Elements for Life

[

] 19

create tools that properly assess risk and can take into

account its dynamic nature – climate change and variabil-

ity, urbanization, the spread of disease and economic

changes. The present weakness in the availability of relevant

climate information in many developing countries must be

addressed if climate-change risks are to be factored into risk

reduction strategies. Central to climate risk management

services is real-time environmental monitoring, without

which it is difficult to create meaningful regional and local

climate change assessments. Advances have already been

made in the development of indicators and indices on disas-

ter risk. In all cases, their value lies in the availability of

social, economic and environmental vulnerability data. The

goal must be to develop robust national and local risk indi-

cators that will influence national development policy and

planning.

At the national level, the meteorological and hydrological

community must ensure that they are engaged in the country’s

development agenda; that relevant data is readily available for

the development of risk indicators; and that they support the

application of these tools to inform national policy and plan-

ning. On the development community’s side, there is need for

greater openness to the potential contribution of National

Meteorological and Hydrological Services and their partners.

A good example of this integration of risk management aware-

ness into development policy is presented by the World Bank.

It has identified climate change as a risk management issue for

development and has begun to factor this risk into its develop-

ment project cycle with the dual purpose of protecting its

investments, and improving the impact of development efforts.

A critical step is the mainstreaming of climate risk management

into countries’ economic planning, and capacity building in

ministries of finance and economic planning to use climate infor-

mation to manage risks to public sector investment.

In a

long-term programme to help Kiribati adapt to climate change,

for example, a Global Environment Facility project was started

in the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning and then

moved to the Office of the President as part of a National

Strategic Risk Management Unit, highlighting the importance

of the effort for Kiribati’s development strategy.

At the international level, the meteorological and hydrolog-

ical community must work to increase the value of long-range

predictions so that the impact of climate variability and change

can be included in assessments of the likely occurrence of

extreme events – floods, droughts, storms – which are criti-

cal factors in determining environmental vulnerability.

In conclusion, achieving the MDGs requires a partnership

between development planners, policy makers, and the risk

management community – a partnership between environ-

mental and social scientists, between understanding natural

phenomena and human behaviour. In general, the fragmenta-

tion between ministries and agencies in most countries is an

impediment to tracking the relationship between disaster risk

levels and development planning and policy. The environ-

mental vulnerability component of risk is addressed by

understanding hazards of the past, monitoring of the present,

and prediction of the future. Combined with social, political

and economic factors, risk indices can be built that help the

development community make informed decisions that may

accelerate human development by ensuring, for example, that

schools, water, sanitation, roads, energy, telecommunication,

and other infrastructure are built to be disaster resistant.

through the death or incapacitation of a primary income earner,

the consequences of migration or resettlement, or the number

of people experiencing secondary health and educational

impacts.

United Nations Development Program (UNDP), International

Strategy for Disaster Reduction The World Meteorological

Organization, other UN agencies, international organizations,

and many national governments have recognized that sustain-

able development depends on understanding and responding to

the issues that can prevent a natural hazard from triggering a

human disaster.

The goal of the development and environ-

mental communities is to minimize the human risk of natural

hazards by reducing the vulnerability of the population in order

to protect and sustain social and economic development. In this

way natural disaster preparedness and management not only

saves lives, but can also promote early and cost-effective adap-

tation to climate risks. Many studies have estimated that the

internal rate of return from disaster reduction initiatives is

between 20 per cent and 50 per cent and often provides addi-

tional, sometimes unanticipated, social benefits.

Flood-alleviation projects, for example, increase the availabil-

ity of water for irrigation, and can offset the impacts of drought.

Vulnerability is the susceptibility and resilience of society

and the environment to natural hazards. Different population

segments and sectors can be exposed to greater relative risks

because of their socio-economic conditions of vulnerability.

The impact of a natural hazard on a population already suffer-

ing from extreme poverty, epidemic disease, or armed conflict

is likely to be catastrophic since that population will proba-

bly lack the organizational capacity to protect itself against

that hazard. Reducing disaster vulnerability requires knowl-

edge of the social, cultural, political and economic conditions

of the population, and the likelihood, consequences, immi-

nence and presence of natural hazards. Thus risk assessment

requires the complementary input of physical and social

scientists to determine the vulnerability of the population to

natural hazards.

Each of the MDGs must interact with disaster risk. One

would expect that the goals would contribute to reducing

human vulnerability; however, unless these risks are properly

factored into the development process, well-meaning social

and economic development efforts may inadvertently increase

the vulnerability of a population and slow down or undermine

efforts to achieve the MDGs. UNDP has explored the relation-

ship between development and disaster risk in great detail.

In its view, achieving more sustainable development that meets

the MDGs is not possible unless risk management is included

within the programme. The challenge lies in devising tools for

policy makers that justify the closer cooperation of disaster

and development policy. UNDP defines three steps:

1. The collection of basic data on disaster risk and the devel-

opment of planning tools to track the changing relationship

between development policy and disaster risk levels

2. The collation and dissemination of ‘best practice’ informa-

tion on development planning and policy that reduces

disaster risk

3. The galvanising of political will to reorient both the devel-

opment and disaster management sectors.

Step one must engage the meteorological and hydrological

community at all levels, from the local to the global, to work

within the risk management sector. More effort is needed to