Dear Ana,

I am very sorry to have confused things - and pleased we are still in contact.

James.



At 22:06 04/09/01 +0200, you wrote:
>Dear James and Ilan, et al.,
>
>Just to clarify:
>
>I unsubscribed because I changed jobs from the UK to Italy, thus also
>computer. I was no longer able to comment on the listserver. But I
>re-subscribed with my new e-mail address. So now I am re-connected again.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: This is a multidisciplinary discussion group on natural hazards
>and disaste [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
>Of James Lewis
>Sent: 04 September 2001 18:48
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: European Disaster Management Policy
>
>
>Dear Ilan,
>
>I also wrote to Ana after her initial message, but perhaps not at quite
>such thoughtful length as yours.
>
>I was particularly interested in what you say about flooding. My additional
>concern is that UK planning authorities appear to be ruling out innovative
>attempts to design for flooding - ie: to arrange or to re-arrange living
>accommodation so as to reduce flooding damage, where this requires planning
>permission. A European initiative would be welcome on this issue.
>In this context, may I introduce my recently launched website -
>
>                        www.livingwithflooding.co.uk
>
>A second point is that I understood Ana to have unsubscribed from the list
>shortly after her message. If I am incorrect in this deduction, I apologise
>to her and to you. The e-mail address she wrote from is:
>
>                        [log in to unmask]
>
>With Best Wishes:       James
>
>
>
>At 16:48 03/09/01 +0100, you wrote:
>>Dear Ana and List,
>>
>>Some random thoughts on European-wide disaster management based on the
>>recent discussion through this list.  Any further thoughts, critiques, or
>>suggestions are, of course, welcome.
>>
>>Ana mentioned that a single European directive on such issues would not be
>>possible due to differences in institutions and institutional
>>responsibilities amongst the European countries.  Would this statement
>>perhaps be a call to propose more standardisation?  While I recognise that
>>the politics would be challenging to overcome, a recommendation to DG
>>Environment might be to consider the feasibility of creating similar
>>structures for the agencies which deal with disaster management--not just
>>civil protection and disaster response, but over the entire disaster
>>management cycle.
>>
>>The anglophone Caribbean has an interesting organisational model.  One
>>agency (CDERA, www.cdera.org) coordinates regional activities but each
>>territory has its own National Disaster Organisation.  Perhaps the EU and
>>the rest of Europe could consider such an approach.  Critiques of the
>>Caribbean model and its implementation undoubtedly exist, but Europe could
>>develop its own version, altered to avoid any pitfalls encountered in the
>>Caribbean and adapted for the differences between the two regions.
>>
>>With respect to aspects where a European-wide approach would be beneficial,
>>rather than focussing on tourism, we could perhaps consider a more
>>encompassing term such as "transients", "travellers", or "temporary
>>residents".  Whether travelling for business, pleasure, or to escape
>>persecution, similar vulnerabilities emerge.  Business and pleasure
>>travellers may have less vulnerability than other categories as they often
>>have money, insurance, embassies, and relatives at home which assist in
>>extracting oneself from a difficult situation.  Newly arrived refugees and
>>immigrants (legal or illegal) rarely have such safety nets and would need
>>greater assistance during a disaster.
>>
>>Ana commented "in my opinion, it is essential to promote legislation that
>>will help protect the lives of any citizen of the world, wherever they may
>>be."  The Radix Network (www.anglia.ac.uk/geography/radix/index.html) has
>>plenty information on this topic which could be applied to the European
>>context.
>>
>>Similarly, the principles behind most disaster management activities are
>>relevant to any country and would lend themselves to a European-wide
>>approach.  A clear declaration from the appropriate EU body articulating
>>such principles and how they would be applied to the EU would be helpful,
>>but would serve as only a starting point.  A clear scope exists for moving
>>beyond more paper and speeches, to support specific strategies which would
>>work in any EU country, even when the implementation must be local.
>>
>>One example is relying too much on structural flood defences to deal with
>>slow-rise floods.  The EU should be promoting to all member states the vast
>>literature on "soft" floodproofing measures and integrating flood
>management
>>strategies with sustainable environmental management.  A specific principle
>>would be that permitting flood water to enter residences is not necessarily
>>detrimental provided that the residence is constructed appropriately and
>>that the population is aware of how to avoid substantial losses in such a
>>situation.  For implementation, construction techniques and education
>>strategies must obviously be tailored to the exact locality and culture.
>>
>>Other examples arise from the previous discussion.  Ana mentioned
>>multilingual 112 operators, but the principle could be more detailed, first
>>by defining the target audience.  Would "multilingual" be focussed on the
>EU
>>or internationally?  For the EU, an operator speaking English, French,
>>German, and the local language would be adequate for a substantial portion
>>of the population.  Replacing French with Spanish (and/or Mandarin and/or
>>Hindi?) and removing German would be more appropriate if considering
>>international travellers.  Less regionally, should all operators in Ireland
>>speak Gaelic and English or would it be better to have operators who speak
>>French, German, and English?
>>
>>The emergency number is an interesting issue too.  The U.K. promotes 999,
>>but 112 works and I am told that 911 also works.  Should Europe promote 112
>>but ensure that 999 and 911 also work?  If so, should the 999 countries
>>shift to 112?  How should travellers from other countries, such as New
>>Zealand (emergency number 111) and Barbados (emergency number 119 plus
>>specific numbers for specific services) be considered?  Would a small
>>information card handed out at customs at all European entry points be
>>appropriate?  Some American cities have been experimenting with 911 for
>>emergency calls and 311 for non-emergency calls.  This system has received
>>plenty criticism, so the EU could have a policy stating that all member
>>countries should have only one emergency number and the operator's primary
>>goal is to determine the nature of the emergency and the service required.
>>
>>One final example of European-wide disaster initiatives relates to
>>development activities, international and regional.  ECHO
>>(http://europa.eu.int/comm/echo/en/index_en.html) is an EU organisation
>>focussing on humanitarian aid.  It is certainly time to consider an EU
>>Disaster Reduction Organisation (and strategy) for both the EU and for
>>EU-supported work in developing countries.  Some issues which need to be
>>addressed at the European regional level are:
>>-the impact of disaster on regional development, particularly in border
>>regions.
>>-using pre-disaster activities for regional development, particularly in
>>border regions.
>>-accessing a remote disaster site in border regions.
>>-fatality identification, survivor support, and repatriation.
>>-complex transportation incidents across borders (e.g. tunnel fires).
>>-volcanic ash drifting across borders.
>>See also the Disaster Diplomacy case studies at www.disasterdiplomacy.org
>>which could form the basis for hypothesising cross-border European
>disasters
>>in the future.
>>
>>I believe that scope for European directives and for much more
>harmonisation
>>of all disaster management activities exists.  See, for example, the
>>brochure at http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/leaflets/disasters/en/ which
>>is also available in ten other languages.  Providing information at an EU
>>scale to all residents is happening, but I believe that other, substantial
>>actions would be feasible.
>>
>>Some countries, most notably the U.K., would not respond well to yet more
>>Europeanisation of what they consider to be national responsibilities.  The
>>rather unfortunate management of recent disasters in the U.K. indicates how
>>much help they need, especially with respect to pre-disaster activities.
>>Such help could come from other European countries.  The potential benefits
>>of closer European collaboration for disasters is immense.  Realising these
>>benefits, without becoming mired in the bureaucracy which Ana mentions, is
>>the immense challenge we face.
>>
>>Due to my substantial ignorance, however, I have plenty to learn on this
>>topic, so contrary viewpoints are welcome (and please point out any errors
>>in the above comments), but I hope that I have provided some material for
>>further discussion.
>>
>>Thank you for your time,
>>Ilan
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>>
>>
>*************************************************
>James Lewis
>Architect RIBA
>-------------------------------------------------
>Datum International
>101 High Street
>Marshfield
>nr Chippenham Wiltshire
>SN14 8LT
>United Kingdom
>--------------------------------------------------
>e-mail   : [log in to unmask]
>website  : www.livingwithflooding.co.uk
>telephone: +44 (0)1225 891 426
>fax      : +44 (0)1225 892 092
>
>e-mail also on:
>[log in to unmask]
>---------------------------------------------------
>Neither this e-mail, nor any attachments to it, constitute professional
>advice or legal obligations unless confirmed by a signed letter.
>
>If this message has been received in error, please contact the address
>above.
>****************************************************
>
>
*************************************************
James Lewis
Architect RIBA
-------------------------------------------------
Datum International
101 High Street
Marshfield
nr Chippenham Wiltshire
SN14 8LT
United Kingdom
--------------------------------------------------
e-mail   : [log in to unmask]
website  : www.livingwithflooding.co.uk
telephone: +44 (0)1225 891 426
fax      : +44 (0)1225 892 092

e-mail also on:
[log in to unmask]
---------------------------------------------------
Neither this e-mail, nor any attachments to it, constitute professional
advice or legal obligations unless confirmed by a signed letter.

If this message has been received in error, please contact the address above.
****************************************************