Post on 30-Dec-2015
description
Safe Cities 1
Principles and components of urban disaster risk reduction
Session 2World Bank Institute
Fouad Bendimerad, Ph.D., P.E
2
Evolution of disaster risk management
FROM ….
Product approach Exclusive science/ technical
approach Risk assessment equals risk
management Risk as uni-dimensional Risk as an agency-specific
issue Risk as a sectoral issue
…. TO
Process approach Inclusive participatory
approach Risk assessment is part
of risk management Risk as multi-
dimensional Risk as a whole-of-
government issue Risk as a whole-of-
society issue
Safe Cities
3
From response management to risk management
Shifting from response management to risk management requires:
An understanding of the risk faced by each community and each segment of society
An understanding of the factors of vulnerability of society and the built environment
A shift from reactive action to pro-active engagement
Cross-organizational and cross-agency communication and coordination
Communicating and planning with communities A long term view anchored on sustainability
Safe Cities
4
From disaster management to disaster risk reduction
Disaster Risk Management takes place when and if: Integrated within the agenda of each function of the
local government Coordinated and supported by the central government
and governed by clear policies It incorporates the participation of the active agents of
society Such integrated approach achieves disaster risk
reduction through Systematic implementation Sustainability Progressive action Cumulative contribution
Safe Cities
5
Cross-organizational integration
Integration of disaster management within each local government function, in coordination with the central authorities and in partnership with the active agents of society.
Civil Society
Media BusinessAcademia
Central Authorities
CBO’sNGO’s
Urban Planning
Building andConstruction
Public Works
Emergency Management
Social Services
Financial Planning
Local Government
Public Safety
Education & Rec.
Safe Cities
6
Cross-organizational integration (cont.)
Each agency of the local government should be trusted with a disaster management obligation as part of its function. For example,
Urban Planning – Integration of risk factors in urban plans; long-term risk mitigation planning; Building and Construction – Enforcement of building code; coordination with construction industry; Public Works – Enforcement of building codes; special provisions for lifeline and infrastructure protection;
continuity of essential services and post-emergency access Social Services – Community outreach and capacity enhancement; victim needs; problem of the poor and under- privileged; stakeholders’ involvement
Safe Cities
7
Cross-organizational integration (cont.)
Coordination of disaster management activities should be centralized within one organization (e.g., civil protection), which will perform: Overall coordination and advocacy functions; Community participation functions; Coordination with central/provincial governments; And performance evaluation.
If such a structure does not exist, it should be created.
A high-level policy coordination committee representing all agencies and other stakeholders should provide oversight and develop a policy framework geared towards mitigation.
Safe Cities
8
Integrated risk management components
Disaster Risk Assessment
Provides the Parameters
for…
Development of Community Resilience
Integrated Disaster Risk Management
Preparedness and
Awareness
Mitigation and
Prevention
Response and Recovery
Institution- Building
Safe Cities
9
Integrated DRM components (cont.)
IDRM should be managed as an integrated set of functions relatedto four basic components: Preparedness and Awareness Raising; Mitigation and Prevention (including financial
protection); Response and recovery planning; Institutional building;
The implementation of these components typically resides within multiple agencies of the local government
Safe Cities
10
Mechanisms for implementation of IDRM
Two mechanisms are required: Policy-setting by high-level inter-agency
coordination committee
Coordination and performance evaluation by a singleagency (e.g., civil protection)
The design of IDRM action plans should be based on parameters provided by Disaster Risk Assessment.
Safe Cities
11
Disaster risk assessment (“DRA”)
DRA consists of the task of quantifying the potential impacts of hazard events on buildings, infrastructure, population, and institutions.
DRA also includes the interpretation of impacts on the community, institutions and organizational processes, and on the available resources.
Disaster Risk Assessment (DRA) is the first undertaking and an essential step in the disaster risk management process.
Safe Cities
12
DRA – consequence analysis
An inter-disciplinary team representing the key functions of the local government should perform “consequence analysis” of risk analysis results to: Interpret the impact on institutions and
customers of key services;
To understand capacity and resource gaps; To identify policy implications; To get familiar with risk parameters and
constraints.
Consequence analysis should include preparation of a communication strategy with the central government, representatives of civil society and general public.
Safe Cities
13
Disaster risk assessment (cont.)
DRA enables government and communities to understand: Potential human and material losses and their
spatial and sectoral distributions
Impact on critical facilities and functions Needs and gaps Disaster “demand” versus the available “supply”
DRA is also an excellent tool for: Communicating risk parameters to different
stakeholders Exchanging data and information Forcing transparency
Safe Cities
14
DRA techniques
Scenario (or Deterministic) Analysis: A potential event is defined to have happened
today and its impact assessed for a defined spatial area.
Probabilistic Analysis: All potential impacts are integrated and the impact
corresponding to a specific return period is assessed (e.g., 1-in-100 years event).
Risk Indexing/Mapping: Key indicators of risk are aggregated in order to
set priorities. Risk Matrix Analysis:
Several risks are put in a matrix to obtain a visual two-dimensional display of the “ranking” of the risk for a region.
Safe Cities
15
DRA – illustration (earthquake scenario)
87
90
Key
Electric Substation
Gas Pipelines
Broadcasting Station
Power Generation Plant
Potable Water Facility
Oil Pipelines
0.40 - 0.50
0.50 - 0.60
PGA Distribution [g]
0.60 - 0.70
0.20 - 0.30
0.30 - 0.40
0.30 - 0.40
0.30 - 0.40
0 10
Kilometers
20
Estimate Ground Shaking/Wind speed
LATERAL BUILDING DISPLACEMENT
STRONGER CONSTRUCTION
WEAKER CONSTRUCTION
MAJORSHAKING
MODERATESHAKING
MINORSHAKING
LA
TE
RA
L B
UIL
DIN
G F
OR
CE
BU
ILD
ING
WE
IGH
T
NONE SLIGHT MODERATE EXTENSIVE COMPLETE
MODULE 3Physical Damage
Loss of FunctionalitySOURCE
SCENARIOMAGNITUDE
ATTENUATION
LOCAL SITE-SOIL
By Geo-Unit
MODULE 2Earthquake Scenario Definition
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
1960 1970 1980 1990 200 2010 2020
Urban
Rural
Demographic & Economy
MODULE 1Exposure Database
Results Report and Display
Ground MotionGround Failure
Safe Cities
16
DRA: scenario analysis
The ability to estimate future losses from scenario earthquakes enables communities to anticipate the consequences of future disasters and to develop plans and strategies for reducing risk.
Disaster Response
Disaster Mitigation
Disaster Preparednes
s
Assessment: Scenario Analysis
Buildings &Critical Facilities
Industrial Facilities
Lifelines &Transportati
on
Social Losses
Disaster Recovery
Risk Transfer
Safe Cities
Disaster Response
Disaster Mitigation
Disaster Preparednes
s
Disaster Recovery
17
DRA: “worst-case” scenario
Different scenarios should be “simulated” to develop a comprehensive understanding of the potential impacts.
Fault Rupture for assumed scenario
Istanbul Max Scenario (M7.5) – Mean Damage Ratio by Sub-ProvinceSafe Cities
18
Very High High Medium Low
Very Low
Very Low Low Medium High Very High
Floods
Forest Fires
Technological
Earthquakes
Epidemics Draughts
Severity (Loss)
Frequency
Risk mapping
A risk matrix provides a visual two-dimensional display of the “ranking” of the risk for a region as a function of severity and frequency.
It is a simple approach for setting priorities .Safe Cities
19
DRA as a communication tool
It can be used for:
Educating the community about risks and vulnerabilities.
Engaging stakeholders in rational discussion about risk parameters and options for disaster risk reduction.
Developing institutional knowledge.
Empowering individuals and communities.
Creating ownership mechanisms.
Safe Cities