Disaster Risks and Capacities in Central Asia

Michael Thurman

Regional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor, ECIS

"Improving Regional Coordination in Managing Compound Risks in Central Asia“ 14-15 April 2011

Contents

1. Risk = hazard exposure x vulnerability

2. Capacity Averages (from CACDRR Capacity Assessment)

3. Capacity Gaps and capacity Development Priorities (from Group Work for HFA 1, 3, and 4)

Geophysical Hazards

• All major cities are highly exposed and contain a high concentration of population and economic activity.

• Secondary effects include landslides, mudflows, and GLOFs. Not enough is known concerning the triggering effect.

• Landslides triggered by geological, seismic, and meteorological processes

• Landslides will become more frequent and intensify with climate change.

• Transboundary hazards in Ferghana Valley and northern Tien Shan.

Meteorological Hazards

• 1991-2007: hydrological variability increased.

• Downstream exposure to floods and hydrological drought often due to poor management at all levels.

• Ferghana Valley and upper Amu Darya basin highly exposed to transboundary mudflow and GLOF hazards.

• GLOFs are a growing concern, due to glacier melt.

• Climate change will amplify exposure to all meteorological hazards.

Compound Hazards

• Hydrological drought and extreme cold:

o “Compound crisis” of 2007-08: natural and man-made factors contributed to exposure

o Climate change expected to result in warmer winters, but hydrological drought more severe

• Technogenic hazards: Mayli Suu and other toxic waste particularly a concern in the Ferghana Valley

Economic Vulnerability

• Lack of adequate data, due to collection and analysis procedures for global and national datasets.

• Potential for losses as % of GDP highest for Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

• Absolute amount of potential losses for other countries are higher.

• Vulnerable to meteorological hazards: weather-dependent sectors account for 40-60% of GDP.

Structural Vulnerability

• Intense earthquake in a major city in Central Asia would collapse or severely damage around half of the residential building stock.

• Water infrastructure deteriorated and vulnerable to flood hazards

• Outdated building codes and lax enforcement attenuate structural vulnerability

Socioeconomic Vulnerabilities

• Poverty, income disparities, and social status significantly lower resilience.

• Poor municipal and land use planning place populations, infrastructure, and livelihoods in the way of hazards.

• Unsustainable operations and maintenance of infrastructure, especially for water, increases both exposure and vulnerability.

• Agriculture requires development to lower vulnerability to drought and floods.

• Environmental degradation contributes to exposure and vulnerability.

CACDRRR Capacity Assessment Averages

DRR Overview Course – Presentation 02 – Disaster Risk & Development (Block 01) – Slide9/15 – 13 April 2023

KAZAKHSTAN KYRGYZSTAN TAJIKISTAN

HFA1: Enabling environment & institutions

3.00 2.66 3.01

HFA 2: Risk assessment & early warning

2.75 2.44 2.51

HFA 3: Awareness and education

2.80 2.33 2.23

HFA 4: Prevention and mitigation

3.09 2.02 2.02

HFA 5: Preparedness & response

3.36 2.03 2.20

Capacity indicators per priority areas of the Hyogo Framework for Action Assessment of the existing capacity level 1 …… 5 Desired capacity level/priority (low, medium, high)

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 1

Ensuring Commitment, Enabling Environment and Institutional Development

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 3

Public Awareness and Education

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 4

Disaster Prevention and Mitigation

THANK YOU!