10 / 156
Other measures that can drastically reduce fatalities include
compliance with building codes, application of safer construc-
tion techniques, land-use planning and zoning. Among the
92,000 people who lost their lives in disasters in 2005, 18,000
were pupils, crushed to death as their schools crumbled during
the Pakistan earthquake. With stronger, more resilient school
buildings in place, this number could have been considerably
lower. Turkey, Cuba and Nepal are three countries that already
make focused efforts to retrofit schools, hospitals and other public
facilities with a view to saving lives and ensuring the continued
functioning of critical services in times of crisis.
So-called ‘natural disasters’ are not really ‘natural’ but a
combination of a natural hazard and vulnerability, influenced
by human decisions and behaviour. It is, therefore, vital to
address environmental degradation as one human-made condi-
tion, and to implement environmental policies, which
strengthen the capacity of ecosystems to withstand and miti-
gate the impact of natural hazards. This includes preserving
wetlands, preventing or reversing land degradation and defor-
estation, preventing the destruction of mangroves, coral reefs
and other natural defences. At the same time, societies need to
mitigate and adapt to climate change, for instance by switching
to renewable energy sources. Sensible environmental manage-
ment encourages sustained economic productivity without
increasing vulnerability.
In addition to making the physical environment more resilient,
the capacity of affected populations to withstand and recover
from disasters must be boosted, too. Microcredit and microfi-
nance programmes play a central role in building and protecting
people’s livelihoods. A single earthquake or flood can wipe out
entire local economies and erase the work of generations. Low
income communities with significant dependence on subsistence
farming are usually particularly hard-hit. Yet, in the absence of
effective insurance and development assistance, people are often
reluctant to respond to warnings and to leave their livestock and
property behind, thus placing themselves in danger in the event
of a natural hazard. Microfinance tools such as microcredit and
microinsurance should be widely available to help households
transfer and share risks and recover more quickly.
The role of the private sector
According to United Kingdom Department for International
Development (DFID), the private commercial sector provides nine
out of ten jobs in developing countries. It therefore plays a criti-
cal role in making societies in general more physically and
economically resilient. Effective disaster risk reduction strategies
must take this into account and promote strong partnerships
between the public and private domains.
Naturally, private companies primarily invest in risk reduc-
tion for their own good, namely to minimize their potential
losses and to improve the company’s public image. However,
public-private partnerships in disaster risk reduction can also
offer much needed material and political support to necessary
but, at times, unpopular government policies. The removal of
slums and spontaneous settlements from hazardous flood or
mudslide zones, for instance, may prove difficult for national
and local authorities to carry out, as they are under pressure to
fulfil popular expectations and safeguard votes in the affected
areas. Pooling public and private expertise and resources can
help to overcome some of these difficulties and make the
process more effective and credible.
In India, central government, in collaboration with private
and technical bodies like space application and land use plan-
ning centres, created a national vulnerability atlas and land-use
zone plans. These served as the basis for the provision of incen-
tives to local authorities to make hazardous settlements resilient
through redevelopment. Another way for the private sector to
contribute would be to offer building loans and construction
services at affordable rates to the affected communities so as to
facilitate their relocation or the upgrading of their settlements.
In return, governments may offer tax breaks for private invest-
ment in seismically safe construction, and allocate land for
companies to relocate to safer zones – measures that will ulti-
mately also benefit the wider community.
These are just some examples of ways for governments and the
private sector to collaborate in disaster risk reduction. As it is an
important aspect of ISDR’s work to serve as an information clear-
inghouse, many existing resources and examples of good practice
are currently being compiled for wider availability on the ISDR
website
(www.unisdr.org).
Disaster risk reduction as a regional effort
Notwithstanding the primary responsibility of national authori-
ties for disaster risk reduction, natural hazards do not respect
national borders. It is therefore important to address trans-
boundary issues early, before emergency conditions arise, to ensure
complementary and mutually reinforcing efforts in the affected
countries. The key actors must cooperate closely before, during
and after a disaster occurs through such institutional arrangements
as regional mechanisms for common natural resource manage-
ment. Regional initiatives can motivate a joint approach to issues
involving geography, political alignment, or cultural/historical affin-
ity amongst neighbouring or nearby countries. The Indus Valley
agreements between India and Pakistan, for example, brokered by
the World Bank and borne out of a common incentive, motivate
both countries to conserve watershed and share water flow infor-
mation for mutual benefit. Similar agreements exist for other major
rivers such as the Mekong and the Nile.
A regional approach can also act as a ‘flywheel’ to maintain a
collective momentum, when a country changes government or
suffers a disaster. Information sharing, education, training and
analysis are all facilitated by a common approach. Furthermore,
regional initiatives prepare the ground for a truly global early
warning system, which the UN Secretary-General called for in
the wake of the Indian Ocean tsunami. The main steps towards
such a system of systems have already been outlined and work is
underway on its realization.
In conclusion, only some key examples of effective disaster
risk reduction could be introduced here. Disaster risk reduc-
tion in hazard-prone countries is a complex task, requiring
comprehensive, cross-sectoral and trans-boundary efforts to
alert communities, strengthen institutions and operational
capacities, and to make disaster risk reduction central to local,
national and regional development planning. The Hyogo
Framework for Action clearly spells out the responsibilities of
governments, regional and international organizations, includ-
ing the UN system, with the ISDR serving as an overall
facilitator. Now it is time to move from concept to action; to
foster a wide ‘disaster risk reduction movement’, with grass-
roots organizations, local and national authorities, regional and
international actors, as well as the private sector and other
segments of society. This will be the new ISDR system.
[
] 10