Some thoughts:
>1) if you were to choose 1 or 2 mitigation investment procedures that you
>would consider most likely to be beneficial to such a community (prone to
>destruction every 1-5 years), what would it/they be? [note: relocation and
>land use planning are not options here; looking for specific investments
>in some sort of infrastructure]
: I would go for creation of community assets that help cope with disaster.
These could be physical infrastructure elements such as drainage channels,
small embankments, shelter belts, disaster shelters, etc, social assets such
as trained voluntary task forces, or economic assets such as community based
insurance schemes.
>2) what % of money invested in this measure would you assume to be saved
>through vulnerability reduction in the 1st year? 2nd year? what is the
>expected time duration of such reduction (in years or months)?
: reasonable investments in the market double a sum of money over five
years. Thus, a return of 100% or more over five years should qualify any
such measure. Exact returns will perhaps be case specific.
>3) if funding for this project is coming from the federal government, what
>% of such funding do you think will actually be used towards completion of
>the project (vs. % lost to corruption and other "leakages")? if funding
>is from NGOs?
: There have been official confessions in this part of the world that a
paltry 18% of federal funds for development actually reach ground level.
The case of disaster related projects may be better than this, and funding
through ngos still better.
>4) what other issues might need to be considered in this specific
>scenario?
: level of participation might be an important factor. Is it an externally
administered project, or one for which a demand has come from the community,
and their participation has been ensured in planning, decision making,
implementation and management???
best,
anshu sharma
SEEDS, India.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|