There is a lot of rumbling about establishing targets -- 5%, 10%, etc. -- of disaster response money collected on mitigation/ vulnerability reduction. In Kobe the UK Minister for Overseas Development pledged as much, and it came up again in Geneva just now. This was also an idea plugged strongly in the IFRCs World Disaster Report 2006.
Will it happen? That depends on lobbying and on demands for it to happen from primary groups of people living with various levels of risk.
I don't deny that there is an industry developed around humanitarian assistance -- what Naomi Klein refers to as "disaster capitalism," but so far, this is focused more on conflict and post war situations and only quite recently on mega disasters. Most of the INGOs that work in disaster response also have strong development arms, and work in areas such as health, rural development, education, human rights, etc. They would not be affected as institutions by a decrease in money for mega disaster response. The newly formed, highly focused relief organizations would.
Finally, more and more discussion of small and medium disasters that displace people and disrupt livelihoods is taking place. The data management system pioneered in Latin America, DESINVENTAR (www.desinventar.org -- bi-lingual English & Spanish), is being used in Asia and Africa now. It and such non-headline grabbing events, were highlighted in the overview paper written by ISDR for the recent Global Platform for DRR.
So, on balance, Jim, I think it's less gloomy than you think at the moment. Have a beer. Sit in the garden (unless its raining). Breathe and smile!
BEN
-----Original Message-----
>From: James Lewis <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Jun 25, 2007 11:42 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Why do we let disasters happen ?
>
>Another little story from the New York Times, this time this morning
>at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/us/25give.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
>reports a clearly apparent regret in the absence of major disasters
>in 2006 which is blamed for a reported shortfall in giving to the charities.
>
>Is it just the mood I'm in or am I being just my cynical / realist
>self when I wonder what hope there is for disaster reduction when, on
>the other side of the coin so to speak, a massive lobby exists that
>is almost praying for the next big one. Or, a little more rationally,
>what hope is there after the big ones happen of the colossal sums
>collected being spent at all on vulnerability reduction ?
>
>Can there not be some kind of follow-up to this kind of reporting ?
>
>James
|