Hi Ben, James et alia
As Ben has suggested, quite a lot has been happening in the field post-Kobe,
certainly since in Asia and the Pacific. Some examples of this.
- The Comprehensive Disaster Management Program - see www.cdmp.org.bd
continues to grow and expand, this being tackled in probably the most
challenging country in the world viz-a-viz hazards. This is an All Hazard
approach involving key stakeholders (government departments; NGOs; research
institutions) from local up to national levels. It ain't easy, but they're
on the right track......
- Country such as Lao PDR are developing similar approaches, particularly
marrying the work of their National Disaster Management Offices (NDMOs) and
their work at national, provincial and district levels, with the work of
NGOs who tend to focus on Community Based Disaster Risk Management (CBDRM)
which is at sub-district level. Interesting that CBDRM work tends to
combine a mixture of Risk Reduction Initiatives = RRIs (eg strengthening
river banks) with Poverty Reduction Initiatives = PRIs (eg diversifying
agricultural production to mitigate against flood or drought)
- In the South Pacific, UNDP, SOPAC and others have commenced a rolling
program of DRM/CBDRM work aimed initially at specific countries - currently
Vanuatu, the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), Papua New Guinea (PNG),
Samoa, Cook Islands. Again this combines DRM/CBDRM initiatives....
- Even in Australia DRM here is increasingly focussed on risk reduction,
with examples of where I live (along bushfire-prone southern Victorian
coastline) towns adopting RRIs which include developing special vegetation
barriers which will slow down fires should they threaten townships.
Certain challenges continue to raise their head:
- Public awareness must be near the top of the list, wherever the location
- Funding for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) initiatives - eg RRI/PRIs in
developing countries is difficult - ideally it should include the national
government topped up by grants from bilateral or multilateral donors
- The Risk Assessment models sometimes appear overly complex - again the
danger of losing sight of the wood for the trees....
- Some terms such as 'Risk Reduction Mainstreaming' are tossed around like
confetti, without a great depth of understanding as to what they mean in
practice (to be honest I'm sometimes confused.....!)
So there is good work being done, certainly in parts of Asia/Pacific, and
I'm sure, elsewhere, but it's relatively low profile. Obviously the proof
of the pie is in the eating, but recent events such as the floods a few
months back in Mozambique, show that national governments, supported by
other stakeholders, are beginning to get to grips with issues. That being
said, drought, and its effects, are particularly challenging (viz-a-viz
latest understanding of some of the underlying causes of the Darfur
conflict....)
Hope this is helpful. Cheers
Chris Piper
PS - Check out our website - www.torqaid.com if you want - we use great
Disaster Risk Management Cycle (DRMC) and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)
diagrams
Chris Piper, Director TorqAid
PO Box 13, Torquay
VIC 3228, Australia
Tel: +61 41 2497317
Email: [log in to unmask] and [log in to unmask]
Website: www.torqaid.com
Chris Piper, Lecturer
School of International & Political Studies (SIPS)
Faculty of Arts, Deakin University
Waurn Ponds, Geelong 3217
Tel: + 61 3 52271426 or + 61 41 2497317
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Natural hazards and disasters
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ben Wisner
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:41 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Why do we let disasters happen ?
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
|
