Print

Print
The last five messages in this chain are very challenging and go to the heart of the matter.  One thing we need to do is to distinguish between 'accountability' and 'causation'.  There are cascades of 'causes' of damage, loss of life and injury due to realised risk in many forms.  It is not always helpful or even possible to blame specific individuals as Charles Perrow argues in his classic, "Normal Accidents."  In other cases, however, where corrupt practice, say in the construction of a school, can be demonstrated, accountability is a valid concern, and it should be treated as a criminal matter.  However, even in such cases, a full forensic examination of the causal cascade (as Ian would probably say) would require asking why the contractor was able to get away with sub-standard construction practices, and why, indeed, there is not more awareness of the rudiments of building safety on the part of parents, teachers and school administrators.  At this point my thinking is stimulated by Fred's reminder of the history of fire safety.  The pubic at large does, in fact, learn generation by generation. To take another example, in many parts of the world, the general public has learned that it is their right to have affordable access to safe water.  It has been a long history since Dr. Snow took the handle off the pump in Broad Street, London that was the source of a cholera epidemic in 1854.

The question, then, is how rapidly to influence public consciousness and people's demands for safety.  Once conscious of their rights, people will demand them whether the governments is more or less democratic or autocratic. 

This is where it becomes clear to me that HFA2 has got to become fully integrated into a post-2015 development agenda that rolls back the neoliberal dogmas that have dismantled or starved public eduction (of children, youth, and adults), primary health care and public support for neighbourhood and grassroots rural organisation.

All the best,

BEN
-----Original Message-----
From: "Dr. Frederick Krimgold" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Dec 1, 2013 8:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Accountability for Disaster

Accountability may not be the issue. We might look to examples of success in loss reduction.
In the 19th century and earlier urban conflagration was a wide-spread threat even in the now industrialized countries, With the introduction of regulatory mechanisms to limit fire ignition and fire spread urban conflagration has bean largely brought under control. This effort has been accomplished through a combination of public understanding, research, insurance and regulation.
These mechanisms have evolved over time. Mrs. O’Leary’s cow might be held accountable for the Chicago fire along with the culture that created the tinderbox of crowded flammable buildings. It may not be so useful to hold any particular individual responsible for the cumulative exposure of a city.
Rather we have to understand the broad long-term collaboration necessary to change the character of planning and construction to reduce the likelihood of ignition and spread of distraction. The most important work of the modern fire department is prevention through inspection and enforcement of fire codes and maintenance of hydrant systems. Not so much the red trucks, blaring sirens and spotted dogs. In most disaster-prone cities of the developing world there is minimal regulatory capacity and neither the local governments, the donor agencies or the NGO have offered any significant attention or assistance to the evolution of efficient and effective regulatory capacity where it is most needed. As Ian has suggested consequences need to be linked to causes and causes need to be dealt with systematically and consistently. For many hazards the mapping of exposure and the engineering for survival is available but the critical mechanisms of implementation are stunted or non-existant. Investment in regulatory capacity can create the administrative machinery and the qualified manpower to initiate the evolution of systems appropriate to specific conditions of risk and resources. Where is the investment in regulatory capacity?


----------------------------------------------------
Dr. Frederick Krimgold
Director
Disaster Risk Reduction Program (DRR)
Virginia Tech
Advanced Research Institute (ARI)
900 North Glebe Road, Room 5014
Arlington, VA 22203 USA
Main: 571-858-3300
Direct: 571-858-3307
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: www.ari.vt.edu

On Dec 1, 2013, at 12:19 AM, Paul Barbier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

All this talk of holding people /institutions/companies/ government agencies responsible is all very well.
However in reality most societies are governed by quasi democratic or autocratic institutions that only serve their own self interests generally.
Thus no matter what is discussed will boil down ultimately to being dependent on these same self serving institutions to become more accountable thorugh self regulation.
This is something I cannot see happening.
Of course the UN or other could adopt resolutions but again the ability of any international organisation to affect the political course of any particular country or to intervene when people accountability is required for the actions of said countries governments and institutions is pretty restricted.
All this talk is merely academic whilst democratic nations stand by  and leave the less democratic nations to wage war their populations ( e.g Syria, Bosnia, Rwanda, Sudan etc). leaving them vulnerable and without recourse to help. If we can't even help where there is a clear chain of command and responnsibility involved what hope is there of getting involved to hold anyone / anything accountable for the destruction caused by natural hazard events of an extreme nature.


On 01/12/2013 06:21, Dilruba Haider wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
I guess just the way, we have set parameters/indicators to label a natural hazard a disaster, we can set some criteria to say what kind of destructions at what level of disasters under what circumstances would enable the people (affected, disaster managers, government) to hold which sections of society/institutions responsible. For instance, in case of earthquake of the magnitude of 10 in richter scale, it probably would be unfair to hold the construction companies responsible for building collapse, but when it's 5 or 6 magnitude EQ, we can probably do so. Similarly, in cyclones like Haiyan with 387 kmph wind speed and 5/6 meter stormsurge it probably is unfair to hold builders responsible for house collapse, but in case of cyclones with 150 kmph windspeed we could probably hold the local authorities/engineers, who are responsible to oversee and approve house contructions, responsible. We could, perhaps need to set up many such detail parameters for: embankment failures, inadequate warning lead time as well as dissemination to the grass root levels, lack of on time evacuation measures, and so on.    

 

However, first as James said, we (society and institutions) have to agree that disasters are not natural events, hazards are. An impediment towards that is our humaniatrain community who are so busy and complacent 'saving lives' that they neither have the time or the inclination to look beyond humanitarian operation, therefore delve into the accountability issue. In a post disaster scenario they run the show, mobilise millions of dollars, run 'feel good' emergency operations for months, by which time society forget who was responsible.

 

Really, something should be done! We must do something to make accountability an integral part of post HFA DRR framework. Ben, the leaders of Radixers, please do something, plan something well ahead with a finishing showdown in 2015 Sendai WCDR, making sure that accounatbility is indeed included in the post 2015 DRR framework.

 

With you

 

Dilruba

 

 

 

 

 

From: Radix [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Dr. Frederick Krimgold [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 5:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Accountability for Disaster

James,
Who is “society” and how do we influence its or their behavior if not through individual action. Isn’t collective action the combination of individual actions. Who or what can we hold to account for the consequences of ignorance or greed?


----------------------------------------------------
Dr. Frederick Krimgold
Director
Disaster Risk Reduction Program (DRR)
Virginia Tech
Advanced Research Institute (ARI)
900 North Glebe Road, Room 5014
Arlington, VA 22203 USA
Main: 571-858-3300
Direct: 571-858-3307
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: www.ari.vt.edu

On Nov 30, 2013, at 6:10 AM, James Lewis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I want to ask who, or what, is 'we'?

Prefererably, 'we' is society at large, not some select part of it; surely then it is 'we' as society at large that is responsible for the causes of catastrophes as well as for removing or ameliorating those causes.

Is the impressive focus of attention displayed by this exchange, for example, on this relatively small and basicaly technological failure because larger 'failures' are deemed to be beyond us - 'us' being society at large again. Whilst most technological failures attract post-event inquiries and reports into their causes, eg: aircraft, train and industrial accidents, large fires, building collapses and supermarkets wanting roof gardens, what of Katrinas, Sandys and Haiyans? Where is similar concern for accountability regarding the causes of the impacts of those, where are the in-depth inquiries and reports? The last I read of Sandy was that there was strong opposition to the then mayor of New York City's proposal to prevent reconstruction in the same highly vulnerable locations. Also, would Japan have instituted its impressive inquiry into the impacts of its tsunami if a nuclear power station had not been a casualty and exacerbator of that catastrophe?

One reason, surely, is that we recognise technology and its applications as products of our own 'society at large' and therefore it is that same society that should be able to spot the causes and put things to rights. Therefore, surely also, as soon as the impacts of Katrinas, Sandys and Haiyans are recognised not as 'natural' but as products of society at large, then the sooner will society take control of those events as well.

Meanwhile, we will toy with

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3629/6880 - Release Date: 11/30/13



<[log in to unmask]>

Dr. Ben Wisner
Aon-Benfield UCL Hazard Research Centre, University College London, UK
& Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania
& Environmental Studies Program, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH, USA

"People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care."