................24
4.2 Activity areas in disaster risk management...................................................25
4.2.1 Risk assessment ...........................................................................................26
4.2.2 Disaster prevention and mitigation ................................................................27
4.2.3 Disaster preparedness ..................................................................................28
4.2.3.1 Early-warning systems ................................................................................. 28
4.2.4 Disaster risk management as part of rehabilitation and reconstruction ........29
4.2.5 Mainstreaming disaster risk management in development cooperation
sectors ...........................................................................................................31
4.2.6 Multisectoral approaches ..............................................................................31
4.2.6.1 Raising awareness ....................................................................................... 32
4.2.6.2 Strengthening local disaster risk management capabilities ......................... 33
4.3 Future challenges ..........................................................................................34
5. GTZ services ................................................................................................35
Sources and selected references..............................................................................37
Selected internet addresses ......................................................................................41
Annex 1 – Selected GTZ reference projects in disaster risk management...........45
Annex 2 – Key terms in disaster risk management.................................................47
5List of abbreviations
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AA German Federal Foreign Office (Auswärtiges Amt)
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADPC Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre
BID/IDB Inter-American Development Bank (Banco
Interamericano de Desarrollo)
BMELF German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and
Forests (Bundesministerium für Ernährung,
Landwirtschaft und Forsten)
BMZ German Federal Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (Bundesministerium
für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und
Entwicklung)
CEPAL/ECLAC Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (Comisión Económica para América
Latina y el Caribe)
CEPREDENAC Coordination Centre for the Prevention of Natural
Disasters in Central America (Centro de
Coordinación para la Prevención de los Desastres
Naturales en América Central)
CRED Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of
Disasters
DAC Development Assistance Committee
DEA Development-oriented Emergency Aid
DIPECHO European Community Humanitarian Office
Disaster Preparedness Programme
DKKV German Committee for Disaster Reduction – reg.
soc. (Deutsches Komitee für Katastrophenvorsorge
e.V.)
DSE German Foundation for International Development
(Deutsche Stiftung für Internationale Entwicklung)
ECHO European Community Humanitarian Office
ECLAC/CEPAL Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (Comisión Económica para América
Latina y el Caribe)
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FEMID Strengthening of Local Structures for Disaster
Mitigation
(Fortalecimiento de Estructuras Locales en la
Mitigación de Desastres)
GDP Gross domestic product
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
6List of abbreviations
IATF Inter-Agency Task Force for Disaster Reduction (of
ISDR)
IDB/BID Inter-American Development Bank (Banco
Interamericano de Desarrollo)
IDNDR International Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction
IDRM International Institute for Disaster Risk
Management
IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
LA RED The Network for the Social Study of Disaster
Prevention in Latin America (La Red de Estudios
Sociales en Prevención des Desastres)
OAS Organization of American States
OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
RELSAT Reforzamiento de Estructuras Locales y Sistemas
de Alerta Temprana
THW Technical Support Service (Technisches Hilfswerk)
TC Technical Cooperation
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
WHO World Health Organization
WMO World Meteorological Organization
ZENEB Centre for Natural Risks and Development
(Zentrum für Naturrisiken und Entwicklung
Bonn/Bayreuth)
7Summary
Summary
There has been an increase in the inci- poverty alleviation (2001)1, GTZ has put to-
dence of natural disasters worldwide with gether a service package for disaster risk
increasing loss of life and damage to prop- management. It has identified five activity
erty. The risk of disasters can also be ex- areas for cooperation with partner coun-
pected to rise in the future, particularly for tries:
developing countries populations. There
• Risk assessment
are two reasons for this trend:
• Disaster prevention and mitigation
• An increase in extreme natural events, • Disaster preparedness
primarily due to climatic change • Disaster risk management as part of re-
• Increased vulnerability of populations habilitation and reconstruction
to these natural events • Mainstreaming disaster risk manage-
ment in development cooperation sec-
Natural disasters are closely bound up with
tors
the development status of a region: They
disrupt or impair development and, at the In addition to this, two multisectoral strate-
same time, a low level of development in- gies are described for supporting measures
creases the chances of them occurring. in disaster risk management. Firstly, we
Supported in part by bilateral and multilat- outline ways of raising awareness amongst
eral donors, many countries are stepping endangered populations and policymakers
up their efforts to prevent disaster. The idea as a precondition for sustainable efforts in
is that effective precautions will avert future disaster risk management. Secondly, we
disasters or at least mitigate them. This in discuss the role of local resources for dis-
turn will help stabilize development in part- aster risk management and the practical
ner countries. We can lower disaster risk by experience gained. The working concept
containing the hazards and reducing vul- concludes with a summary of GTZ services
nerability. The general economic and social for disaster risk management.
conditions in a country are a major determi-
nant for both factors. All measures must
therefore be assimilated into the 'normal'
institutional, regional and sectoral develop-
ment strategies employed in threatened re-
gions.
Mainstreaming this issue in development
cooperation sectors is a major challenge.
Cooperation with projects for decentraliza-
tion and/or community development, rural
development, environmental protection and
resource conservation, housing, health and
education are of particular importance.
Based on the German Federal Govern-
ment's policy papers on BMZ emergency- 1
BMZ, Poverty Reduction – a Global Responsibility:
oriented development aid (1996) and global Program of Action 2015. The German Govern-
ment's Contribution Towards Halving Extreme Pov-
erty Worldwide, Bonn 2001.
8GTZ – a service enterprise for international cooperation
GTZ – a service enterprise for international cooperation
The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische age can be averted by preventive meas-
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH is a gov- ures, so approaches, instruments and meas-
ernment-owned corporation for international ures have been developed to manage con-
cooperation with worldwide operations. Its flicts and prevent crises and disasters.
development-policy mandate is to help im-
prove the standard of living and prospects Both the international community and part-
of people in partner countries all over the ner governments are attaching increasing
world, whilst stabilising the natural resource importance to disaster risk management.
base on which life depends. GTZ is respon- The measures developed for disaster risk
sible for designing, planning and imple- management are designed to supplement
menting programmes and projects in part- existing sectors of development coopera-
ner countries oriented by the German Gov- tion. Comprehensive approaches are adopted
ernment’s development-policy guidelines that aim to reduce the disaster risk associ-
and objectives. The GTZ’s main commis- ated with potentially highly destructive
sioning body is the German Government natural events. This is designed to make
through the Federal Ministry for Economic development more sustainable.
Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and
The present document is a working concept
other ministries such as the Federal For-
for disaster risk management. It outlines
eign Office. Other clients of GTZ include the
some project case studies and presents
European Commission, UN organizations,
GTZ services in this field.
the World Bank and regional development
banks. Increasingly, foreign governments or
The first chapter contains a description of
institutions also directly commission GTZ
the situation in developing countries and
services.
the rationale for addressing this theme. The
second chapter deals with the underlying
Technical Cooperation is playing a growing
policy approach and the specific cause-ef-
role in strengthening the capabilities of both
fect matrix.
people and organizations in partner coun-
tries. In achieving this, the institution is itself
The ongoing paradigm shift towards focus-
changing in the process. In the past, an-
ing emergency aid intervention on disaster
swers were found to clearly delineated
risk management is outlined in the third
problems. But, today’s intricate and com-
chapter.
plex issues call for more sophisticated ap-
proach Sustaining improvements in peo- In Chapter 4 we identify the link between
ple’s living conditions in our partner coun- German development cooperation and dis-
tries in the long term crucially depends on aster risk management and describe the
the political, economic and social frame- specific operational areas of a comprehen-
works in place. sive approach. The fifth chapter summa-
rizes the specific services GTZ provides in
Where crises, conflicts or disasters create
this operational area, outlining GTZ's ser-
acute needs that threaten survival, GTZ
vice delivery profile. Reference projects are
provides development-oriented emergency
listed in annex 1.
aid (DEA). It has become increasingly ap-
parent in recent years that loss and dam-
91. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
1. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries
and development cooperation
A number of well documented studies show List of some disasters from 1998 to
that there has been a significant increase in 2001:
natural disasters2 over the last decade. • The three-months of flooding in Bangladesh
and India in the summer of 1998 left more
than 4,700 dead and 66 million homeless,
Total number of reported natural
disasters worldwide from 1966-2000 destroyed 1.2 million buildings and indirectly
caused several hundred deaths due to
1.600
epidemics.
1.200
• At the end of October 1998 Hurricane Mitch
800 in Central America claimed a death toll of
more than 9,000 with almost 13,000 injured
400
and it left 2 million homeless. Altogether
0 11% of the total population was affected.
1966-70 1971-75 1976-80 1981-85 1986-90 1991-95 1996-00
The total damage came to over US$ 7
Fig. 1: Number of natural disasters worldwide from billion.
1966 to 2000.
Source: CRED, University of Louvain, Belgium 2001.
• In August 1999, the earthquake in north-
western Turkey claimed over 17,000 lives
There are also many small-scale, local with 44,000 injured. In November 1999, the
same region was hit by another earthquake.
disasters that are not recorded in official
The two earthquakes are estimated to have
statistics.3 Even more pronounced than the destroyed or badly damaged a total of
increase in the numbers of disaster events 400,000 buildings.
is the magnitude of the physical damage • Heavy rains in Venezuela in December
caused and particularly the loss of human 1999 caused floods and landslides that
life. destroyed more than 23,000 houses. This
disaster caused the death of about 30,000
Natural disasters are caused by extreme people.
occurrences in nature for which society is • Since the end of 1999, Kenya has been
unprepared. They destroy the basic condi- suffering from the worst drought in 40 years.
tions of life for the victims, who lack the re- This drought, which reached its worst point
in July 2000, affected over 4 million people.
sources to recover in the short or medium
For several months more than 3 million had
term. Disasters often have a very significant to rely on external food aid.
detrimental impact on past development
• At the beginning of 2000 over 650,000 peo-
efforts. ple were made homeless by 2 cyclones and
flooding in Southern Africa. Mozambique
was particularly hard hit by this disaster.
Over 2 million people in this country suf-
2 fered in the aftermath.
The present paper concentrates on so-called natu-
ral disasters that have to do with natural events • Two severe earthquakes that shook El
such as earthquakes, hurricanes or tornadoes. We
leave aside technological disasters that are often
Salvador in January and February 2001
caused by people taking inadequate safety precau- took a toll of more than a thousand lives. In
tions, such as reactor accidents, and the disastrous the hardest hit Department, La Paz, 90% of
impacts of political-military conflicts (cf. Eikenberg,
C., Journalisten-Handbuch zum Katastrophenma- the houses in urban and rural areas were
nagement 2000, Typologie von Katastrophen, damaged or destroyed. Material loss
DKKV, Bonn 2000, p. 6-7).
3 amounted to US$ 1.3 billion.
Cf. BMZ, Entwicklungspolitik zur Vorbeugung und
Bewältigung von Katastrophen und Konflikten, BMZ
spezial 082, Bonn 1997, p. 9.
101. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
A vast majority of natural disasters occur in Material damage in high, medium and low
human developed countries from 1991-2000
emerging economies (medium human de-
600.000
457.091
veloped) and developing countries (low 329.615
400.000
human developed).4
200.000
0
Natural disasters in high, medium and low Total material loss in US$ millions
human developed countries from 1991-2000
High human developed countries Medium and low developed countries
1.838
2.000
1.500 Fig. 4: Material damage in high, medium and low hu-
1.000
man developed countries from 1991-2000.
719
Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva
500
2001.
0
Number of natural disasters
If, however, we compare the size of the
High human developed countries Medium and low developed countries
damage caused with gross domestic prod-
Fig. 2: Natural disasters in high, medium and low uct (GDP), the ratio shifts substantially.
human developed countries from 1991-2000. Take the following comparison as an ex-
Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva
2001.
ample: The colossal earthquake that de-
stroyed the Japanese town Kobe on 17
The loss of life in the emerging and devel- January 1995 caused damages totalling
oping countries is also much higher than in US$ 100 billion (see Fig. 5). This amounted
the industrialized countries. to approximately 2% of Japanese GDP in
the same year.
Loss of life in high, medium and low human
developed countries from 1991-2000
In contrast, a study5 put the US$ 1,255 mil-
800.000 lion in total damages after the earthquake
649.398
in El Salvador at the beginning of 2001 at
600.000
about 10% of national GDP (as much as
400.000
20%-35% in most of the departments af-
200.000
fected). World Bank figures for small island
16.200
states indicate an even heavier burden: In
0
Number of deaths
the state of Niue in the South Pacific cy-
High human developed countries Medium and low developed countries clone Ofa in 1990 caused damage to gov-
ernment and administrative buildings worth
Fig. 3: Loss of life in high, medium and low human de- US$ 4 million, which made up 40% of
veloped countries from 1991-2000.
Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva
GDP.6
2001.
A comparison between Venezuela and
In absolute figures, however, the material France gives us a similar picture: Land-
damage in industrialized countries (high slides in Venezuela and severe storms in
human developed) is greater. France in December 1999 caused similar
economic losses in both countries – about
US$ 10 billion. The death toll in France was
5
Cf. CEPAL/BID, El terremoto del 13 de enero de
2001 en El Salvador. Impacto socioeconómico y
4
We use the definitions of UNDP. They categorize ambiental. Naciones Unidas, LC/MEX/L.457, 2001.
6
countries according to their level of human devel- Cf. World Bank, Managing Disaster Risk in
opment. See also, UNDP, Human Development Emerging Economies, Disaster Risk Management
Report 2001, New York, Oxford 2001. Series No. 2, Washington 2000, p. 13-14.
111. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
123. In Venezuela, however, it amounted to people living in these regions. The com-
30,000. Venezuela will take years to re- paratively low level of development, as evi-
cover from the aftermath, whereas France dent in the fragile infrastructure, the poor
was quick to get over the worst hanks to building fabric of housing, the vulnerability
effective public and private system of dis- of productive activities, the low level of po-
aster management and damage sharing.7 litical and social organization and the ab-
sence of warning systems, makes them
Loss of life and material damage worldwide more vulnerable to natural disasters.
after natural disasters between 1990 and 1999
Damage in Mio.US People killed
$
250.000 200.000
The doubling of the world population since
* **
200.000 1950 to more than 6 billion and its impact
150.000
150.000 on settlement patterns and natural re-
100.000
100.000 sources also makes itself particularly felt in
50.000
50.000 the developing countries. Moreover, the
0 0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
rapid rise in world population has not just
Total amount of estimated damage in mio. US $ caused a drastic increase in the density of
Total amount of people killed
settlements; it has also altered their distri-
Fig. 5: Loss of life and material damage worldwide bution pattern and land use. There is, for
after natural disasters between 1990 and 1999.
example, a growing migratory trend towards
Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva
2001. valleys and slopes under threat of flooding,
* The year 1991 claimed a particularly high number of deaths. land-slides and earthquakes, particularly on
The floods in Bangladesh alone left about 139,000 people
dead. the outskirts of large and medium-sized
** 1995 was the year with the heaviest material damage. The
big earthquake in Kobe, Japan, alone caused losses worth conurbations. These are growing too fast
about US$ 100 billion.
for the requisite planning and building
regulations to be drafted and supervised.
It is no coincidence that 95% of the deaths
Modernization without the necessary safety
caused by natural disasters in 1998 were in
precautions (e.g. when building bridges) in-
developing countries.8 The vulnerability of
creases the vulnerability to and risk of ad-
these countries is much higher than in the
verse impacts resulting from a natural
industrialized nations. We shall look at the
event.
reasons for this in the following section.
Finally, another cause of the increase in
1.1 Causes and effects
natural disasters is the widespread human
Due to their geographical location devel- intervention in the climatic system9 and in
oping countries are particularly exposed to the equilibrium of fragile ecosystems (forest
extreme natural phenomena. Storms, heavy clearance, soil erosion, single cropping
rains and landslides are more frequent and practices).
severe in the subtropical and tropical re-
Natural disasters have direct and indirect
gions of the South. Hydrometeorological,
effects on developing countries. First, dur-
seismic, volcanic and other natural events
pose a permanent ongoing threat to the
9
The scientific findings of the IPCC report show
clearly that the rise in global temperatures correlate
7 with the increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
Cf. World Bank, Managing Risk, A Special Report The inference in this connection is that human
on Disaster Risk Management, ProVention Con- activities exert an influence on the global climate
sortium, undated, p.2. (cf. IPCC, Third Assessment Report – Climate
8
Cf. CEPAL/BID, Un Tema del Desarrollo: La Re- Change 2001, http://www.ipcc.ch/). To date, how-
ducción de la Vulnerabilidad Frente a los Desas- ever, there is no scientific proof that this is the
tres, LC/MEX/L.428, no loc. 2000. cause of climate change.
121. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
ing and after a disaster people lose their large-scale assets (e.g. infrastructure, in-
homes, their belongings, the very basis of dustrial plant, technology). Unlike the de-
their livelihood. The poorer population is veloping countries, material losses far out-
much harder hit than the middle and upper weigh human loss. Also, population and
classes because their vulnerability is far governments have the capacity to make
greater. This is due to social, economic and good these losses, at least in the medium
political factors. The poorest people often term. Most are insured and part of the costs
have nothing left with which to resume their of rebuilding and rehabilitation are borne by
daily battle for survival. It is very difficult for the insurance firms. Nor does local and na-
them to recover from the losses they have tional economic stability depend on a few
suffered and many migrate elsewhere in marketable products. This signifies far
the hope of finding better conditions of life. lower levels of economic vulnerability.
Then, the direct losses in productive sec- The figure below illustrates the different
tors are followed by indirect impacts. In the medium-term economic effects of disasters,
largely agrarian economies the production taking capital formation as a benchmark.
losses lead to the dismissal or unemploy-
ment of day labourers. The loss of jobs re- Impact of disasters on capital formation in
smaller national economies
duces income and curbs spending power in
families that already live under very pre-
carious conditions. This in turn affects trade
Formation of Capital
and transportation as well as other ser-
vices. Finally, losses can occur in the finan-
cial sector and even result in economic
collapse if deposits and large amounts of
savings are withdrawn. Disasters thus im-
*
poverish the population further, and in-
Time
crease their vulnerability. A vicious circle of
vulnerability to more frequent extreme natu-
ral events is established. * Disaster
Developing countries
The international community often provides Industrialized countries
assistance for reconstruction but this is a
huge burden on the economy. Since eco- Fig. 6: Impact of disasters on capital formation in
nomic rationale demands that destroyed smaller national economies.
Source: ECLAC/IDB, La reducción de la vulnerabilidad
infrastructure are restored first, little funding frente a los desastres: Una cuestion de desarrollo,
is left for years to pursue coherent devel- presentation at IDB anual meeting in March 2000, New
Orleans 2000.
opment strategies. Disasters often have a
destabilizing political impact as well given The disaster itself causes disruption to eco-
the worsening situation of large sectors of nomic development, which is overcompen-
the population in the medium and long sated at first by the rapid provision of addi-
term. tional capital. After the additional funds for
emergency aid and reconstruction have
In the industrialized nations, the damage been consumed, the local economy has to
caused by extreme natural events is also cope with the remaining adverse effects on
on the increase. This increase may be ex- its own. While the industrialized countries
plained in good part by the higher density of
131. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
manage this relatively quickly, in the devel- health and education, for example). These
oping countries the disaster depletes capi- sectors are either heavily affected by dis-
tal formation for a long time. asters and their consequences and/or strive
to reduce the vulnerability of the population
1.2 Action needed with the aim of promoting sustainable de-
velopment. "Development can only be
As we showed in the previous section, vul-
sustained if it enables a society to prevent
nerability to extreme natural events com-
or cope with disasters."12
prises various factors that bear a close re-
lation to the development of a country or Most developing countries are still a long
region. These provide a number of starting way from assimilating disaster risk man-
points for bilateral and international devel- agement in national development strategy,
opment cooperation. despite the verifiable economic costs of
disasters and the demand for effective dis-
In many development cooperation projects
aster risk management voiced at the na-
and programmes efforts are underway to
tional and international level for years. The
reduce development constraints and short-
United States Geological Survey estimates
comings. This implicitly translates into low-
that investing US$ 40 billion worldwide in
ered vulnerability in developing countries.
preventive measures in the 90s would have
Nevertheless, as BMZ points out, "the con-
reduced economic loss through disasters
nections between poverty and vulnerability
by US$ 280 billion.13 With the help of a cost-
are quite complex" and "not every kind of
benefit analysis for eight towns in Argentina
development effort in areas threatened by
the World Bank also worked out that in-
disaster qualifies as disaster prevention".10
vestments of US$ 153 million in flood pre-
vention would have been more than offset
On the other hand, as the term itself im-
by an estimated saving of US$ 187 mil-
plies, disaster risk management is fre-
lion.14
quently aimed at finding practical remedies
for current problems. There is need here for
1.3 Obstacles to implementation
a wider vision to include the systematic re-
duction of hazards and vulnerability. This There are many different reasons why gov-
means extending the mandate beyond ernments are reticent as regards disaster
emergency assistance. "Assistance in dis- risk management. However, these are com-
asters and conflicts and the related preven- pounded by the following difficulties found
tive measures (development-oriented emer- in mainstreaming disaster risk management
gency aid) cannot properly be treated as an in development strategy:
isolated field of activity; it must be as-
similated into development cooperation as • Preventive measures are seen by gov-
an integral component."11 ernment and the private sector as cost
GTZ's concern is to mainstream this theme 12
Plate, E., Merz, B. and Eikenberg, C., Naturkatas-
in other sectoral projects and programmes trophen – Strategien zur Vorsorge und Bewäl-
(in decentralization and rural development, tigung, Bericht des Deutschen IDNDR-Komitees
zum Ende der "International Decade for Natural Di-
saster Reduction", Deutsche IDNDR-Reihe 16,
Bonn 1999, p. 16.
10 13
Cf. BMZ, Entwicklungspolitik zur Vorbeugung und Cf. IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Focus on
Bewältigung von Katastrophen und Konflikten, BMZ Recovery, Geneva 2001, p. 12.
spezial 082, Bonn 1997, p. 4. 14
Weltbank, Weltentwicklungsbericht 2000/2001 –
11
Cf. ibidem, p. 17. Bekämpfung der Armut, Bonn 2001, p. 212.
141. Disasters – a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
factors and not as profitable invest-
ments. On the other hand, external aid
supplies and reconstruction measures
expected in the event of a disaster are
mostly cost-free transfers.
• Pure emergency measures taken after
disasters are spectacular. And it is eas-
ier to make political capital out of them
than out of disaster risk management.
• Donors are still more prone to react with
reconstruction models rather than with
preventive action.
• Expanding infrastructure is often a way
of attracting votes during elections.
When implementing these measures,
however, construction quality standards
that are important for disaster risk re-
duction are often neglected (e.g. streets
without drainage systems).
• Uncertainty as to whether an extreme
natural event is actually going to occur
often deters decision makers from in-
vesting scant existing funds in risk-re-
duction measures. In addition, many
disaster risk management technologies
are still too costly and sometimes too
complicated to be easily applied by
poorly equipped and funded organiza-
tions and populations.
• Some well-established local political
and economic institutions hamper dis-
aster risk management (land law and
land distribution, for instance). Reforms
meet with strong opposition from all
kinds of pressure groups.
152. Approach and definitions
2. Approach and definitions
Extreme natural events can become disas- taking place over months and even years,
ters if people are affected directly or indi- the causes are more complex and it is often
rectly. At present, the term disaster is not only possible to identify the effects in-
used to mean only one thing; the definition directly.
of the term can differ greatly depending on
the standpoint (e.g. victim, insurer or scien- However, not every extreme natural event
tist) and the cultural setting. is a disaster. A volcanic eruption in an un-
occupied area is a natural event but not a
Nevertheless, in all definitions, there are disaster. Floods can also have many bene-
two common elements: one, the extent of ficial effects – the soil is supplied with fresh
damage and loss, which is considered to be nutrients and made more fertile again, re-
very high, and two, the inability of the peo- sulting in higher yields. So, disasters al-
ple, regions or countries affected to cope in ways have adverse impacts but specific
the short or medium term on their own. approaches to them must cater for the dual
nature of such events, i.e. disaster risk
Under the auspices of the International management searches to maintain the
Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) an positive impacts while reducing the adverse
updated glossary was issued in May 2001, consequences of extreme natural events.
which marks a major step forward in stan-
dardizing terms in disaster risk manage- 2.1 The growing risk
ment.15
In many regions of the world the threat of
GTZ's disaster risk management strategy is natural events such as volcanic eruptions,
based on the United Nations' definition of earthquakes and tsunamis, hurricanes and
disaster. tornadoes extreme rainfall, droughts or for-
est fires are permanently present. People
Definition of 'disaster' living in these regions are exposed to these
"A serious disruption of the functioning of soci- natural hazards, but they may be able to
ety, causing widespread human, material or en-
prevent them having grave consequences
vironmental losses which exceed the ability of
(e.g. earthquake-resistant building, a dyke
affected society to cope using only its own re-
sources."16 or a good insurance policy). People who
are unable to protect themselves sufficiently
This notion of disaster draws a distinction against the adverse effects of a natural
between sudden and slow onset disasters. event are particularly 'vulnerable' to disas-
Amongst natural disasters extreme droughts ter.
are the only ones that are slow onset by
nature. The causes and effects of a drought The disaster risk (of a region, a family, or
disaster are far more difficult to ascertain a person) is therefore made up of two ele-
than sudden natural events such as ments: hazard and vulnerability.
earthquakes, tsunamis or landslides. Due
to the gradual nature of the process, often
15
ISDR, Updated and Expanded Terminology on Di-
saster Reduction, Geneva 2001.
16
Cf. ibidem, p. 24.
162. Approach and definitions
ing vulnerability, i.e. the possible repercus-
Hazard Vulnerability
sions in the event a natural phenomenon
should occur.
2.1.1 Hazard
Disaster risk Hazards are extreme natural events with a
certain degree of probability of having ad-
verse consequences. A distinction also needs
to be drawn between a real natural hazard
and a socio-natural hazard. Given the com-
plex set of influences this distinction is
Disaster difficult to make, but it is useful in helping
define disaster risk management measures.
Whereas with truly natural phenomena
Fig. 7: Components of disaster risk.
Source: GTZ, Eschborn 2001. people exert no influence as regards their
occurrence, socio-natural hazards are in-
The following formula is used to calculate duced or aggravated by a combination of
disaster risk: extreme natural events and human inter-
ventions in nature. Only a few hazards,
Disaster Risk =
earthquakes for example, occur as purely
Hazard x Vulnerability17 natural phenomena; most others, such as
forest fires, floods and landslides, can come
In this equation risk is the product of the about with and without human intervention.
two factors, hazard and vulnerability. There-
fore, it is clear that a risk exists only if there Some examples of extreme natural events
is vulnerability to the hazard posed by a are listed and classified in the following
natural event. For instance, a family living in box.
a highly earthquake-resistant house would
List of natural hazards18
not be vulnerable to an earthquake of 6 on
Volcanic eruptions ♦
the Richter scale. So, they would not be at ♦
Earthquakes and seaquakes
risk. If the hazard approaches zero, be- Floods ♦ X
cause, for example, buildings have been Droughts ♦ X
constructed in areas far away from conti- Storms ♦
nental plate subduction zones and tectonic Hurricanes and tornadoes ♦
faults, a house built with minimum precau- Forest fires ♦ X
Landslides ♦ X
tions will be a safe place for the family, be-
Avalanches ♦ X
cause they would only be vulnerable to very
Heat and cold waves ♦
extreme events.
Tsunamis ♦
Risk identification starts with identifying the ♦ Hazard posed by pure natural phenomena
X Hazard also due to human intervention
hazard and then assesses the correspond-
17 18
Cf. amongst others Wilches-Chaux, Gustavo, Auge, This list does not claim to be complete. See also
Caída y Levantada de Felipe Pinillo, Mecánico y the typology in Eikenberg, C., Journalisten-Hand-
Soldador o Yo Voy a Correr el Riesgo, LA RED, buch zum Katastrophenmanagement 2000, Bonn
Peru 1998, p. 142. 2000, p. 6-7.
172. Approach and definitions
Hazards can be narrowly confined to a lo- mented (regional development and land
cality or threaten entire regions. So a haz- use planning, building regulations).
ard is a variable whose intensity and prob-
• The personnel and financial resources
ability can differ by place. This has a con-
available for disaster risk management
siderable influence on the levels of possible
and preparedness are inadequate.
damage.
• Roles are not properly or clearly as-
signed and there is a lack of coordina-
tion in and amongst the responsible in-
stitutions (including centralism: insuffi-
cient power for local actors).
• The political culture is conducive to
vested interests and corruption, which
hampers consistent disaster risk man-
agement (e.g. in the building trade) and
effective disaster preparedness.
Fig. 8: Aftermath of Hurricane Mitch: roof of a clay • Democratic institutions are underdevel-
house in mud following floods, Honduras 1998.
oped: The low level of participation of
To be able to reduce hazards or prepare for the population in democratic processes
them, we have to ascertain their potential. diminishes their self-help capabilities.
To a certain extent, it is possible to obtain • Mechanisms and instruments for spread-
quite a full picture of possible hazards from ing financial risks are lacking or in-
the history of past events. To exactly iden- adequate (e.g. disaster funds, insur-
tify the possible size of the hazard, how- ance).
ever, this information must be supple-
• A culture of prevention is obstructed or
mented by professional assistance and
insufficiently promoted.
modern technology.
Economic factors
2.1.2 Vulnerability
• Governmental financial resources are
Vulnerability denotes the inadequate means insufficient for disaster risk manage-
or ability to protect oneself against the ad- ment (e.g. for flood protection infra-
verse impacts of natural events and, on the structure).
other hand, to recover quickly from their
• Poverty in general limits the self-help
effects.
capabilities of large parts of the popula-
Vulnerability comprises very diverse, often tion, although very effective traditional
mutually reciprocal, factors that have to be mechanisms to cope with disasters still
taken into account to determine the vulner- exist in many regions. Poverty increas-
ability of a family, a village or a country. The ingly compels people to settle in en-
main vulnerability factors are summarized dangered areas (on riverbanks and
below: steep slopes, in gulleys or ravines or on
the slopes of volcanoes). Partly through
Political-institutional factors environmental degradation (e.g. unoffi-
cial garbage dumps or slash-and-burn
• Legislation is lacking, is not commensu-
rate with the hazard or is not imple-
182. Approach and definitions
clearance), poor people often contribute help reduce poverty, facilitate the applica-
to their own higher disaster risk. tion of appropriate production methods and
raise organizational abilities. This in turn
• The economies depend on a few prod-
can motivate people for prevention, thus
ucts (low level of diversification) and the
generating a positive influence on the politi-
danger is particularly great if these
cal factors through greater participation.
sectors are vulnerable to disaster (e.g.
agriculture).
2.1.3 Disaster risk management
• Not enough account is taken of the
influence of economic activities on dis- Technical Cooperation defines disaster
aster risk (e.g. consumption of natural risk management as a series of actions
resources). (programmes, projects and/or measures)
and instruments expressly aimed at re-
Sociocultural factors ducing disaster risk in endangered re-
gions, and mitigating the extent of disas-
• Due to poor education and insufficient
ters.
knowledge of the cause-effect matrix,
people are less able to respond appro-
Disaster risk management includes risk as-
priately in a changing environment.
sessment, disaster prevention and mitiga-
tion and disaster preparedness. It is used in
• Fatalism is widespread as a conse-
the international debate to underscore the
quence of the belief that natural disas-
current trend of taking a proactive approach
ters are willed by God and are therefore
to hazards posed by extreme natural phe-
inevitable.
nomena. The intention is a comprehensive
• The tradition of slash-and-burn clear- reduction in disaster risk accounting for all
ance or the application of out-dated the factors that contribute to risk (risk man-
production methods can result in agement), as opposed to a focus on each
greater vulnerability for people and their individual danger.
property. On the other hand it may re-
sult in greater hazard due to the ad-
verse impact on the natural environ-
ment (e.g. erosion through deforesta-
tion).
• The population is not prepared to en-
gage in mutual support schemes and
organize themselves in order to negoti-
ate competing interests in the search
for greater levels of general welfare.
These political, economic and cultural fac-
tors are interconnected in a complex way.
They have a reciprocal relationship and of-
ten compound each other. Progress in indi-
vidual aspects, therefore, may well also
have a positive effect on other vulnerability
factors. A general improvement in school
education, for instance, can be expected to
193. From disaster relief to disaster risk management
3. From disaster relief to disaster risk management
The notion of a continuum of crises and Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
disasters, as coined by the UN, conveys the (OCHA),
idea that the phases of emergency aid, re-
• the European Union (EU) with its spe-
habilitation, reconstruction and the resump-
cialized ECHO office and
tion of development are concurrent but
nevertheless interconnected. From this • non-governmental organizations, such
standpoint, they must be viewed as an in- as the well renowned International
teractive process.19 Until a few years ago, Federation of Red Cross and Red
disaster relief was a major intervention area Crescent Societies (IFRC).
whenever sudden events disrupted the
The main responsibility remains, however,
functioning of society and overstretched
with the government and civil society of the
available self-help capabilities. Due to the
affected country. However, developing coun-
close link between disasters, development
tries in particular are usually incapable of
and development cooperation an increasing
coping with the magnitude of the financial
number of national and international actors
and technical-organizational tasks. As a
are calling for the introduction of disaster
rule, state institutions in these countries
prevention measures in development plan-
lack sufficient technical equipment and they
ning, and the establishment of national
do not have the same organizational capa-
systems for comprehensive disaster risk
bilities as institutions in industrialized coun-
management. Kofi Annan, the Secretary
tries.21
General of the United Nations, has also ex-
pressly demanded a paradigm shift from
Due to the existence of many national and
the prevalent 'culture of reaction' to a 'cul-
multilateral institutions as well as the rapid
ture of prevention'.20
growth in the number of small non-govern-
mental organizations, it is difficult to keep
3.1 The scope of disaster relief and
track of all of the actors involved. For this
the actors involved
reason it is very difficult to arrive at exact
The main organizations and institutions in- figures as regards the financial scope of
volved with disaster relief (humanitarian aid disaster relief. Another problem is that the
in the phase of emergency assistance and phases of emergency aid, reconstruction
reconstruction) are: and the resumption of development coop-
eration are often hard to demarcate such
• Friendly governments which proffer that it turns out to be very difficult to exactly
their help immediately, allocate costs for each phase. However, it
can be clearly established that the share of
• the various suborganizations of the
emergency and disaster relief in total public
UN, particularly the UN Office for the
development cooperation spending by the
19
See EU, Communication from the Commission to
the Council and the European Parliament – Linking 21
Aside from the public agencies, the health services,
Relief, Rehabilitation and Development – An as- police and fire departments in Germany the techni-
sessment, COM (2001) 153 final, 2001. cal relief organization (THW) for example is a
20
Annan, K., Facing the Humanitarian Challenge. To- leading actor when it comes to rapid response to
wards a Culture of Prevention, Report on Work of disasters. The THW does not confine its relief op-
Organization, New York 1999. erations to Germany; it also engages abroad.
203. From disaster relief to disaster risk management
OECD countries in the 90s was much United Nations Conference on Natural Dis-
higher than in the 80s.22 aster Reduction celebrated in Yokohama in
1994.24 In the Yokohama Declaration,
3.2 The international path towards disaster prevention, mitigation, prepared-
integrated disaster risk man- ness and relief were specified as the basis
agement for a sustainable development policy.
The United Nations International Decade In December 1999 the United Nations
for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), General Assembly adopted a resolution
which ended in 1999, made a major contri- (No. 54/219) on actions to be taken follow-
bution to raising international community ing the end of the International Decade for
awareness of the need to move from reac- Natural Disaster Reduction. Since then, the
tive measures towards integrated disaster issue has been followed up in an Interna-
risk management. The decade was inaugu- tional Strategy for Disaster Reduction
rated in 1989 by the General Assembly of (ISDR), whose organization (IATF secre-
the United Nations with the overall goal of tariat and task force) is to concentrate on
mitigating the adverse consequences of raising political awareness, assisting re-
disasters, particularly in developing coun- gional networks and stepping up scientific
tries (Resolution 44/236). A secretariat un- research.
der OCHA was established to coordinate
IDNDR activities. The IDNDR initiative also Between 1989 and 1999 other major UN
prompted the establishment of national international conferences took place that
committees for disaster risk management. highlighted the interdependence between
In Germany the IDNDR committee was ap- disaster risk management and other global
pointed in 1989 and renamed German challenges facing the international commu-
Committee for Disaster Reduction – DKKV nity. Of particular note here are the summits
(reg. soc.) once the decade expired in in Rio de Janeiro (1992) and Kyoto (1997)
1999. The committee focuses on combining on environment and development. In Rio de
activities in science and practice, innovation Janeiro, Agenda 21 was adopted. With re-
development and know-how transfer, social gard to disaster risk management, Agenda
dialogue and raising public awareness, as 21 points in particular to the threat of sea
well as strengthening local disaster prepar- level changes for densely populated coastal
edness capabilities.23 GTZ is currently re- regions, the need to combat drought and
presented on the executive board and in desertification and the paramount role of
the operative advisory board of the DKKV. local authorities in prevention/prepared-
ness. In September 2002, the World Sum-
In the course of the decade, the early more mit on Sustainable Development (Rio + 10)
technical approach of the IDNDR was sup- will take place in Johannesburg. Its aim is
plemented with the incorporation of socio- to review how sustainable changes have
economic factors in the cause-effect matrix been achieved in the world since the 1992
of disasters, hazards and vulnerabilities. A world summit in Rio. The prime concern in
major milestone in this process was the Kyoto was to reduce the greenhouse effect
22
See OECD, The DAC Journal, Development Co-
operation Report 2000 – Efforts and Policies of the 24
United Nations, World Conference on Natural Di-
Members of the Development Assistance Com- saster Reduction, Yokohama Strategy and Plan of
mittee Volume 2 Issue 1, Paris 2001. Action for a Safer World – Guidelines for Natural
23
Plate, E. und Merz, B. (Pub.), Naturkatastrophen. Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation,
Ursachen, Auswirkungen, Vorsorge, Stuttgart 2001. Yokohama 1994.
213. From disaster relief to disaster risk management
worldwide through the implementation of Despite its priority of providing rapid emer-
definite measures. Major progress in im- gency aid, the International Federation of
plementing the Kyoto Protocol was made at the Red Cross and the Red Crescent So-
the climate conferences in Bonn (July cieties (IFRC) has for many years attached
2001) and Marakkesh (November 2001), importance to disaster risk management.
although the original targets had to be To promote this it supports relevant activi-
rolled back. ties by its members worldwide and as of
1993 publishes an annual World Disaster
The UN international conference HABITAT Report containing developments, facts and
II in Istanbul in 1996 also dealt explicitly analysis on natural disasters and crises and
with the issue of disaster risk management. conflicts.26
As does Agenda 21, the final document
stresses the role of local action: "The most There is also a discernible trend amongst
efficient and effective disaster prepared- the international development banks to-
ness systems and capabilities for post-dis- wards assimilating disaster risk manage-
aster response are usually provided ment in projects. Via its Disaster Manage-
through volunteer contributions and local ment Facility, the World Bank launched the
authority actions at the neighbourhood ProVention Consortium in 2000. This initia-
level." tive centres on mitigating the impacts of
disasters by means of comprehensive dis-
In 1996, the World Food Summit took place aster risk management. The World Bank
in Rome under the auspices of the United underpins its activities in this field with mar-
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization ket incentives for investment in disaster risk
(FAO).25 Amongst other things, the 186 na- management.27 When planning its finance
tions and 32 international organizations investment projects the Inter-American De-
pledge to combat drought and desertifica- velopment Bank now also includes risk as-
tion and improve preparedness for natural sessment and investigation into appropriate
disasters, with a view to preventing a short- and feasible disaster risk management
age of basic foodstuffs due to extreme measures.28
natural events. A follow-on conference is
planned for 2002 to review the results. As of 1994, the European Union finances
projects for disaster risk management via
At the operative level of the United Nations, its European Community Humanitarian Of-
disaster risk management is the responsi- fice (ECHO). Since 1996 the focus has
bility of the United Nations Development been on programmes (DIPECHO) for
Programme. The focus of UNDP activities
is on strengthening national disaster risk
management capabilities in developing
countries. UNDP's approach comprises
short, medium, and long-term measures.
Scheduled for publication in spring 2002, 26
Reconstruction was a priority topic in the latest
the first World Vulnerability Report will report: IFRC, World Disaster Report 2001. Focus
on recovery, Geneva 2001.
analyse disaster risk and outline measures 27
Market Incentives for Mitigation Investment (MIMI):
in disaster risk management worldwide. http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/dis_man/
mimi/default.htm.
28
Cf. for example IDB, Action Plan – Facing the
25
The final declaration and plan of action are printed Challenge of Natural Disasters in Latin America
in BMELF, Nahrung für alle. Welternährungsgipfel and the Caribbean. Special Report, Washington
1996. Dokumentation, Bonn 1997. 2000, pp. 24-26.
22You can also read
