Disaster Management History PDF

2 Introduction and basic framework 2 Disasters in History Personalist analysis of history has not given sufficient visibility to the impact of catastrophic events on human civilisations: Table of contents 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 D...

2 Introduction and basic framework 2 Disasters in History Personalist analysis of history has not given sufficient visibility to the impact of catastrophic events on human civilisations: Table of contents 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disasters in History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Disaster management in history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Antiquity: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The roots of our risk management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Civil defence: the first modern solution . . .. . .. .. .. .. 1 Protection on demand: the 1970s and 1980s . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (1990s) 3.1 The Yokohama Strategy (1994): global recognition of the problem 3.2 The UN international disaster reduction strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 The Hyogo Framework for Action (2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The Senday Framework for Action for Risk Reduction (2015-2030) . . . 4.1 Objectivos: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Guiding Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Priorities for action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Modern approach to disaster management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 International disaster management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 The interaction between disasters and poverty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Trends observed in disasters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The number of people affected is growing. .. . .. .. .. .. Disasters become less lethal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disaster costs have soared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disasters hit the least developed countries especially hard. . The number of catastrophic events has been increasing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 6 6 7 7 8 9 10 10 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 1 Introduction Disasters have been with us since time immemorial. The continuous interaction with them has meant that society has incorporated into our way of life a set of strategies to respond to these problems. These options should cover, among other things − − − Measures to achieve defence against the event. Measures to escape the effects of the event. Measures to recover from the event. While disaster management may appear to be a modern issue, the reality is that all societies have had to respond to a set of issues that articulate the disaster management policy they adopt. The choices made are a characteristic attribute of each society and are an essential component of its definition. In the face of the great diversity of solutions that can be found, there are key questions to be considered in disaster management that all societies must answer: − Protection of people. − Protection of the environment. − Section 3 Protection of property. The possibilities for action have been different; not all countries have the same resources, nor do they face the same problems or the same intensity. However, no country has managed to avoid the problem completely. 1 − Perception bias, we only perceive one reality and disregard the alternative realities that collapsed. − Sometimes the memory of natural events is incorporated into anthropology. • Earthquakes → Adapted architecture • Epidemics → Hygienic or food measures • • Floods → Spatial distribution Fires → Spatial organisation, construction methods Desastres Earthquake Mediterráneo Earthquakeo de Shaanxi Typhoon de Calculta Hurricane Caribeño Volcano Tamboro Flue Epidemic Inundaciones del rio Yangtze Famine Cyclone de Bangladesh Earthquake de Tangshan Tsunami de Java Paises Egypto y Siria China India Martinica y Barbados Indonesia Worldwide China Rusia Bangladesh China Indonesia Año Muertos 1201 1,100 1556 830 1737 300 1780 22 1815 80 1917 20,000 1931 3,000 1932 5,000 1970 300 1976 655 Table 1. Catastrophic events and deaths (thousands) reported over history 3 Disaster management in history Antiquity: Although natural events have always been present on the planet, their character as a source of catastrophic risk has not always existed; the presence of a volcano is only a source of risk if there is a society that is threatened by it. There is evidence of the existence of hazards throughout history since man began to make his mark, and these hazards are not essentially different from the present ones. − Famine − Epidemics − Wildlife attacks − Mitigation strategies are recorded in the Bible, as preparation for certain risks (Noah). − Droughts − Violence The practices recorded in ancient sources are also not fundamentally different from today’s. Mitigation strategies are recorded in the Bible, as preparation for certain risks: − Strategies covering complex sources of threat, (biodiversity) − There is evidence of empirical and magical practices that developed diagnostic techniques based on detailed analysis and the study of solutions. − Evidence collected on catastrophes preceded by self-protection measures (Herculaneum). The roots of our risk management The hydraulic theocracies of the fertile crescent were built on the basis of the need for regulation and protection works and for the agricultural exploitation of the river terraces. Disaster management in history 3 The emergence of large conurbations such as Rome required the implementation of fire protection systems. The watchmen became the predecessors of our fire brigades, given the failure of spontaneous organisations. − A specialised corps was created. − A prestige is acquired by participating in collective protection. − Specific ranks and tasks were established. The cities created in the high Andes to guarantee protection against hostile attacks became one of the differentiating elements of this society. These facilities included storehouses, cisterns and siege survival facilities. India’s endemic famine was combated during the British Raj with mitigation measures including: − Centralised management of emergency food resources. − Rapid response planning via railways. − Real-time monitoring of conditions. Civil defence: the first modern solution The world wars brought to light the importance of incorporating professionalised collective protection measures: 4 Section 3 A UN office is established in Geneva to coordinate the various activities involved to: − Improve each country’s capacity to mitigate the effects of natural disasters effectively, with particular attention to assisting developing countries in assessing their potential damage, and in establishing early warning systems and providing resilient structural systems. − Develop guidelines, regulations and strategies to exploit existing scientific and technical knowledge, with respect for the economic and cultural diversity of nations. − Identify and eliminate areas of scientific ignorance that put people and property at risk. − Develop measures for the assessment, prediction, prevention and mitigation of disasters through technical assistance and transfer programmes, demonstration projects, training and capacity building programmes, appropriate to local characteristics, as well as developing an ex-post evaluation of these programmes. − Disseminate and exploit existing and future information on potential courses of action. The commitments made by governments are: − Formulate national disaster mitigation programmes, including policy developments, spatial planning and insurance policies, especially in developing countries, for integration into national development plans. − Participation during the [INDIR] period in concerted international actions for natural disaster reduction, establishing national action committees in coordination with the scientific communities and other sectors of knowledge to stimulate the achievement of the Decade’s objectives. The need to limit the cruelty of war by establishing a normative basis in international law. − Air defence systems during the bombing raids of the Second World War involved the implementation of measures that largely shape what we call disaster prevention policies. Encourage local administrations to mobilise private public actors to contribute to the achievement of the Decade’s objectives. − Keep the institution informed of third party assistance plans and capacities to facilitate the UN becoming an international centre for information exchange and coordination of efforts, in fields relevant to the objectives of the Decade, so that each state can build on the results of the others. − Take appropriate measures to raise social awareness of the likelihood of damage and the importance of preparedness, prevention, relief and immediate recovery from natural disasters through education, training and other measures, taking into account the role of the media. − Pay attention to the impact of natural disasters on health, particularly on activities to reduce the vulnerability of health facilities, as well as the impact on a society’s basic supply and protection mechanisms. − Improve the rapid availability of emergency supply rapid response instruments through the creation of logistical support networks. − The importance of incorporating professionalised collective protection measures. − The growing demand from society that feels at risk and demands protection from governments. − The need to allocate resources to preventive management systems. − − Detection systems. − Physical protection measures. − Multi-level administrative organisation of the defence system. − Early warning systems with their strategies and priorities. − Organisation of rescue systems. The legislative basis for these systems remains in place throughout the 20th century and feeds current policies. 1 Protection on demand: the 1970s and 1980s The 1970s saw a consolidation of the protection system: − By consolidation of existing administrative protection structures that are embedded in the administrative pyramid of states. − As a response to catastrophes that highlight social deficiencies: → Earthquakes in Managua , Mexico.... → Perception of the degree of helplessness of these societies. 2 The International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (1990s) In 1987 the UN declares the 1990s under this title with a complex objective: − International coordination of efforts. − To solve the post-disaster paralysis of economic and social activity. − By strengthening their infrastructures, institutions and human capital. − To reduce material losses. − Especially in developing countries. 3.1 The Yokohama Strategy (1994): global recognition of the problem In 1994, at a conference in Yokohama (World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction), an evaluation was made of the functioning of the action mechanisms put in place for the INDIR. In this evaluation, the following assertions were made: 1. The impact of natural disasters in terms of human and economic losses has continued to grow. Society has become more vulnerable. The most disadvantaged groups have been the most affected, as they lack the resources to defend themselves. 2. Sustainable development and environmental protection policies are inextricably linked to: − Disaster prevention − Preparedness − Mitigation − Post-event recovery Disaster management in history 5 6 Section 3 3. Consequently, it is essential to incorporate these factors into multilevel planning instruments. 9. Environmental protection is an indispensable component of sustainable development consistent with the objectives of poverty eradication. 1. Preventive action is much more effective and efficient than reactive action. The imperative need to react to past events cannot make us forget the importance of integrated risk planning and management. 10. All countries have a priority obligation to protect their people, infrastructure and other national assets from the impact of natural disasters. The international community is obliged to undertake political measures to ensure the efficient use of financial, scientific and technological resources in the field of disaster reduction, focusing especially on the impact on the least developed countries. 2. The world is increasingly interconnected. Problems must be addressed in a new spirit of community. Disasters do not respect borders or responsibilities. International cooperation strategies based on sharing resources, efforts and knowledge are proving to be extremely fruitful and should be strengthened. 3. Technical solutions and the basic information needed to reduce impacts can be available at very low cost. It is imperative to disseminate and train in the use of available technologies and resources, especially in developing countries. 4. Community mobilization and active participation is of paramount importance to ensure that the development-risk dichotomy is adequately considered by the sociocultural characteristics of the society and by its geostrategic decisions. The effective application of the principles of sustainable development depends entirely on these factors. 3.2 The UN international disaster reduction strategy. Following the successful declaration of the Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, the UN General Assembly in December 1999 adopted the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDIR). The strategy aims to build resilient nations and communities by applying the principle that disaster reduction is a fundamental component of economic development. It seeks to curb the punishment of continued disasters on rich and poor societies. The strategy proposes: • Increase public awareness of risk, vulnerability and disaster reduction. The more people, regional organizations, governments, NGOs, UN entities, civil society representatives and others are aware of risk, vulnerability and how to manage the impacts of natural hazards, the more disaster reduction measures will be implemented in all sectors of society. • Obtain the commitment of public authorities to implement disaster reduction policies and actions. The more decision makers at all levels commit to disaster reduction policies and actions, the sooner communities vulnerable to natural disasters will benefit from implemented disaster reduction policies and actions. This requires, in part, a grassroots approach in which communities at risk are fully informed and engaged in risk management initiatives. • Encourage interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral partnerships, including the expansion of risk reduction networks. The more disaster reduction entities share information about their research and practices, the more the global body of knowledge and experience will advance. By sharing a common purpose and through collaborative efforts, the nations of the world will be more resilient to the impacts of natural hazards. • Improve scientific knowledge about disaster reduction. The more we know about the causes and consequences of natural hazards and related technological and environmental disasters in our society, the better prepared we are to reduce the risks. The joint work of the scientific community and policy makers enables them to contribute to jointly addressing the problems. 5. An updated strategy is approved establishing the following mandatory points for countries − − Obligation to protect their inhabitants from natural disasters. Priority attention to developing countries, landlocked countries and small island states. 6. Development and strengthening of local capacities and regulations aimed at disaster prevention, mitigation and preparedness, including the mobilization of NGOs and local communities. 7. Development of inter-country cooperation networks in prevention and mitigation activities, with special emphasis on: → Individual and institutional development and training. → Sharing of available technology and information. → Mobilization of resources 8. The international community is responsible for the actions described above. 9. The Yokohama conference is the initiating event for these efforts, which must be developed urgently and inescapably. 10. The Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World is a call for urgent and coordinated action to address these objectives. The critical factor in this strategy is the incorporation into international law of the obligation to protect citizens from natural disasters. This obligation translates into the requirement for a set of actions: 1. Risk assessment is an essential step for the implementation of any measures and policies. 2. Prevention is the most efficient and effective measure to reduce damage. 3. Disaster prevention and preparedness is an essential aspect of planning at all levels. 4. 4. The development and strengthening of capacities to prevent, reduce and recover from disasters is essential to prolong the impact of policies beyond the decade. 3.3 The Hyogo Framework for Action (2005) In 2005, at the World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, the 168 countries attending signed the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 "Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters". The HFA promotes the pursuit of three goals aligned with the Millennium Development Goals, aimed at reducing the impacts of natural disasters. • The integration of natural risk reduction into development planning and policy instruments. • Development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities to build resilience to hazards. • The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into risk management programs. 5. Early warning systems to detect and disseminate the presence of ongoing disasters are key factors for successful prevention. In addition, 5 priorities for action were defined, also identifying the individual and collective roles of the agents responsible for their implementation and supervision. These priorities include: 6. Preventive actions are much more successful when they involve the participation of all levels of actors and agencies. 1. Ensure that disaster risk reduction (DRR) is a national and local priority with substantial foundations to guarantee its implementation. 7. Vulnerability of specific groups can be reduced through appropriate systems of education and training of the whole community. 2. Identify, quantify, and monitor disaster risks and strengthen early warning systems. 8. The international community accepts the need to share the technology necessary to prevent, reduce and mitigate disasters. It should be included free of charge and in a timely manner in cooperation programs. 4. Reduce underlying risk factors. 3. Use education and research to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels. 5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels. The Sendai Framework for Action for Risk Reduction (2015-2030) 7 Within the framework of these reflections, the UN secretariat established a consultative process on mechanisms to strengthen the decade’s objectives. To evaluate their fulfillment, it established a system of indicators to test compliance with them. It also established a system for the periodic publication of self-assessment reports on the situation published under the auspices of the HFA Monitor. 4 The Sendai Framework for Action for Risk Reduction (20152030) In 2015, the third United Nations World Conference on Risk Reduction is meeting. This conference invokes the opportunity for countries to: a) Adopt a concise, focused, forward-looking and action-oriented post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. b) Complete the assessment and review of the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. c) Review lessons learned through regional and national strategies/institutions and plans for disaster risk reduction and their recommendations, as well as regional agreements relevant to the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action. d) Determine the modalities of cooperation based on commitments to implement a post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. e) Determine the modalities for the periodic review of the implementation of a post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. In the evaluation of the Hyogo framework, the following conclusions have been reached: • Experience shows that risks have been reduced, damage has been reduced, cooperation between countries and disciplines has been deepened, and the effectiveness of the conceptual approach has been proven. • The problem has not diminished, disasters have continued and have been of great volume. Displaced deaths and damage continue to be of critical importance. • Small-scale recurrent disasters and slow onset disasters particularly affect communities, households and small and medium-sized enterprises, which account for a high percentage of all losses. All countries-especially developing countries, where mortality and economic losses from disasters are disproportionately higher-face increasing levels of potential hidden costs and challenges in meeting financial and other obligations. • There is a need to modify the risk analysis framework, making it more people-centered and capturing multi-risk, multi-sector and multi-hazard problems. The analysis must be more inclusive and accessible. Governments need to take into account affected actors such as women, the disabled, indigenous people, volunteers, experts, the elderly, etc. in the policy management process. Integrated cooperation of all affected actors is necessary to work together in the field of risk management. • Risk management has proven to be a key element for the achievement of the millennium goals and for sustainable development. 4.1 Objectivos: The following objectives are established for the period 2015-2130: a) Substantially reduce disaster mortality by 2030 to reduce the 2020-2030 decade average. b) Substantially reduce the number of people affected globally by 2030 to reduce the average of the 2020-2030 decade. c) Reduce economic losses from direct disasters as a share of global gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030 8 Section 4 d) Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and the disruption of basic services, including health and education facilities, including building their resilience by 2030 e) Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020. f) Substantially strengthen international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and sustainable support to complement their national efforts to implement this Framework by 2030 g) Substantially increase the availability of multi-hazard early warning systems and information and assessments of disaster risks to people by 2030 4.2 Guiding Principles Based on the principles contained in the • Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World, • the Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation • the Hyogo Framework for Action, The implementation of this Framework shall be guided by the following principles, taking into account national circumstances and in accordance with national legislation, as well as international obligations and commitments: Based on the principles contained in the Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World, the Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation and the Hyogo Framework for Action, the implementation of this Framework shall be guided by the following principles, taking into account national circumstances and in accordance with national legislation, as well as international obligations and commitments: a) Each state has the primary responsibility to prevent and reduce disaster risk, including through international, regional, sub-regional, transboundary and bilateral cooperation. Disaster risk reduction is a common concern of all states and the extent to which developing countries can improve and effectively implement national disaster risk reduction policies and measures, in the context of their respective circumstances and capacities, can be further enhanced through sustainable international cooperation. b) Disaster risk reduction requires shared responsibilities between central governments and relevant national authorities, sectors and actors, as appropriate to their national circumstances and governance systems. c) Disaster risk management is oriented towards the protection of people and their property, health, livelihoods and productive assets, as well as cultural and environmental assets, while respecting all human rights, including the right to development, and promoting their implementation. d) Disaster risk reduction requires the involvement and collaboration of society as a whole. It also requires empowerment and inclusive, accessible and non-discriminatory participation, with special attention to those disproportionately affected by disasters, particularly the poorest. Gender, age, disability and cultural perspectives should be integrated into all policies and practices, and the leadership of women and youth should be promoted. In this context, special attention should be given to enhancing the organized voluntary work of citizens; e) Disaster risk reduction and management depends on coordination mechanisms across sectors and between sectors and with relevant actors at all levels, and requires the full participation of all executive and legislative institutions of the State at national and local levels and a clear articulation of the responsibilities of public and private actors, including business and academia, to ensure mutual communication, cooperation, complementarity in roles and accountability, and follow-up; f) While the enabling, guiding and coordinating role of national and federal governments remains essential, local authorities and communities need to be empowered to reduce disaster risk, including through resources, incentives and decision-making responsibilities, as appropriate; The Sendai Framework for Action for Risk Reduction (2015-2030) 9 g) Disaster risk reduction requires a multi-hazard approach and inclusive decision-making informed by risk assessment and based on the open sharing and dissemination of disaggregated data, including by sex, age and disability, as well as easily accessible, up-to-date, understandable, science-based and non-confidential risk information, complemented by traditional knowledge; h) The development, strengthening and implementation of relevant policies, plans, practices and mechanisms should seek coherence, as appropriate, between the agendas for sustainable development and growth, food security, health and safety, climate variability and change, environmental management and disaster risk reduction. Disaster risk reduction is essential to achieve sustainable development; i) While the factors that can increase disaster risk may be local, national, regional or global in scope, disaster risks have local and specific characteristics that need to be understood in order to identify disaster risk reduction measures; j) Addressing the underlying drivers of disaster risk through public and private investments based on information about these risks is more cost-effective than relying primarily on postdisaster response and recovery, and contributes to sustainable development; k) In the post-disaster recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction phase, it is essential to prevent further disasters and reduce disaster risk through the principle of "building back better" and to increase public education and awareness of disaster risk; l) Effective and meaningful global partnership and the further strengthening of international cooperation, including the fulfillment of respective official development assistance commitments by developed countries, are essential for effective disaster risk management; m) Developing countries, in particular least developed countries, small island developing States, landlocked developing countries and African countries, as well as middle-income and other countries facing specific disaster risk challenges, require adequate, sustainable and timely support, including through funding, technology transfer and capacity-building from developed countries and partners, tailored to their needs and priorities, as defined by them. 10 Section 6 4. Priority 4: Improve disaster preparedness for effective response and "Build Back Better" In recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction. The continued growth in disaster risk, including increased exposure of people and assets, combined with lessons learned from past disasters, indicates the need to further strengthen preparedness to respond to disasters and ensure that the necessary capacities are in place for effective response and recovery at all levels. 5. Priority 5. Empowering women and persons with disabilities to publicly lead and promote equitable and universally accessible response, recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction approaches is key. Disasters have shown that the recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction phase, which must be prepared in advance of a disaster, is a crucial opportunity to "build back better", including the integration of disaster risk reduction into development measures, making nations and communities resilient to disasters. 5 Modern approach to disaster management Integrated disaster management is based on four distinct components: mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. 1. Mitigation. Also called Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), mitigation involves reducing or eliminating the probability or consequences of a hazard, or both. Mitigation treats the risk so that it affects society to a lesser degree. 2. Preparedness. This involves equipping people who may be affected by a disaster or who can assist those affected with tools to increase their chances of survival and to minimize their financial and other losses. 3. Response. This involves taking steps to reduce or eliminate the impact of disasters that have occurred or are currently occurring in order to prevent further suffering, financial loss, or a combination of both. Relief, a term commonly used in international disaster management, is a component of response. 4. Recovery. This involves returning the lives of victims to a normal state after the impact of the disaster’s consequences. The recovery phase usually begins after the immediate response has ended and may persist for months or years afterwards. 4.3 Priorities for action The following priorities for action are established 1. Priority 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 people and assets, hazard characteristics and environment. Such knowledge can be used for pre-disaster risk assessment, for prevention and mitigation, and for the development and implementation of adequate preparedness and effective disaster response. 2. Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk management. Disaster risk management at national, regional and global levels is of great importance for effective and efficient management. It requires a clear vision, plans, competence, guidance and coordination within and between sectors, as well as the participation of relevant stakeholders. It is therefore necessary to strengthen risk governance for prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery and rehabilitation and to foster collaboration and partnership among mechanisms and institutions for the implementation of relevant instruments for disaster risk reduction and sustainable development. 3. Priority 3: Invest in disaster risk reduction for resilience. Public and private investment in disaster risk prevention and reduction through structural and non-structural measures is essential to improve the economic, social, health and cultural resilience of people, communities, countries and their assets, as well as the environment. These can be drivers of innovation, growth and job creation. These measures are cost-effective and instrumental in saving lives, preventing and reducing losses, and ensuring effective recovery and rehabilitation. Figure 1. The Disaster Management Cycle 6 International disaster management What is international disaster management? International disaster management 11 The study of the various emergency and disaster management systems and structures that exist throughout the world. The study of disaster management in scenarios where the capacity of a single nation’s response mechanisms are overwhelmed. What is an international disaster? These are situations in which : 1. The demands of responding to the disastrous event exceed the disaster management capabilities of a single nation or of several nations. 2. The government of the affected country appeals to the resources of the international response community when it is overwhelmed. 3. The international community commits itself to the problem, the demand raised is not enough, but the commitment of the actors receiving the demand for help is required. A recognized and systematic process for responding to international disasters has begun to emerge. − Standards for response have been developed − A recognized group of typical participants has emerged. The example of the Mozambique floods shows how failure to respond can have catastrophic results. Date 9-Feb 11-Feb 22-Feb 24-Feb 27-Feb 2-Mar Sequence of events Torrential rains begin Floods in Maputo Thousands of people homeless across the country Damage to crops and infrastructure 70 dead. 150,000 people at risk due to lack of supplies. Dysentery outbreaks Tropical Cyclone Eline Hits Flooded Areas 23,000 people fed by air. UN unsuccessfully appeals for $13 million in emergency aid. Flood drainage in the area concentrates water in the flooded areas. in the flooded areas New wave of rains sweeps the rest of the crop areas. New flooding Floods of 8 m in the country, need to evacuate 100,000 people (7,000) subsist in trees for days. International aid begins to arrive Table 2. Evolution of the impact of floods in Mozambique in 2000. Typical participants in disaster management are • Spontaneously organized victims • First responders active at the local level 12 Section 6 Experience is showing that the request for international assistance is a symptom of the lack of coherent action in preventive measures. The international management mechanism has a second leg formed by UN-led actions to strengthen preventive policies. Recovery and response efforts It focuses essentially on disastrous events Scenarios based on single events Basic responsibility for responding to an event Local analysis in the service of local conditions Responsibility concentrated in a single manager Downward accountability of a single central authority Established hierarchical relationships Focused on physical equipment Depend on specialized experts Summary planning, performance and results deadlines In a continuous process of change, with dynamic processing of information often with contradictions. Primary information sources, specific and complex information sources that require facts to be activated. Centralized and top-down information flows and downstream. They deal with public safety issues. Prevention efforts Focuses on vulnerability and vulnerability and risk Dynamic multi-hazard scenarios combining risk and development Basic need to assess, control and and update exposure to an event Focused on spatial variability and joint effects. They affect multiple authorities, interests and stakeholders. Adaptable organization, freedom of assignment and removal Fluid, temporary and adaptable adaptable Dependent on the interaction between knowledge, skills and experience It seeks to coordinate specialized knowledge withm public vision and priorities Medium to long planning, performance and results Use of cumulative information, structured and comparative Open to public information; changing, multiple and diverse sources. Diverse points of view. Dispersed and lateral information flows. They have an impact on issues of interest, investment and public safety issues. Table 3. Comparison of reactive and preventive policies As management instruments have advanced, the construction of tools to address the risks of inaction has deepened. Response and recovery are not effective in disaster management in the absence of preparedness and mitigation activities. International disaster management organizations, agencies and stakeholders are moving from response to prevention. UN efforts in developing countries : IDNDR • Governments of affected countries − • Governments of other countries − • International organizations − International Strategy for Disaster Reduction • International financial organizations • Regional organizations • Non-profit organizations • Private organizations Assesses progress in implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action. • Local and regional donors − Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action The Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (GP) was established by mandate of the UN General Assembly. The GP is an international meeting held every two years with the participation of the international disaster risk reduction community, which includes governments, international organizations (including the UN and other regional organizations and institutions), NGOs, scientific and academic institutions, and the private sector. By mandate, the GP − Improves awareness of disaster risk reduction. The interaction between disasters and poverty − − 13 14 Section 8 Enables the sharing of experiences and lessons of good practice. Identifies remaining gaps and recommends specific actions to accelerate national and local implementation. The first and second sessions of the GP, which took place in 2007 and 2009, respectively, were attended by more than 152 governments and 137 organizations. These sessions helped build momentum for national commitments to implement disaster risk reduction, culminating in the May 2011 GP meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. The benchmarks established at the first two meetings focused on five main areas, including the following: A country that maintains a stable growth rate suffers a catastrophic event. − − − − 1. Harmonizing disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in the broader context of poverty reduction and sustainable development. 2. Reducing risk at the community and local levels through partnerships that better recognize the mutual dependence of governments and non-governmental organizations and promote the role of women as drivers of action (with special consideration for youth and children Roles). This event causes an immediate loss. In a period of reconstruction it recovers part of that loss. After recovery, it continues on a new growth path that implies an accumulated delay. Both the damage generated and the subsequent growth path are conditioned by the level of preparedness of the affected societies: → by the path of becoming robust by avoiding the direct impact. → by improving resilience both in terms of speed and amount. The pathways of damage diffusion in society are identified as: − National and international development efforts are halted, erased or even reversed. − It often becomes necessary to shift considerable amounts of GDP from development projects, social programs or debt repayment to managing the consequences of the disaster and initiating recovery efforts. 4. Increase the contribution dedicated to disaster risk reduction from national budgets and international development funding (including humanitarian relief and recovery expenditures) and improve measurements of the effectiveness of investment in risk reduction. − Vital infrastructure is damaged or destroyed, including roads, bridges, airports, seaports, communications systems, power generation and distribution facilities, and water and sewerage plants, requiring years of reconstruction. 5. Continue ISDR efforts to support governments and NGOs in their disaster risk reduction efforts. − Educational facilities are damaged or destroyed, leaving students without an adequate source of education for months or even years. − Hospitals and clinics are damaged or destroyed, resulting in increased vulnerability to disease of the affected population. − Formal and informal productive organization systems are destroyed, leaving the economic system heavily damaged. − The concentration of reconstruction efforts over time results in shortages of materials and labor, which in turn increases construction costs, inflates wages and disorganizes the productive fabric, attracting workers from other sectors where they are needed and for which they are qualified. 3. Move towards full implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action through various action targets (e.g., assessments and mitigation of educational and health facilities). 7 The interaction between disasters and poverty Experience shows that the poorest countries are also the ones that suffer the most from disasters. This implies two distinct correlations: − First, countries that are more exposed accumulate more damage over time and the effect accumulates without allowing time for recovery. − Secondly, the poorest countries have fewer resources available for prevention and protection or for recovery from an event. − The basic mechanism of interaction between economic growth and risk management is presented in the graph. As can be seen the benefits from policy are nott visible as they drive from the observed damagae and real trend and the potential damages and trend that could have existed in the past. Giving visibility to these benefits is critical to make the measures acceptable for the society. Residents are driven out of the affected areas, often irreversibly, dismantling all institutional knowledge, cultural and social identity and the economic viability of the areas that need them especially at that time of crisis. − Despair and poverty lead to a rapid increase in crime and insecurity. Quality of life deteriorates. − A general feeling of despair affects the affected population, leading to increased rates of depression and a lack of motivation to regain independence from outside assistance. 8 Trends observed in disasters In general, there is much better information available, which allows us to observe the following trends 1. The number of people affected by disasters is increasing. 2. In general, disasters are becoming less lethal. 3. In general, disasters are becoming more costly. 4. Poor countries are disproportionately affected by the consequences of disasters. Figure 2. Interaction mechanism between disasters economic development 5. The number of disasters is increasing every year Trends observed in disasters 15 The number of people affected is growing. The processes of settlement of the population in the territory have traditionally been adapted to the specific situation they face. However, in recent times these patterns have been altered: − − − Massive concentration of population in urban areas. Massive concentration of population in exposed areas Concentration makes events very dangerous. 16 Section 8 The overall trend of reduced deaths is attributed to : − Broader and more organized preparedness campaigns are helping individuals and communities decrease their vulnerability and react more adequately to disasters. − Early warning systems are giving potential victims more time to leave dangerous situations associated with impending disasters. − Special disaster-specific protective structures, such as tornado rooms, are mitigating the impact that disasters have on human life. − The creation and enforcement of building codes are helping to increase the resilience of the various structures and systems that humans depend on. − Secondary post-disaster consequences, such as hunger and disease, are more effectively managed through modern public health response mechanisms. − Proper zoning procedures and enforcement of regulations are helping to prevent people from locating in disaster-prone areas and helping to remove those who have already misplaced themselves. − Sustainable development processes are helping to reduce population movement to higher risk areas. Disaster costs have soared The costs of disasters have skyrocketed. On the one hand, the mechanisms of population concentration in exposed areas described above have increased the problem. But on the other hand, the growing technological and wealth endowment that accompanies the population has increased the cost. Also, a certain overestimation of the capacity of technology has led us to oppose the problem by accumulating assets in risk areas. Figure 3. Number of people affected by natural disasters (1900-2011) Disasters become less lethal Over the years, adaptive capacity has helped us to reduce our damage. The number of deaths has clearly decreased. It has also been observed that in the last 10 years the trend seems to be reversing. This is attributed to the fact that after the 2011 attacks, the attraction of funds to anti-terrorist security has been at the expense of deactivating environmental protection policies. Figure 5. Estimated damage caused by natural disasters 1900-2010 (×109US$) Specifically, we find the following explanations: Figure 4. Number of deaths due to natural disasters worldwide (1900-2011) − Increased urbanization in high-risk areas occurring around the world is concentrating wealth, physical structures and infrastructure in high-risk areas. − Economies are much more techno-dependent, and technology tends to fail in times of disaster due to cascading effects; more deadly blackouts. − Areas not directly affected are experiencing secondary economic consequences of disasters, as is the case with many world economies after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Trends observed in disasters 17 − A greater number of less deadly but financially destructive disasters are occurring worldwide as a result of climate change or other factors − Population increase; The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the world’s population grew from 3.8 to 6.8 billion between 1950 and 2010. Disasters hit the least developed countries especially hard. Ninety percent of the deaths caused by natural disasters occur in poor countries, a fact that requires an explanation. From the review that has been carried out so far, we can conclude several working hypotheses to explain this fact: 1. The distribution of events treats the poor unfavorably. This proposal requires analysis, because although the distribution of events is irregular on the planet and can be correlated with income, the distribution of events alone does not justify this asymmetry in the effects. 2. The vulnerability of the poor is greater and their damages are greater. 3. The accumulation of damage in poor areas accelerates the processes and aggravates their situation. 4. All damage in poor areas implies a greater degree of irreversibility. There are contrasting explanations in the literature: − Low-income subjects surround themselves with assets inadequate to withstand the risk factors they face. Houses with seismic resistance capacity or better foundations are more expensive. Vulnerability bias. ie. residential in flooding area (floodplain) − Low-income individuals occupy the most exposed and least valuable spaces; the market helps to spatially segregate agents by wealth. Exposure bias. − There is a consistent correlation in the location of agents and the presence of extreme hazards. Threat bias. − Depressed areas show a lower capacity to learn techniques and mechanisms of defense and action and consequently their capacity for post-event reaction is much lower. Socio-cultural vulnerability bias. − Less developed countries have fewer budgetary resources and give prevention much lower priority in their allocation. Consequently, early warning and immediate assistance systems tend to be scarce. Prevention bias. Rich Countries They tend to suffer greater losses, but have mechanisms to absorb them. absorb them. They have protection mechanisms protection mechanisms such as: Early warning systems. Building codes. Planning. They have emergency and medical emergency and medical systems that increase survival and control control disease. They have mechanisms for transfer and mutualization and mutualization mechanisms. Poor countries They have less exposed wealth, but lack resources. They are exposed to processes of processes of damage multiplication. They lack protection systems. They do not have access to new technologies. Lack institutional mechanisms. to implement precautionary measures. They present massive direct losses. They do not participate in insurance mechanisms. They have to sacrifice funds for development in the recovery process. Table 4. Disaster impact differences between rich and poor countries 18 Section 8 The number of catastrophic events has been increasing. Empirical evidence shows an increasing trend in the sequence of events; however, we must remember that the definition of catastrophe implies human presence, so the higher incidence of catastrophic hurricanes in an area of recent colonization does not necessarily imply an upward deviation in their strength. In fact, a reduction in frequency has been observed in recent years. We have four explanations for this observed trend: − Our action on the environment is increasing the importance of extreme events, altering the natural conditions in which they are generated. This is true for meteorological events but not for geological ones. − Our accumulated history of events is liquidating the resilience of the system, eliminating redundancies, safety stocks and other mechanisms that provided us with inertia and resistance. − The self-segregation of people in marginal areas stems from rapid urbanization, but the development of social infrastructures for organization and protection is solving part of the problem. − Our corrective measures are beginning to bear fruit, technological events are moderating spontaneously. As can be seen, the character of the threat is checked when the event is framed in the social context of the affected society. In our case, an agricultural society has specialized in one way of solving its problems in view of the resources at its disposal. That chosen option has made it dependent on the crop on which it feeds. That dependence makes rainfall a basic resource, and consequently its suppression becomes a threat. If the event materializes with sufficient intensity we are faced with a reduction in harvests and as a consequence we suffer a famine that can eventually acquire a catastrophic character. The tools for action in the fight against catastrophes range from strategic changes (reducing dependencies...), technological changes (cultivated species, irrigation....), investments in systems for regulating resources and production (storage to cover droughts...), political actions (resource management policy), external support (food aid....) to emergency management.