Cluster
1:
Governance, Institutional And Policy
Frameworks For Risk Reduction |
Lead
Agencies:
- United Nations Development Programme, Bureau for Crisis Prevention
and Recovery (UNDP/BCPR)
- ProVention
Consortium Secretariat
- United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)
- United Nations Volunteers (UNV)
|
|
Closing
statements |
|
|
|
Discussion
paper |
|
|
|
Panel |
|
Panel
Report |
|
|
Date: |
20
January 2005 |
|
|
Time: |
13h00-15h00 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kairaku
room |
|
|
Chair: |
H.E. GJ
Mtshali, Ambassador, South African Permanent Mission in Geneva |
|
|
Rapporteur: |
Dr. Kenneth
WESTGATE, Senior Regional Advisor, UNDP-BCPR |
|
|
Speakers: |
|
People-Centred
Governance
Reducing Risk for People who are Poor and Excluded
Mr. Khurshid ALAM, Policy Advisor for International
Emergency Team, ActionAid International |
|
Martin
J. OWOR, Assistant Commissioner Disaster Managment,
Republic of Uganda |
|
Integrated
Approach of Multi-Stakeholder under the Political Commitment
Mr. Keiichi TANGO, Senior
Executive Director, Japan Bank
for International Cooperation,
JBIC |
|
Ms.
Irmgard SCHWAETZER, Former Federal Minister in
Germany and current Chairman of DKKV |
|
Governance:
Institutional and Policy Frameworks for Risk Reduction
Key Points From the Discussion Paper |
|
|
|
Session
1.1
Institutional policy frameworks for disaster deduction: the role of international
financial institutions in meanstreaming risk |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
20 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
15h00-17h00 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kitano room |
|
|
Organizer: |
- ProVention
Consortium Secretariat
- Asian Development Bank as lead partner and proposed chair of the
session |
|
|
Objectives |
The ProVention
Consortium proposes to organise and coordinate a thematic session
at the WCDR on the subject of institutional and policy frameworks
for risk reduction. The session will focus on the role of International
Financial Institutions (IFIs) in mainstreaming disaster risk
reduction into development. ProVention partner IFIs, including
Asian Development Bank, African Development Bank, Caribbean
Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank and The World
Bank, will contribute experiences and perspectives on integrating
risk reduction into the institutional and policy frameworks
of IFIs. The session will involve panel contributions from
the various participating IFIs, highlighting progress as well
as the challenges in mainstreaming risk into development policy
and planning, followed by a plenary discussion. |
|
|
Contributions
of Session to WCDR |
- Analysis
of the role, experiences and perspectives of IFIs in supporting
institutional and policy frameworks for disaster risk reduction
- Assessment of IFIs progress and challenges in mainstreaming risk
into development
- Identification of risk financing strategies and effective financial
instruments of risk management. |
|
|
Speakers: |
|
|
|
Session
1.2
National platforms within ISDR |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
21 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
14h30-16h30 |
|
|
Venue: |
Nunobiki
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
- German
Committee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV)
- Partner European national platforms |
|
|
Language: |
English,
French |
|
|
Objectives |
In Yokohama
at the midway assessment of IDNDR it was stated: "Equally,
the creation of the organizational framework called for by
the General Assembly, which includes National Decade Committees,
has laid the basis for intensified preventive and preparedness
effort sin the second half of the Decade; "(see: Yokohama
Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World B. Assessment
of the status of disaster reduction midway into the Decade,
3.)
In the
Plan of Action it was recommended: "As appropriate, establish
and/or strengthen National Committees for the Decade..."(see:
Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World
II. Plan of Action 11.5.)
At the
end of IDNDR when the successor arrangement the International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction was established, the Secretary
General of the United Nations requested "Governments to
maintain and strengthen established national and multisectoral
platforms for natural disaster reduction in order to achieve
sustainable development goals and objectives, with the
full utilization of scientific and technical means. "He
also stated in his report that: "Given the success of national
committees and focal points for the Decade in a large number
of countries, the Secretary General strongly encourages
all Governments to take the necessary measures to implement
this appeal..." (See Secretary-General's Report to the
UNGA, 1999, A/54/497, para. 32)
"The
ISDR Secretariat has renewed its efforts to re-establish
these contacts. A priority for the coming year is to revitalise
and strengthen the building of stronger national networks
or national platforms drawing from several sectors and
disciplines to further improve the implementation of disaster
reduction." (see ISDR website, Country information, Introduction)
National
Platforms are concrete manifestations of political willingness
and institutional recognition of disaster risk reduction
as a relevant issue within the national interests. National
Platforms can work to involve in ISDR activities the various
ministerial departments, agencies, institutions, organizations,
civil society and individuals working for the advancement
of disaster reduction, so that each Member State may play
an ever-increasing role in ISDR's work, and particularly
in the formulation and execution of its programmes.
Particularly
in its implementation, national platforms act very distinctively.
In some instances, national platforms have a major role
in promoting DRR as an international issue (Germany). In
other cases, they have a major role in addressing the needs
for DRR within their own countries (most expected in developing
countries). In some countries, we found a combination of
the previous cases (Switzerland and France).
On the
European level, where several National Platforms of Disaster
Risk Reduction exist, the National Platform started to
network among themselves with the aim to make use of existing
synergies and to coordinate their activities on the regional
level.
The
thematic session on National Platforms will show on the
case study of European National Platforms:
- the
diversity of possible structures
- the
working agenda and focus of activities of the different
Platforms
- short
falls in support to the system of National Platforms
- the
added value of networking on regional levels and
the
potential of the National Platform structure in the implementation
of the ISDR (national and regional).
The
session will be started by inputs provided by representatives
of different National Platforms on structures and working
agenda, followed by a panel on networking and regional
activities. So far the National Platforms from France,
Switzerland, Czech republic and Germany confirmed their
participation to the thematic session.
|
|
|
Contributions
of Session to WCDR |
- National
policies, institutional developments and legislation, national
coordination
- Regional institutional frameworks and policies
- Transparency - accountability
- Indicators and indexing to support progress and performance |
|
|
Speakers:
|
|
|
|
Session
1.3
National systems for disaster risk management in the context of governance |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
20 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
17h15-19h15 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kikusui
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
United Nations
Development Programme |
|
|
Abstract: |
The United
Nations Development Programme is organizing a thematic session
on National Systems for Disaster Risk Management in the Context
of Governance. Good governance has long been recognized as
an important prerequisite for successful disaster risk reduction
and key for achieving sustainable human development. Functioning
National Systems for Disaster Risk Management are considered
important from a governance perspective in view of minimizing
losses and deaths from disasters and reducing disaster vulnerability
in order to limit the disruption of socio-economic systems.
National Systems for Disaster Risk Management comprise a broad set
of functions such as preparing and formalizing policy frameworks,
setting up organizational structures for disaster management, preparing
disaster risk management plans and other planning instruments, revising
existing or putting in place new legislation, as well as ensuring
the availability of sufficient resources and capacities, underpinned
by good management support. An integral part of these systems must
be the operational infrastructure, which ensures effective operations
for tangible results. It operates at all levels of administration,
governing how the country manages disasters and disaster risks.
The state, civil society and the private sector are all integral
parts of these systems.
Experience has shown that successes with strengthening national systems
follow seldom a linear line. Most countries, both in the developed
and developing world report of alternate phases of progress and regression
in fight against vulnerability and disaster loss. This session thus
aims at fostering exchange of practices and lessons learned in strengthening
National Systems for Disaster Risk Management among a variety of
stakeholders. It will identify key success factors and challenges
to overcome in achieving good governance for risk reduction. |
|
|
Objectives |
- Exchange
practices and lessons learned with establishing and strengthening
National Systems for Disaster Risk Reduction with the aim of
identifying improved strategies and effective action as a contribution
to the WCDR Programme Outcome.
- Improve the understanding of the factors influencing the functioning
of National Systems for Disaster Risk Reduction. |
|
|
Subjects
to be addressed |
This
session will discuss good practices and lessons learned with
various aspects of establishing and strengthening National
Systems for Disaster Reduction, such as:
- Legal and regulatory frameworks
- Policy and planning
- Organizational structures
- Resources and Capacities at local and national levels
- Partnerships and cooperation at national and regional levels
The session
will commence with a brief session introduction, followed
by short presentations of panelists from national governments,
international and regional organizations as well as donor
agencies on the topic of national systems for disaster
risk management. Each contribution will aim at emphasizing
a different aspect of the topic or present a different
point of view. The panel presentations will be followed
by an open discussion which will focus on identifying recommendations
on how to improve the functioning of national systems for
disaster risk management in the broader context of governance,
how to make more effective the assistance provided, as
well as the identification of issues which may require
further discussion in the follow-up to the World Conference.
|
|
|
Agenda: |
Topic
|
Proposed
Speaker
|
Time
Allocation
|
Welcome
and introductions |
Ken
Westgate, UNDP (chair) |
5
- 10 min |
Experiences
of national government |
Saroj
Jha, India |
10
min |
Experiences
of national government |
Joeli
Rokovada, Fiji |
10
min |
Experiences
with regional approaches |
Janine
Ferretti, IADB |
10
min |
Experiences
of civil society |
Allan
Lavell, La Red |
10
min |
Donor
perspective |
DFID |
10
min |
Experiences
of UNDP |
Angelika
Planitz, UNDP |
10
min |
Discussion |
Chair |
60
min
|
|
|
|
Speakers:
|
|
UNDP
Support to Institutional and Legislative Systems for
Disaster Risk Management
-- A Global Review --
Ms. Angelika Planitz, UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention & Recovery,
Geneva. |
|
Mr.
Kenneth Westgate, UNDP/BCPR, Nairobi. |
|
Disaster
Reduction Disaster Reduction for Sustainable Sustainable
Development
Mr. Satoru Nishikawa,
Cabinet Office of Japan, Public
Relations. |
|
National
Systems for Disaster Risk Management in the Context
of Governance:
Experiences with National Approaches in Latin America and the
Caribbean
Mr. Janine Ferretti, Inter American Development
Bank (IADB) |
|
Mr.
N. Sanyal, Government of India |
|
Working
Towards Good Governance For Effective Risk Reduction –
Fiji Experience
Mr. Joeli Rokovada, Director, National Disaster
Management
|
|
Mr.
Allan Lavell, La Red, Costa Rica |
|
Mr.
Nigel Adams, DFID |
|
Ms.
Joanne Burke, UNDP/BCPR, Geneva -Rapporteur |
|
|
|
Session
1.4
Turning Practice into Policy: supporting community risk reduction through
government and institutional policy |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
21 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
12h15-14h15 |
|
|
Venue: |
Nunobiki
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
Tearfund (a UK based Christian relief and development
NGO with extensive experience in disaster management)
|
|
|
Objectives |
To present
ideas and generate discussion on why and how community-focused
disaster risk reduction (DRR) can be supported and expanded
by national and institutional donor policy frameworks.
|
|
|
Overview
of content: |
3 presentations:
1. The effectiveness of community-based disaster preparedness:
a case study
Indian NGO Discipleship Centre will present its community-based,
low cost flood preparedness and mitigation project operating in
Bihar State. The effectiveness of the project in saving lives and
livelihoods has been demonstrated through recent severe flooding,
and detailed cost-benefit research has proved it to be a worthwhile
investment. Such local level risk reduction can and should be supported
through effective national and donor policy.
2. A
conceptual framework for risk reduction
Tearfund will present its community-focused conceptual framework
for disaster risk reduction (modified ‘crunch model’).
This model informs the development of government policies based
on good risk reduction practice at community level.
3. Effective
national and donor policy frameworks for disaster risk
reduction
A/ Community risk reduction must be facilitated through a strong
national policy framework. The Indian government’s approach
to DRR will be discussed from an Indian perspective.
B/ Local
and national risk reduction can be either supported or
hindered by donor policy. Tearfund will discuss the obstacles
that institutional donor organizations face when seeking
to ‘mainstream’ risk reduction, and offer recommendations
to address them. This will be based on Tearfund’s
consultation with 9 key donor organisations in 2003 including
the EU, UN agencies, governments and financial institutions.
C/ Tearfund
and Cranfield University will present a new tool – a
framework of indicators –which enables donor organizations
to measure and monitor their progress with mainstreaming
risk reduction into relief and development processes. The
indicators were developed in wide consultation with donor
organizations and experts in 2004 and will be introduced
at this session. The framework is designed to enable donor
organizations to determine the ‘level’ of mainstreaming
they have achieved, where level 1 represents ‘zero
progress’ and level 4 represents ‘fully mainstreamed’.
The Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) will
comment on the framework’s application for donor
organizations, as well as SIDA’s own approach to
mainstreaming.
|
|
|
Agenda:
|
Each
of the above three presentations will allow 5 minutes for questions
of clarification. The session will end with a 30 minute, facilitated,
open discussion on the ideas presented. |
|
|
Speakers:
|
|
A
Conceptual Framework for Risk Reduction
Marcus Oxley, Disaster Management Director, Tearfund
marcus.Oxley@tearfund.org
Tel. +44 (0)20 8943 7704 |
|
The
Effectiveness of Community-Based Disaster Preparedness
Alex Joseph, Senior
Project Officer, Discipleship
Centre
disciple@del2.vsnl.net.in
Tel. +91 11 2765 1557 |
|
Turning
Practice into Policy: Community Based Disaster
Preparedness (CBDP)
Rajeev Issar,
Programme Associate, UNDP – India
rajeev.issar@undp.org
Government of India and UNDP’s Disaster Risk Management
Programme |
|
Effective
National and Donor Policy Frameworks for Disaster
Risk Reduction
Paul
Venton, Disaster
Mitigation and Preparedness
Officer, Tearfund
paul.venton@tearfund.org
Tel. +44 (0)20 8943 7995
Sarah La Trobe, Public Policy Officer, Tearfund
sarah.latrobe@tearfund.org
Tel. +44 (0)20 8943 7962
|
|
Johan
Schaar, Head, Division for Humanitarian Assistance & Conflict
Management, Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency (SIDA)
johan.schaar@sida.se
Tel. +46 (0)8 698 5766 |
|
Mainstreaming
Disaster Risk Reduction: a tool for development development
organisations |
|
Supporting
community risk reduction through Government & institutional
policy.
TEAR FUND UK |
|
Chair
Ian Davis, Visiting Professor, Cranfield University
i.davis@n-oxford.demon.co.uk |
|
|
|
Session
1.5
Disaster Reduction Indicators: safer critical facilities |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
18 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
13h00-15h00 |
|
|
Venue: |
Nunobiki
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
Pan
American Health Organization / World Health Organization
(PAHO/WHO) |
|
|
Objectives |
The
session aims at complementing the discussions in the intergovernmental
segment, mainly through the Thematic Cluster 1: Governance,
Institutional and Policy Frameworks for Risk Reduction.
Specifically, the objective of the session is to
a) To discuss the importance and relevance of national policies on
vulnerability reduction in social critical facilities
b) To discuss, identify and describe specific indicators to monitor
the implementation of disaster reduction in critical facilities Exchange
experiences and good practices in understanding and reducing vulnerabilities
in health facilities, especially in developing countries, |
|
|
Participants:
|
-
Disaster prone countries representatives
- Experts in disaster reduction in social facilities
- International organizations advisors
- Members of Non-governmental organizations
- UN agencies representatives |
|
|
Brief
Overview of Subjects being Addressed |
• Schools,
Drinking water systems and hospitals: huge social investments
that should be protected
• Ensuring essential services: a key national policy on disaster reduction
and sustainable development
• Safer critical facilities a political commitment and a global indicator
for multisectoral disaster reduction.
Disasters have damaged critical facilities. Thus the vital services
are found disrupted right at the time when they are the most needed.
Such a situation of disrupted critical facilities was seen during
the several disasters.
Isolated initiatives have been successfully implemented in some developing
countries in assessing and reducing disaster risks to critical facilities
including their structure and services. These efforts have yielded
rich experiences that could be successfully employed in other developing
countries with some adaptation. Replication of such good cases needs
to be replicated. An organized approach is felt necessary for encouraging
the process of replication. The Session aims to analyze the issues
and challenges, and to identify the suitable strategies for encouraging
disaster risk reduction in critical facilities across the developing
countries. |
|
|
Agenda: |
The
Session 1.5 will have two parts, namely, a) Presentation
of Experiences, and b) Plenary discussion. The Presentation
section will be a forum for sharing of experiences and
approaches on Disaster Reduction on Critical Facilities.
The Plenary discussion will try to look into the future
of the efforts and develop a consensus of approaches and
recommendations to the WCDR through the chairperson of
the Thematic Cluster.
13:00 |
Introduction
of the Session |
Dr.
Ciro Ugarte (PAHO/WHO) |
A.
Presentations on Disaster Reduction in Critical
Facilities.
Chair: H.E. GJ Mtshali, Ambassador, South African Permanent
Mission in Geneva
|
13:05 |
Presentation
of Issues |
Chair |
13:10 |
Disaster
reduction and Health (video presentation) |
Mirta
Roses, World Health Organization |
13:20 |
Socioeconomic
impact of disasters in critical facilities |
Ricardo
Zapata, Economic Comission, ECLAC/UN |
13:35 |
Policies
and Strategies for vulnerability reduction in critical
facilities |
Julio
Kuroiwa, National Institute of Civil Defense. Peru |
13:50 |
Disaster
reduction in Water Supply Systems |
Surya
Narayan Shrestha, National Society for Earthquake
Technology - Nepal |
14:05 |
School
Vulnerability Reduction |
Tony
Gibbs, Barbados |
14:20 |
Safe
Hospitals: an indicator of disaster reduction |
Luis
Fernando Correa, Ministry of Health, Colombia |
B.
Plenary Discussion
|
14:35 |
Discussion:
Safer critical facilities: key disaster reduction
indicators |
All
panelists and participants |
16:55 |
Session
Summary |
Chair |
17:00 |
Adjourn |
|
|
Speakers: |
|
ICT
Saves Lives– ICT in Disaster Reduction & The
Japanese Challenge for Global Standard
[e-University Network
in ICT HRD for DR]
Prof. Toshio Obi, Director
Naoko Iwasaki, Ass.
Director
ITU ITU-Waseda ICT Center, Tokyo |
|
Safe
Hospitals: an indicator of disaster reduction
Luis Fernando Correa Serna -
Md MSP |
|
National
Society for Earthquake Technology -Nepal (NSET)
Surya Narayan Shrestha
Seismic Risk of Water Supply System of Kathmandu Valley and
Risk Reduction Measures |
(7.93MB) |
School
Vulnerability Reduction
Tony Gibbs
CEP Ltd
Consultant to PAHO/WHO |
|
A
HOSPITAL IN THE CONTEXT OF A SUSTAINABLE CITY
Julio KUROIWA
Scientific Advisor to Peru’s Civil Defense.
Professor emeritus Nat. Univ. of Engg. Lima . Lima- PERU |
|
|
|
Session
1.6
Accountable and transparent governance: the key for disaster reduction |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
19
January 2005 |
|
|
Time: |
14h15-16h15 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kikusui
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
Action
Aid International (AAI) and its partner organizations across
Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean |
|
|
Objectives: |
With
micro and macro case studies; and good practices from Asia,
Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, the session will
offer and generate significant knowledge that has direct
relevance to the inter-governmental process.
The key
speakers from Action Aid International will present a paper
and show a documentary that will analyse the challenges,
good practices and past experiences in the area of governance
and risk reduction. The session proposed by ActionAid International
will take forward the outcomes of the seminar we are hosting
in December mentioned in the next section.
Background
work for the proposed session: ActionAid International
is organizing an international seminar on "governance
and disaster risk reduction" in December 2004 in Bangladesh.
The seminar is one of six seminars in a series titled "Managing
Risk: Exploring Interfaces Between Disasters and Development" organized
by Integrated Planning Against Risk [IPAR] and funded
by Economic and Social Research Council[1] in the UK.
The IPAR network is a transdisciplinary group of development
practitioners, policy-makers and academics. It is hosted
by five organizations; ActionAid International, Centre
for Development Studies (University of Wales, Swansea),
Benfield Hazard Research Centre (University College London),
Wageningen University Social Scientists and INTRAC.
Members
from the network will be participating in the seminar along
with local Bangladeshi organizations. We are currently
exploring collaboration with Comprehensive Disaster Management
Programme [CDMP] of UNDP and Government of Bangladesh;
DFID funded Chars Livelihoods Programme and University
of Dhaka.
ActionAid
International has carried out a number of studies on the
subject across many countries including Ethiopia[2], Malawi[3],
India and Bangladesh. We published a paper together with
the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters
(CRED) and University Collage London on the subject for
the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg
in 2002 entitled "Development at Risk"[4].
We will
be drawing on experience both from across ActionAid International
and our partners experience at a micro and macro level
to feed into the parallel session. The very timing of our
Bangladesh seminar provides an ideal platform to develop
discussions for the WCDR international conference.
ActionAid
International are also discussing and developing thinking
with other NGOs including Tearfund, Christian Aid, British
Red Cross, Cafod, ITDG, Stakeholder Forum and the Department
for International Development.
The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is the UK's leading
research funding and training agency addressing economic and social
concerns. They aim to provide high quality research on issues of
importance to business, the public sector and government. The issues
considered include economic competitiveness, the effectiveness
of public services and policy, and our quality of life. (www.esrc.ac.uk)
[1]
The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is the
UK's leading research funding and training agency addressing
economic and social concerns. They aim to provide high
quality research on issues of importance to business, the
public sector and government. The issues considered include
economic competitiveness, the effectiveness of public services
and policy, and our quality of life. (www.esrc.ac.uk)
[2] www.actionaid.org.uk/wps/content/documents/em_gov.doc
[3] www.actionaid.org.uk/content_document.asp?doc_id=211
[4] www.actionaid.org.uk/content_document.asp?doc_id=194
|
|
|
Contributions
of Session to WCDR: |
Global
learning shows that dominant disaster management approaches
(preparedness and mitigation and response) alone cannot help
societies and vulnerable people cope with the increased pattern
of disaster risk. What is most important is a full adoption
of -risk reduction- that relates to how systematic development
and the application of policies, strategies and practices
can minimize vulnerabilities, hazards and the impact of disasters
on a society, in the broad context of sustainable development.
Increasingly
appropriate governance is noted as fundamental if risk
considerations are to be factored into development planning
and if existing risks are to be successfully reduced. Learning
from practitioners suggests that good governance does reduce
disaster risk.
Governance,
in the form of transparency, participation and accountability
can explain why different groups of people are affected
differently and have different recovery patterns, and among
these groups why the poorest and most marginalized have
the least capacity to cope. AAI research in Bangladesh
and Ethiopia clearly suggests that there are strong linkages
between levels of accountability and government's performance
in risk reduction.
Although
it has long been acknowledged that strengthening public
accountability is likely to be the most effective way of
reducing the negative impact of emergencies on some of
the world's poorest people[5], very little work has been
done on what this means and on how to strengthen channels
of institutional accountability in order to reduce disaster
risk. There has been substantial investment in strengthening
governance in many developing countries in recent years,
but this has rarely been extended to disaster risk.
ActionAid
International, therefore, is applying for a parallel session
to contribute to the future direction of disaster reduction,
which falls under the discussion of theme of governance
focussing on risk reduction and sustainable development
and transparency-accountability.
Importance
of the session: One of the key issues that has emerged
from the UN/ISDR online dialogue is the following: "Political
will and accountable governance is the most essential element
for sustainable development as well as effective disaster
reduction at all levels, in government and society at large".
Although this has been conceptually acknowledged, significant
knowledge gaps exist in terms of understanding what form
and nature of governance can reduce disaster risk. The
second area, which is also poorly researched, is how citizen
participation could build the form and nature of governance
that essentially protects citizens from disaster risk.
Purpose
and main discussion issues in the session: Given the problem
mentioned above, the ActionAid International proposed session
will discuss the barriers of risk reduction, potential
solutions and suggest a policy direction for the WCDR negotiation
process.
[5] See, for example, Drèze, J., and Sen, A., 1989, Hunger
and Public Action, Oxford: Clarendon Press
|
Speakers: |
|
People-Centred
Governance
Reducing Risk for People who are Poor and Excluded
Roger Yates Head of Emergencies ActionAid International |
|
Sunamganj,
just after the flash flood |
|
|
|
Session
1.7
Disaster prevention and adaptation to climate change |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
19
January 2005 |
|
|
Time: |
12h00-14h00 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kikusui |
|
|
Organizer: |
World Bank
(or other VARG member) |
|
|
Objectives: |
In recent
years there have been two important trends in thinking about
the impacts of climate on human societies. First, there has
been an increasing focus on preventive measures dealing with
disasters arising from climatic extremes. Secondly, it has
been recognized that, whatever the outcome of mitigation
measures to combat climate change, some climate change is
inevitable and adaptation measures that address the most
likely impacts of climate change especially within the development
context will be necessary. There is the need to explore the
contextual linkages between disaster prevention and adaptation
to climate change in order to promote a more comprehensive
approach to current and future climate risks, which maximizes
benefits for the sustainable development process.
Thematic
Link : Theme 1: Governance: Institutional
Policy Frameworks for Risk Reduction. The proposed
session is closely linked to Theme 1 of the parallel
sessions. It proposes a more comprehensive approach to
current and future climate risks by highlighting linkages
and divergences between disaster risk management and
adaptation to climate change. Thereby it addresses an
issue of relevance to development processes, which deserves
more practical recognition on the international to sub-national
level.
Approach: A
Short Paper will presented by the agencies highlighting
the core messages. The presentation will be followed by
an open discussion
|
Speakers: |
|
Fenella
Frost, Chair Person, DFID, London |
|
Disaster
Risk Management in a Changing Climate
Discussion Paper
Frank Sperling, Presenter, VARG Secretariat,
Washington, D.C.
Francisco Szekely,
Presenter, European School
of Management and Technolgy
(Berlin), Berlin
|
|
Climate
Change and Disaster Risk Management
Ar. Subbiah, Team Leader,
Climate Risk Management, Asian
Disaster Preparedness Center
(ADPC), Bangkok |
|
Marcus
Moench, Commentator, Institute for Social and
Environmental Transition (ISET), Boulder |
|
|
|
Session
1.8
Dialogue on risks in mountainous regions: Experiences from Switzerland
with integrated approaches and lessons learnt for international cooperation |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
19 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
16h30-18h30 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kikusui
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
Swiss Agency
for Development Cooperation (SDC) |
|
|
Objectives |
The Government
of Switzerland proposes to organize a thematic session workshop,
focussing on the country’s policy framework, strategies
and visions for disaster reduction. The implementation of the
framework will be explained using a particular region of Switzerland
where various natural hazards exist and where a number of major
disasters occurred in the past few years.
The disaster reduction
policy framework in Switzerland is
based on an integrated and holistic
approach taking into account the entire
disaster cycle (addressing prevention,
response and recovery), on a dialogue
on risks between all the actors concerned
(including the residents) and on the
principles of sustainability. A central
element of the session will be to point
to the relations with other countries
and specifically focus on the transfer
of Swiss experiences abroad and on
the return of lessons learnt abroad
to Switzerland.
Session themes
- Integrated approach for disaster reduction.
- Sustainability as key criteria for action.
- Implementation on the basis of a sound analysis of risks.
- Direct involvement of the local population.
Key messages
- Further progress in terms of disaster reduction could be achieved
in Switzerland thanks to the efforts made in implementing the
Yokohama Strategy on a national level.
- Risk reduction should be promoted as a topic of concern for the
general public.
- Emphasis should be laid on integral policy frameworks, which
include mitigation, response and recovery and take into account
multi-risk factors, multi-stakeholders and the issue of sustainability.
- Exchange of information and experiences on an international level
should be further promoted (two-way communication).
|
Agenda:
|
Form
Workshop of a duration of 2 ½ hours.
Key issues and questions will be introduced at the beginning and
a synthesis presented at the end of the workshop.
Focussing on a mountainous area, the workshop will deal with the
following topics:
- Risk identification: Assessment of risks
and identification of damage potential.
- Risk avoidance: Land-use planning as a priority for integral
risk management.
- Living with risks: Definition of protection objectives.
Appropriate land-use.
Consideration
of needs of all concerned.
Maintenance
and regular check of existing protection measures.
Systematic
assessment of protection measures after
occurrence of disasters.
Awareness
building among the concerned population.
Issue
of insurance against natural hazards.
- Preparedness: Preparation for emergencies.
- International solidarity and cooperation : Cooperation, exchange
of know-how and lessons learnt.
The workshop
will include several short presentations. Although focussing
on Swiss experiences, it is designed for a wide international
audience and will take into account the particular situation
and needs of developing countries.
|
Speakers: |
|
Swiss
Experience with an Integrated Approach and Lessons
Learnt for International Cooperation
Introduction |
|
Dialogue
on risks in mountainous regions |
|
Summary |
|
Sustainability
and risk management
Walter J. Ammann
Head of the Swiss Federal Institute for Snow and Avalanche
Research SLF, Davos |
|
Risk
Dialogue
Thomas Rageth
Chief Advisor Natural Hazards
Cantonal Forest Service, Glarus |
|
Natural
Disasters in Valais, Switzerland: Problems
Charly Wuilloud
Cantonal Forest Service
Valais, Sion |
|
Solutions:
Examples from Switzerland
Charly Wuilloud
Cantonal Forest Service
Valais, Sion |
|
The
Risk Concept
Markus N. Zimmermann
Consultant for the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation,
Bern |
|
Video |
|
|
|
Session
1.9
Local governance: preconditions for effective disaster risk reduction |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
21 January
2005 |
|
|
Time: |
10h00-12h00 |
|
|
Venue: |
Nunobiki
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
- German
Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
- German Committee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV)
- InWEnt |
|
|
Language: |
English,
Spanish |
|
|
Objectives |
WCDR
highlights the significance of Governance in order to render
disaster risk reduction a sustainable and effective intrument
to reach Poverty Alleviation and the Millenium Development
Goals. This concerns national structures, but also municipal
stakeholders in countries where the local actors are increasingly
involved in disaster risk reduction responsibilities. The
proposed thematic session has the objective to
- present
key elements for municipal responsibility (Local Good
Governance) in favor of effective DRR and discuss them
- present
good practice examples to foster Local Good Governance
for disaster risk reduction and
- identify
future challenges and aspects requiring further discussion
It will
include the proposed Governance-related sub-themes Local
authorities and municipality policies for risk reduction, "Community
action and participation and Transparency and accountability".
Content
and structure
Good
Governance is a precondition for effective disaster risk
reduction. The session will analyse which elements of Local
Governance are of special interest for disaster risk reduction
and will present good practice examples, from the municipality,
national and NGO points of view.
Some
of the discussed aspects are:
- Municipal
responsibility for DRR aiming at a sustainabe development
and poverty reduction
- Participation
of community, civil society and private sector in order
to foster transparency and accountability for decision
making and implementation processes
- Integration
of risk management in municipal development (legislation,
assignment of responsibilities and resources)
- Integration
of local disaster risk management in the national institutional
and political framework
After a
short introduction representatives from different organisations
and levels (municipality, NGO, regional or national institution)
will discuss the significance of key elements and present best
practice examples from Africa, Asia and Latin America on how
to improve Local Good Governance for disaster risk reduction. |
|
|
Speakers:
|
|
Antecedentes,
Principales Resultados y Proyecciones 2002 - 2007
David Smith
JICA regional Advisor for Central America
Proyectos de Gestión Local de del Riesgo a Desastres
en América Central
CBDM: CEPREDENAC - JICA |
|
Good
practice examples of Disaster Risk Good practice examples
of Disaster Risk
Management in the B Management in the Búzi District
of Central zi District of Central
Mozambique Mozambique
Lucas Renco
District Administrator of B District Administrator of Búzi
District, zi District, Mozambique |
|
Buena
Governabilidad Local
Condiciones de una Gestión de Riesgo Efectiva
Oscar Alcantara
Civil Society La Massica, Honduras |
|
LOCAL
GOVERNANCE FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
Angeles Arenas
UNDP regional advisor for DRM Latin America |
|
Yusaf
Pashtun, Minister for Urban Development, Afghanistan |
|
|
|
Session
1.10
Addressing the root causes of vulnerability of human settlements in megacities |
|
Session
Report |
|
|
Date: |
20
January 2005 |
|
|
Time: |
17h15-19h15 |
|
|
Venue: |
Kitano
room |
|
|
Organizer: |
- EMI
- UN-HABITAT
- UNDP
- Kobe University
- PDC |
|
|
Objectives |
The
surging migration of people from rural areas into high-density
urban areas has contributed to a rapid growth of megacities
(generally defined as cities with populations that exceed
8 million people). Given their sheer size, as well as their
economic and social importance, these cities are at a particularly
acute risk with regards to disasters. As more cities have
swelled into megacities over the last few decades and even
more cities are expected to join this rank, their risk from
natural and human-made disasters continues to increase.
Effective
urban governance is as the heart of reducing disaster risk.
All three factors that contribute to urban risk viz. hazard,
vulnerability, and human settlement, are directly influenced
by urban planning, enforcement of regulatory environments,
improvement of social welfare and other acts of governance.
Similarly, public policy has failed to effectively address
the issue of illicit construction that continues to swell
the population of megacities and to contribute to their
vulnerability. The rapid increase in disaster risk of megacities
can therefore be ascribed to a great extend to failures
in urban governance. The strain to provide basic civic
amenities combined with the complexity of the issues relegates
the attention of megacities managers and policy-makers
from the disaster risk reduction agenda. Disaster management
practice continues to focus on post-disaster response and
recovery, causing major gaps in public policy and leaving
an increasingly larger fraction of the population at risk
from disasters. Local implementation remains the weakest
link in disaster risk management. Disaster risk reduction
should find roots within city functions because these functions
service the public, build infrastructure and enforce regulation.
This is the essence of mainstreaming and of sustainable
development. A governance system that assigns authority
of policy setting, resource allocation and oversight to
central government but shifts implementation towards local
government and local institutions is paramount to enable
the shift from response to mitigation.
|
|
|
Agenda: |
This session
will focus on issues of governance related to disaster risk
reduction of megacities on the basis of actual experiences
from megacities.
Each speaker
will have 20 minutes for discussing a specific theme in relation
to the experience of his/her city. The rest of the time will
be for discussion and for taking questions and comments from
participants.
Opening
Remark and Introduction (Head of UN-HABITAT OR
UNDP)
- Governance
issues related to the implementation of the Istanbul
Earthquake Master Plan . Mesut Pektas,
Deputy Secretary General, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality
This issue
will explore how the development and implementation of the
Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan by the Municipality of Istanbul
has impacted governance practices both at the local and central
government levels, in particular, the participation of a
large academic constituency in formulating a holistic plan;
the involvement of professional organizations; the review
by independent international experts; the decentralization
to the district municipalities for actual implementation;
and the pressure on the central government to enable implementation
by undertake legislative reforms and enacting new policies.
- Dealing
with illicit construction - Quito Case Study. Arch.
Diego Carrion , Director of Dept. of Urban
Planning, Quito Municipal Government.
Illicit
construction is a failure of governance and the example of
Quito's deforestation and un-planned use of land is an illustration
of the socio-political difficulties that are imposed on local
governments to deal with this issue. The sprawling of un-planned
urbanization is acute in Quito were most of this development
takes place on hazardous slopes that are subject to land
erosion, landslide, flush-flooding and other geo-meteorological
hazards and which resulted in the increase of vulnerability.
- Dealing
with migrant population and slums - Experiences from
Nairobi
This session
is organized by UN-HABITAT
- Stakeholders'
involvement in Identifying and Implementing Risk Mitigation
Options - Experience from Kathmandu - Mr. Amod
Dixit, National Society of Earthquake Technology,
Nepal.
This session
explores the Theme of education and involvement of stakeholders.
Kathmandu has a long-standing and rich experience in community-based
disaster-risk reduction programs. These experiences and their
impact on governance will be reported and discussed in this
session.
- Risk
Assessment and risk communication - Developing policy
and understanding trade-offs - Case of Bogota. Fernando
Ramirez , Direccion de Prevvencion y Atencion
de Emergencias de Bogota, DPAE.
The Municipality
of Santa Fe deBogota' has successfully used information technology
not only for disaster risk assessment but also for risk communication,
education and for involving stakeholders and policy makers
in understanding their options for disaster risk reduction
and for understanding the trade-offs involved in the policy
and decision making process.
|
Speakers:
|
|
|
|
|