Disaster Risk Reduction

There is no such thing as a 'natural' disaster, only natural hazards. DRR aims to reduce the damage caused by natural hazards like earthquakes, floods, droughts and cyclones, through an ethic of prevention (UNISDR, 2009). The rationale is used by the United Nations, in particular UNISDR, to understand the DRR. There is no 'natural' disaster, there is only

“hazard”, if it is not well-managed, will potentially be a disaster.

DRR measures are taken to reduce the destruction and impact caused by natural hazards such as earthquakes, floods, droughts and strong winds, through disaster mitigation action. DRR is an effort to reduce the risk through systematic efforts to analyze and reduce the factors that lead to a disaster. The concept and practice of DRR, through systematic efforts to analyze and manage factors including reduced exposure to threats, reduced vulnerability of people and property, wise management of the land and the environment and improving the readiness of society to the adverse event.

The Yokohama conference (1994) produced a document called: Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World. The focus of this report is specific DRR namely natural disasters. In 2005, The World Conference on Disaster Reduction (2005) published the "Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters" which was a DRR strategy for 2005-2015. The Hyogo

21 Framework for Action (HFA) consists of 3 strategic goals, 5 priorities for action, 22 indicators of progress and 5 levels of progress (See Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Summary of strategic goals, priorities for action, indicators of progress, reporting process, key documents and supporting mechanism of the HFA

Mechanism Description

3 Strategic Goals  More effective integration of disaster risk consideration into sustainable development policies, planning and programming at all levels, with a special emphasis on disaster prevention, mitigation, preparedness and vulnerability reductions

 The development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities at all levels, in particular at the community level that can systematically contribute to building resilience to hazards

 The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the design and implementation of emergency preparedness, response and recovery program in the reconstruction of affected communities

5 Priorities for Action  HFA 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation

 HFA 2: Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning

 HFA 3: Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels

 HFA 4: Reduce the underlying risk factors

 HFA 5: Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels

22 Source: UNISDR, 2011

The latest document as a guide for DRR worldwide is the "Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR)" which is a guide to DRR since 2015-2030. There are some significant differences between SFDRR compared to Hyogo Framework. One of them

22 Indicators of Progress

 HFA 1: 4 indicators (Existence of institutional and legal frameworks for DRR; Availability of resources; Community participation; Functioning national platform)

 HFA 2: 4 indicators (Risk assessment and vulnerability information; Hazard and vulnerability information system; Early warning system; National, regional/trans-boundary and local risk assessments)

 HFA 3: 4 indicators (Disaster information sharing and dissemination systems; school curricula and educational materials on DRR; Research, tools, analysis for risks assessments; public awareness strategy)

 HFA 4: 6 indicators (DRR as part of development policies and plans; Social policies to reduce vulnerabilities; Policies that reduce economic vulnerability; Inclusion of DRR into built-environment planning; DRR consideration into recovery and reconstructions;

Risk screening for major development projects)

 HFA 5: 4 indicators: Policy and mechanisms for disaster management; Disaster preparedness and contingency plans with training and drills; Financial reserves and contingency mechanisms;

Procedure for information exchange during response and recovery) 5 Levels of Progress  Level 5: Comprehensive achievement has been attained, with the

commitment and capacities to sustain efforts at all levels

 Level 4: Substantial achievement has been attained, but with some recognized deficiencies in commitment, financial resources or operational capacity

 Level 3: There is some commitment and capacities to achieving DRR but progress is not substantial

 Level 2: Achievements have been made but are relatively small or incomplete, and while improvements are planned, the commitment and capacity are limited

 Level 1: Achievements are minor and there are few signs of planning or forward action to improve the situation

23 is the adoption of the priorities and strategies for DRR into regional and global levels as well as national and local, including the community level.

The research will develop components and practical models of SFDRR that will be based on four priorities of SFDRR (2015):

1. Understanding disaster risk

Policies and practices for disaster risk management should be based on an understanding of disaster risk in all its dimensions of vulnerability, capacity, exposure of persons and assets, hazard characteristics and the environment. Such knowledge can be leveraged for the purpose of pre-disaster risk assessment, for prevention and mitigation and for the development and implementation of appropriate preparedness and effective response to disasters.

2. Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk

Disaster risk governance at the national, regional and global levels is of great importance for an effective and efficient management of disaster risk. Clear vision, plans, competence, guidance and coordination within and across sectors as well as participation of relevant stakeholders are needed. Strengthening disaster risk governance for prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery, and rehabilitation is therefore necessary and fosters collaboration and partnership across mechanisms and institutions for the implementation of instruments relevant to disaster risk reduction and sustainable development.

3. Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience

Public and private investment in disaster risk prevention and reduction through structural and non-structural measures are essential to enhance the economic, social, health and cultural resilience of persons, communities, countries and their assets, as well as the environment. These can be drivers of innovation, growth and job creation. Such measures are cost-effective and instrumental to save lives, prevent and reduce losses and ensure effective recovery and rehabilitation.

4. Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction

The steady growth of disaster risk, including the increase of people and assets exposure, combined with the lessons learned from past disasters, indicates the need to further strengthen disaster preparedness for response, take action in anticipation of events, integrate disaster risk reduction in response preparedness and that ensure capacities are in place for effective response and recovery at all levels. Empowering women and persons with disabilities to publicly lead and promote gender equitable and universally accessible response, recovery rehabilitation and reconstruction approaches are key. Disasters have demonstrated that the recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction phase, which needs to be prepared ahead of the disaster, is a critical opportunity to build back better, including through integrating disaster risk reduction into development measures, making nations and communities resilient to disasters.

24 Table 2.2: Some Differences between HFA and SFDRR

No. Aspect HFA SFDRR

1. Time Frame Hyogo Framework for Action was Implemented for 10 Years (2005-2015)

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction will be implemented for 15 Years (2015-2030)

2. Expected outcome and goal

Qualitative (without specific number) expected outcome and goals

Quantitative Global Target

3. Priorities for action 1. No division among Global, Regional, National and Level Strategy

2. Five Priorities for Action

1. Strategy for “Priorities for Action” is divided into two kinds: “Global and Regional” and

“National & Local”

2. Four Priorities for Action

4. Role of stakeholders

Do not discuss about people with disability, migrants, etc.

Recognized people with disability, migrants, etc.

5. Build Back Better Do not recognized terminology “Build Back Better”

Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and

reconstruction Source: Author Analysis based on SFDRR (2015) and HFA (2005)

Table 2.3 shows that generally, developed countries have a better DRR system comparing to developing countries. Likewise, this situation also influences DRR in developed and developing country. This condition has been identified by Coppola (2007) in his study. The developed country tends to suffer high economic loss, but has mechanisms in place to absorb the costs. This is different with developing (poor)

25 countries which are less at risk regarding financial value but maintain low financial impacts.

Table 2.3: Different in disaster impact between rich and poor countries

Rich Countries Poor Countries

 Tend to suffer higher economic losses, but have mechanisms in place to absorb the costs

 Employ mechanisms that reduce loss of life, for example early warning systems, enforced building codes, and zoning

 Have immediate emergency and medical care that increase survivability and contain the spread of disease

 Transfer much personal, private and public risk to insurance and reinsurance providers

 Are less at risk in terms of financial value, but maintain little or no buffer to absorb even low financial impacts

 Economic reverberations can be significant and social development ultimately suffers

 Lack the resources necessary to take

advantage of technologies and little ability to enforce building codes and zoning

 Generally do not participate in insurance mechanisms. Divert funds from development programs to emergency relief and recovery

Source: Coppola, 2007

A developed country has a mechanism that reduces death victims such as early warning systems, enforced building codes and zoning. While in a developing country, the lack of necessary resources to take advantage of technology and the lack of ability to enforce building codes and zoning exists. Another difference is a developed country has a private and public risk to insurance and reinsurance providers while developing countries generally do not participate in insurance mechanisms. The funding limitation is becoming a problem to divert funds from development programs to emergency relief and recovery.

26