96 / 168
[
] 96
One of the major gaps identified is the need to docu-
ment and learn from the experiences of countries with
good practices and to develop guidelines that could
help national and local governments and agencies in the
development of EWS. Building on these developments,
WMO (together with UNISDR system partners) is assist-
ing countries in developing EWS strategies.
International attention to early warning systems
In January 2005, the United Nations convened the Second World
Conference on Disaster Reduction in Japan. During this conference
the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (HFA) was negotiated
and adopted by 168 countries, shifting the paradigm for disaster risk
management from post-disaster response to a more comprehensive
approach that would also include prevention and preparedness meas-
ures. The second high-priority area of the HFA stresses the need for
‘identifying, assessing and monitoring disaster risks and enhancing
early warning’. Taking this into consideration, it becomes clear that
an early warning system (EWS) must be an integral component of
any nation’s disaster risk management strategy, enabling national
and local government and communities to take appropriate measures
toward building community resilience in anticipation of disasters.
Over the past decade, there has been significant international atten-
tion given to this topic, including three international EWS conferences
hosted by the government of Germany; two international experts’
symposia on multi-hazard EWS organized by theWorldMeteorological
Organization (WMO) in collaboration with UN International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction, other UN and international partners; the Global
EWS Survey Report requested by the former UN Secretary General,
Kofi Annan; and a survey of EWS conducted by the WMO with the
support of 18 UN and international agencies, as input to the 2009
Global Assessment Report (See References Section).
The Second International Conference on Early Warnings (2003)
specified that effective early warning systems should comprise four
operational components, to ensure that:
• Hazards are detected, monitored and forecasted, and hazard
warning are developed
• Risks are analysed and this information is incorporated in the
warning messages
• Warnings are issued (by a designated authoritative source) and
disseminated in a timely fashion to authorities and public at risk
• Community-based emergency plans are activated in response to
warnings to reduce potential impacts on lives and livelihoods.
These four components need to be coordinated across many agencies
from national to community levels for the system to work. Failure in
one component or lack of coordination across them would lead to
the failure of the whole system. Furthermore, roles and responsibili-
ties of various public and private sector stakeholders are reflected in
the national and local regulatory frameworks and planning.
As revealed by various assessments and the outcomes of the
mid-term HFA review, many nations around the globe operate
early warning systems for various naturally occurring and man-
made hazards. However, the governmental priority, stage of
development and overall effectiveness of these systems vary
widely. Differing approaches are taken to warning people of
hazards in various countries, depending on economic and social
factors that include the state of development of communications
and other critical infrastructure, societal structure, literacy levels,
and general awareness of the potential impacts of hazards to
which people could be exposed. While there have been efforts by
governments and by international and donor agencies to support
the development of these capacities, many countries, especially
those at highest risk, remain challenged in building and sustaining
their early warning systems along regulatory, financial, institu-
tional, technical and operational dimensions from national to
community levels.
A Simplified Outline of the Template Used for
Systematic Documentation of Good Practices in EWS
1 Overview of early warning systems (EWS)
2 Background in the establishment of EWS
3 Governance and Institutional Arrangements (national to
local levels)
a) Policy, intuitional and legal frameworks to support
emergency planning and response
b) National to local emergency planning and related
linkages to EWS
c) Organizational structure for implementing the plans
d) Institutional capacities and concept of operations
(coordination and operational collaboration)
e) Financial and budgetary aspects
4 Utilization of risk information in emergency contingency
planning and warnings
a) Organizational responsibilities and arrangements for
the development of risk information
b) Hazard assessment, quantification and mapping
(national to local)
c) Assessment of vulnerabilities and exposure (national
to local)
d) Storage and accessibility of disaster and national
hazard risk information
e) Development and utilization of hazard/risk information
to support emergency planning and warnings
5 Hazard monitoring, forecasting, and mandates for
warning development
a) Organizational responsibilities for monitoring,
forecasting and development of hazard warnings
b) Organizational collaboration and coordination for
development of hazard warnings
6 Development of understandable, authoritative,
recognizable and timely warnings
a) Warning message development cycle
b) Warning message improvement cycle
7 Warning dissemination mechanisms (national to local)
8 Emergency preparedness and response activities
(national to local)
a) Disaster preparedness and response planning and
emergency response activation
b) Community response capacities
c) Public awareness and education
9 Sustainability, resources and budgetary commitmments
10 Improvement of overall operational framework of EWS
through on-going drills and feedback and evaluations
during and after an event
11 Examples of previous events where the operational EWS
has led to improvements in emergency preparedness
and prevention
12 Overall lessons learned and future steps for improving
Meteorological, Hydrological and Climate services
contribution in EWS particularly focusing on institutional
coordination and cooperation with the disaster risk
management agencies and EWS stakeholders (public
and private)
Source: World Meteorological Organization