Opportunities for British Involvement in the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction

IAN DAVIS

The UK Science, Technology and Engineering Committee for the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) was jointly established by The Fellowship of Engineering and The Royal Society, in 1990. Its purpose is to promote the aims of the IDNDR with particular reference to disaster risk reduction within developing countries.

In order to provide a forum for people with a wide range of experience in this field to meet and exchange views, the Committee convened a one-day Workshop, held at The Royal Society in London on 27 March 1992. The following is a shortened version of a position paper (originally drafted by Ian Davis and subsequently approved by the Committee), setting out seven 'priorities' for the IDNDR, which formed the basis of discussion at the Workshop.

RISK ASSESSMENT

In order to develop protection against disaster impact, the essential first step is to undertake systematic hazard mapping and vulnerability analysis in order to define accurately the risks that face persons and property. Whilst some risks will be known in all hazard-prone countries, others will be unknown and unmeasured, with very serious consequences. Risk Assessment seeks to determine who or what, in what precise location, is subjected to which hazard, of what level ofseuerify, resulting in what type and nature of impact, how often and for what duration.

Technical assistance for risk assessment

Within the UK there are public and private

agencies as well as individual consultants with excellent international experience of risk assessment in hazard-prone areas. This body of expertise needs to be made more widely known and available since there is a major technical gap in many countries in the area of risk assessment. Consultants should, however, work in a supportive manner with national counterparts in undertaking risk analysis to strengthen national capacity and this developmental opportunity is often missed. Sponsoring bodies such as the ODA, UNDP and the World Bank should require such links when assistance programmes are formulated.

Vulnerability analysis

Whilst hazard mapping has become a well developed discipline in the field of primary

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

Zarr Davis 260

hazards (earthquakes, flood, drought and high winds) and there has been good progress in physical vulnerability analysis, there has been serious neglect of social and economic aspects. There is a need to en- courage sociallbehavioural scientists and economists to become much more active in this field so that acceptable levels of risk can be determined which relate to human and economic dynamics as well as to more fully developed physical criteria. (The neglect of social issues in disaster planning is further discussed below under the heading ‘Human Resources’).

Casualty estimation and medical preparedness

Human Vulnerability Analysis is a prerequisite for the development of medical preparedness pre-planning for types and numbers of casualties and, in the case of earthquakes, to know precisely where the greatest number of casualties are likely to occur. This risk assessment will need to review the adequacy of local health infra- structure and the local capacity for search and rescue. The medical professions in the UK should therefore encourage staff to develop, and transfer specialised expertise in, the use of epidemiological methods to determine injury and death estimates rela- tive to natural hazards. Such information can be used both in justifying expenditure on protective measures as well as in hospital contingency planning.

Funding of risk assessment

Due to the political dynamics that require tangible evidence of concern, donor coun- tries as well as non-governmental organisa- tions (NGOs) have traditionally been more enthusiastic to invest in mitigation and prepardeness measures rather than to devote money to the vital process of risk assessment. The Overseas Development Administration (ODA) and other donors, including NGO

groups, should therefore consider spending a considerable proportion of their disaster assistance allocation on finding ways to analyze and monitor hazards and ever changing patterns of vulnerability. Ulti- mately, this process has always to occur at the local level. Without such proper risk analysis it is possible that precious funds may be wasted on inappropriate forms of protection. Levels of protection may, for example, be too low or unrealistically high; particularly dangerous locations may be missed; and mitigation measures may fail to take account of the most dangerous hazards whilst addressing lesser risks in order to satisfy powerful sectional interests.

Resource assessment

Resource assessment is the complimentary process that should follow risk assessment. This review will need to include an exam- ination, in all vulnerable areas, of such resources as cash, goods, expertise, leader- ship, disaster preparedness, enabling legislation, appropriate local institutions and local ’coping abilities’. Advice may be needed on how to undertake this type of assessment but, in addition, it is vital that disaster-prone countries are made aware of the likely type and scale of assistance that may be forthcoming from governmental and non-governmental sources in the UK. These resources will fall into the categories of pre-disaster protective planning and post-disaster response.

NATIONAL LEVEL DISASTER PREPAREDNESS

The second priority is to develop the capacity of national disaster bodies, and ’in country’ programmes for risk reduction. Local institutions will include national organisations, training bodies and national disaster management institutes. Emphasis should be placed during IDNDR on the development of national level disaster

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

British Involvement in International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction 261

preparedness plans and on increased regional collaboration. These developments can form the environment in which pilot disaster mitigation projects can be implemented.

Supporting national disaster preparedness

The Committee strongly encourages the ODA to give a very high priority in the use of its IDNDR designated funds to support the development and maintenance of ‘in- country’ governmental and non-govern- mental institutions that promote disaster preparedness and mitigation activities.

Transfer of useful knowledge

It is clear that, despite obvious resource differentials, there are many aspects of the British experience in the management of ‘domestic hazards’, such as high winds and coastal and river flooding, that are trans- ferable to other countries. This experience should be documented in a format that provides usable ideas on such aspects as: enabling legislation, data collection, warning systems, coordination of related bodies, risk assessment techniques and structural and non-structural mitigation measures including community awareness programmes. Whilst this documentation may well be known to sections of the ‘in- country’ scientific community, it is unlikely to be familiar to policy makers developing local preparedness plans. These lessons should be a candid appraisal of both negative as well as positive learning experiences. They could be developed by a joint working party including, for example, the Meteorological Office, the National Rivers Authority and the Department of the Environment and could take a case study approach by reviewing the lessons learnt and procedures adopted after such events as the Great Storm of 1988. It is also clear that the UK could learn useful lessons from other countries, particularly those with

similar conditions but with more experience due to the greater frequency of hazards.

HUMAN RESOURCES FOR DISASTER MITIGATION

The third priority is to develop and maintain a comprehensive public awareness and education programme in order to alert all sections of vulnerable populations to the risks they face and the actions they can take to reduce them. Training is also needed for certain occupations, professions and for public officials. The emphasis should be on developing and maintaining disaster pre- paredness at the community level, working through local institutions and non-govern- mental agencies and placing emphasis on affordable measures.

Social aspects of warning systems

Many observers of this subject have com- mented on the need for more attention to be paid to social aspects of natural disaster warning and response. Technological prob- lems are easier to address than the more complex and difficult issues involved in human response to warning. Although great strides have been made in developing and implementing technology that provides early detection of impending disasters, the human response component is frequently ignored.

Public awareness programmes

A key mitigation strategy is the allocation of resources for public education pro- grammes to inform members of the public how to deal with the onset of a hazard and how to respond following its impact. Such education should be conducted in a variety of settings including schools, work environ- ments, public information campaigns and through the media. Perhaps the British NGO community is well placed to focus on awareness raising, both for their donor

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

262 lan Davis

public as well as their overseas partner organisations.

The role of media

Since the media are one of the primary sources of distorted images of behaviour following disasters, there is a need to train andlor inform journalists on the nature of hazards and disasters. Such a programme should be aimed at making journalists the partners of government during the warning and impact phases of the event, although this will inevitably be interpreted as a restriction on the freedom of the press. In addition, the media should be encouraged to report on policy questions. Since British journalists have established an international reputation for their exposure, or 'declara- tion', of certain African famines, they may be able to support an initiative aimed at a better informed media response to disasters.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF EFFECTIVE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION TO REDUCE RISKS TO PEOPLE AND PROPERTY

The fourth priority is to develop and implement a wide range of mitigation measures. Such measures should be real- istic, of proven effectiveness, developed with public participation to ensure maximum local confidence in the selected methods, of minimum cost and focused on the needs of the most vulnerable communities.

Pilot projects

Efforts should be made by the ODA and UK NGOs to promote an integrated set of pilot mitigation projects in a number of selected countries which are particularly vulnerable (e.g., the Philippines, Ethiopia, Jamaica, Bangladesh, Nepal). The aim should be to monitor the programmes and performance of such measures, including their possible

future testing under hazard loads. Regular films and publications should be produced by appropriate bodies to promote wider knowledge of both other problems and opportunities of risk reduction measures.

Success stories

There is a need to disseminate information about mitigation measures which were tested in recent disasters and proved effective in reducing losses to lives and property. Such 'success stories' would include:

- early warning of impending drought in North India, 2988-89;

- improved cyclone warning and evacua- tion from Bluefields, Nicaragua in 1988 and Andhra Pradesh, India, 1990;

- the seismic preparedness programme in the Bay Area, San Francisco, and its success in the Loma-Prieta earthquake of 1989; and

- the evacuation of the population living near Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines before the volcanic eruption of 1991.

Such accounts can provide much needed encouragement to governments considering whether to commit scarce resources to initiate mitigation and pre- paredness measures. They are also likely to be useful to British agencies that are grappling with 'compassion fatigue', as a way to combat an image of 'endless failure, gloom and doom'. Some of the groups based in the UK with an interest in publica- tion or film-making may be interested in devoting resources to such a task. They could be provided with useful information by scientists associated with the IDNDR committee.

The role of insurance

The insurance and reinsurance industries in the UK should be encouraged to explore ways in which a wider economic spectrum

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

British Involvement in International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction 263

of people and small commercial enterprises in disaster-prone areas may obtain easier access to insurance to protect themselves, their livelihoods and property. (In China, a highly effective government backed insur- ance scheme has assisted in the recovery of poor farmers following the devastating floods in Anhui Province in June 1991.) Reduced insurance premiums may thus become a major incentive to adopt and maintain safety measures. Obviously, the key issue will be how to provide an affordable premium for low and medium income families.

INTEGRATION OF MITIGATION

The fifth priority is to incorporate disaster mitigation measures into all aspects of environmental protection and development planning and relevant governmental struc- tures. The aim should be, firstly to deter- mine whether proposed development projects are likely to increase levels of vulnerability and, secondly, to make certain that proposals have been designed to withstand the impacts of a hazard. This proposal could have a significant impact on the investment policies of International Investment Banks.

Disasters and development

For a number of years progressive govern- ments and agencies have recognised the importance of incorporating disaster mitiga- tion measures within developmental pro- jects, both to avoid the possibility that certain development projects may increase risks and to protect the development invest- ment from its destruction in a disaster. Donors and multilateral aid agencies need to idenbfy, fund and promote disaster preparedness and mitigation as areas of specific activity which can be offered as technical assistance within the framework of developmental assistance.

Living with hazards

The adoption of ‘sustainable development’ policies and programmes can be regarded as a means to guarantee development patterns which allow a mutual process of adaptation between the environment and human communities. The basic aim of these development policies will be to ensure that the environment will not be a hazard for the community, and that the community will not pose a hazard for the natural environ- ment. Work is needed by environmental groups to explore further the impact of communities on the expansion and contrac- tion of vulnerability. The role of agencies and development planners will be to link risk reduction strategies to long term development plans, emphasizing balanced growth and ecologically sound sites for human habitation.

Integration of disaster planning with governmental policies

Specific attention should be drawn to the importance of integrating other areas of government and community policies (at all levels), with policies for disaster prevention and reduction. In other words, policy conflicts should be identified and mechanisms for reducing them should be focused upon to ensure that the conditions for disaster are not exacerbated by policies designed to pursue other priorities (Parker, 1990).

This issue may need to be addressed within the ODA, to create an awareness amongst officials, consultants, contractors and overseas counterparts of the pressing need to incorporate mitigation measures into development programmes within all hazard-prone countries. During the IDNDR, pressure may need to be exerted on such bodies as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank and national public works agencies, so that they undertake, as a routine part of project preparation, to include a statement of vulnerability to

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

264 lan Davis

natural hazards and possible mitigating measures.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS

The sixth priority is to secure funds to undertake applied research on ways to reduce risks in various sectors (e.g., early warning systems and hazard resistant building), to implement the results of existing research and to investigate potential obstacles to its application.

Commonalities and differentials

Whilst there are obvious differences between hazard types and their impact characteristics, there are also important similarities. A generic approach is therefore needed in scientific enquiry into ways to reduce risks, so that opportunities to establish appropriate linkages are not missed. For example, the experience of warning systems for flood risk may be transferable to cyclone-prone areas. Similarly, the development of safety legislation, such as land use planning controls to reduce seismic risk may provide lessons that are applicable to the development of a legal framework to reduce flood impact. It is to be hoped that the IDNDR will break down some professional and sectoral barriers and thus facilitate this transfer of ideas between ‘hazard communities’ as well as between the frequently isolated worlds of research, policy development and practice.

Frequent, low-damage potential versus infrequent, high-damage potential disaster risk

E. Grundfest and J. Huber of the University of Colorado (1990) have asked whether governments should address more frequent events as well as the rare, devastating disasters that capture public attention.

When there are limited resources, the ques- tion has to be faced whether it is reasonable and cost effective in all cases to protect against extemely rare events when perhaps more lives can be saved by reducing the risk from more common environmental extremes (Grundfest and Huber, 1990).

The answers to such dilemmas may lie within the process of economic analysis using a cost-benefit approach, but a recent study by the Asian Development Bank (1991) indicated that, as yet, very few coun- tries in these regions are using economic appraisal techniques in risk assessment.

The application of existing knowledge

Whilst new research is always required, it is important to determine why so much knowledge concerning preparedness and mitigation is lost, or is known but un- applied. Research is therefore needed to discover the impediments to the imple- mentation of existing knowledge. A working group of academics involved in research in these related fields could usefully meet to review this question and possibly reduce some of this very serious wastage of research findings. Armed with such information, it may be possible to free blockages through procedures to preserve institutional memories within governments and NGOs in order to implement existing, well proven measures to reduce risks.

Establishing objectives for education and research and technological development

During the IDNDR it will be important to establish and pursue long range national objectives within disaster-prone countries for the development of research and tech- nological development. These aims will be dependent on the preparation of educated and trained personnel to assure the continuous improvement of the country’s capability to reduce and respond t o disasters. Perhaps sections of the UK

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3

British lnvolvement in lnternational Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction 265

research community, undertaking basic as well as applied research in these fields, can develop proposals for organisations that fund research and education to promote a long range strategy for application in developing countries with resource limitations.

FORMATION OF A UK NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE IDNDR

During the recent meetings of the Science, Technology and Engineering Committee for the IDNDR a conviction has been growing of the need for a very high level UK IDNDR National Committee, with the capacity to raise the public profile of the decade and secure the extensive funds that are clearly needed if there is to be a significant impact on risk reduction. The issue was discussed in outline by the committee, with a proposal that the current committee evolves into a Technical Sub-committee of the proposed National Committee. This proposal, which was endorsed at the Workshop, follows a pattern that has been adopted in many other countries, including the USA.

References

Asian Development Bank (ADB), (1991) Disaster Mitigation in Asia and the Pacific, Asian Development Bank, Manila, p. 11.

Grundfest, E. and J. Huber (1990) Private correspondence with Edmund Penning- Rowsell and Ian Davis in response to a request for Priority Items for Governments during IDNDR (report unpublished).

Parker, D. (1990) Private correspondence with Edmund Penning-Rowsell and Ian Davis in response to a request for suggestions for Priority Items for Governments during IDNDR (report unpublished).

Ian Davis Disaster Management Centre Oxford Polytechnic Gipsy Lane Headington Oxford OX3 OBI' UK

DISASTERS VOLUME 16 NUMBER 3