I have been discussing with several parties when it would be possible to do
rapid environmental impact assessments for the Indian Ocean Tsunami
disaster. The scale of the environmental impacts of the disaster justify
these types of assessments as a way to include salient environmental issues
into relief and recovery plans and operations. For those who subscribe to
Sphere, these types of assessments identify cross-cutting environment issues
which need to be incorporated into the disaster response.

A lesson from the Philippines REA (documentation currently being finalized)
was that an earlier REA would have provided useful input into initial relief
plans and funding appeals. In fact, the assessment was conducted from 7 to
14 days after the passage of Typhoon Yoyo, just as road access was being
reestablished to the most affected areas. While not specifically planned,
initial assessment results were available as government and NGOs began to
focus on extended relief and recovery plans.

The Indian Ocean Tsunami disaster is, of course, of much greater magnitude.
However, the main mechanisms of impact appears to have been sea surge and
flooding, with earthquake damage also occurring in Indonesia, all fairly
well understood damage agents.

Anticipated environmental issues include water and soil contamination
(including from flooded industrial sites - Naztech disasters), solid and
biological debris and waste, changes to local land formations (from the
impact of water movement over land), standing water, immediate and medium
health related impacts, the nature and scale of relief aid and the need to
feed, rehouse and reemploy those who have survived the disaster.

At the national-international coordination level, the UN has dispatched
teams which include (or will include) environmental specialists to most of
the affected counties. Other Donor-managed coordination teams will likely
include environment-related expertise as the response evolves. This will
allow for a broad identification of critical environmental issues,
particularly (but not only) those related to Naztech events, and initiation
of initial response where appropriate.

For the next few days it would appear that very critical environmental
issues (e.g., the release of dangerous chemicals from a damaged factory) can
be identified and addressed through the UN/Donor/Host Government
coordination effort. And, realistically, trying to raise a broad
environmental perspective when most survivor and external attention is
focused on immediate survival requirements will probably get little
attention.

As in the Philippines, it would seem that rapid environmental assessments
would be useful as part of the "second wave" of assistance efforts and
particularly focus on two areas:
1.      Providing programmatic input into longer term relief and recovery
plans and activities, and,
2.      Identifying environment-related concerns and expectations of the
survivors.
Note that coordinating structures would not normally be involved in the
second type of activity, leaving it to implementing agencies.

Both focus areas should be integrated into overall assessment efforts to
economize time and resources. As in the Philippines, the assessment and
extended relief planning process phase (closely linked to reestablishing
access and the need to submit funding requests) should be starting in no
more than 5 to 7 days. Rapid environmental impact assessments should start
within the same timeframe.

The manner and location of these assessments (to be integrated with other
assessments whenever possible) remains to be determined. Based on reported
death toll, Indonesia and Sri Lanka are top candidates for initial efforts.
However, local capacities to identify and assess environmental issues also
need to be considered, something which the UN coordinating structure may be
best at determining.

Additionally, different types of rapid environmental impact assessment may
be appropriate, each matched to a specific need or situation. The "Generic
REA", developed by Benfield Hazard Research Centre and CARE (used in the
Philippines) provides both broad and specific perspectives and results for
use in operations and planning. A "Camp REA", developed by UNHRC and CARE
under the FRAME project, is particularly useful in looking at short to
medium term temporary shelter (expected to be a major need) and
resettlement/rehousing activities. The ECLAC process for estimating the
socio-economic and environmental impacts of disasters is useful to get a
handle on the broad economic and social impacts of the disaster.

These comments are intended to encourage discussion on the challenges of
rapid environmental impact assessment in disasters and promote coordination
and collaboration of any environmental impact assessment efforts related to
the Indian Ocean Tsunami disaster.

Comments are welcome.

Sorry for any cross-posting.
C. Kelly