Risk Returns

[

] 69

resilience to disaster, so that preparation and response

become everyone’s responsibility. Also, it is well known

that the first and most efficient intervention is that initi-

ated by the members of an affected community, and it

can make the difference in terms of human life and mate-

rial losses. For that first intervention to be efficient, the

community’s members must prepare before a disaster

occurs. To integrate risk in the community’s life and to

create resilience, there are some instruments that can be

used in all of the phases of a disaster (prevention, prepar-

edness, mitigation, response and reconstruction) in order

to minimize negative effects afterwards.

In the first phase Romania takes into account

community awareness of prevention measures through

awareness campaigns. Examples include informa-

tion materials created by the General Inspectorate

for Emergency Situations, such as

Citizens

’

Guide in

Emergency Situations

Protective Measures in Case of

Earthquake

. Such campaigns were started in schools by

some institutions (Save the Children Romania, Ministry

of Education, Research, Youth and Sports, General

Inspectorate for Emergency Situations and High Group

for Romania’s children). A curriculumwas devised, along

with a handbook,

Let’s Learn to Prevent Disasters

, initially

in two areas affected by the floods in year 2006, and later

expanded to national level.

Preparedness is the key

For the preparedness phase, the General Inspectorate

for Emergency Situations created different materials to

train people how to act in case of disasters. The same

because there are other salt reservoirs in the same situation and

other people and houses could be affected by further landslides. The

Romanian authorities have evacuated people from this danger area,

but many of them refused to leave their houses. The authorities have

started soil stabilization works to reduce the risk.

A similar case occurred in Ocna Mure

, Alba County, where, as a

consequence of salt extraction and water infiltration, the salt deposit

melted, resulting in a landslide in 2010 that affected public build-

ings, a general store and a street. The other buildings nearby that

could have been affected have been evacuated. The more recently

constructed general store is an example of poor construction,

because of the lack of soil analysis that could have revealed the

danger.

Lessons learned

In spite of a prompt response for mitigation and intervention in

these cases from the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations

(the main institution with responsibilities in disaster management),

and other governmental and non-governmental institutions that

have support functions in disaster management, there was signifi-

cant loss of life and property. From the lessons learned, we can say

that the response in case of disaster is not sufficient and we must

highlight the importance of preparation for all phases of a disaster

(pre-disaster, disaster and post-disaster) and also of the community’s

involvement in activities that can increase resilience and decrease

vulnerability in case of disasters.

Natural risks are a fact and ‘fighting risk’ is a battle that cannot

be won, so Romania has approached the idea of ‘living with risk’

through programmes for awareness and preparation.

This idea must be adopted by every member of the community

in order to increase involvement in activities aimed at improving

A house in risk of collapse because of landslides in Ocna Mure

, 2010

Image: General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations