The International Day for Disaster Reduction is an important opportunity to highlight the urgent need for risk reduction to become both a global priority and a public value.
Relief and development agencies have vast experience in disaster response - but are just beginning to learn what disaster risk reduction means.
When large disasters strike, there is no shortage of relief agencies on the scene providing all sorts of assistance. The National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies are famous for providing rapid response because of the unique network of widely dispersed volunteers who stand ready to assist in times of need. In addition to the local response and if required, there is back-up from the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the network of 181 National Societies worldwide, which can help with rapid, professional assessments and assist in coordinating international relief support. It is imperative to be ready to react rapidly and professionally when disasters strike. Aid workers arriving to the areas hit by disasters often realize that “much of this loss and pain could have been prevented if only …”
In hindsight, it is always easy to see what could have been done to reduce the impact of disasters. And yet, if we look carefully at our environment, listen to the experiences of the elderly and take advice from specialists, we can map out the risks and devise ways to become less vulnerable to the hazards which threaten our lives.
A simple example: when we drive in traffic, we are “prepared” by keeping a first aid kit under our seat to treat wounds in case of an accident – but to avoid ever using the first aid kit, we “mitigate” the impact of the accident by wearing seatbelts, driving carefully, and sometimes honking the horn as a warning to other people on the road . That is the culture of preparedness the Red Cross and Red Crescent is currently trying to facilitate at a larger scale by strengthening vulnerable communities’ ability to balance ‘response preparedness’ and ‘mitigation.’
The safest prevention measure is to “avoid the hazard” – an option rarely open to the most marginalized people. For example, many landless in poorer countries and those gravitating towards urban areas in search of brighter futures are compelled to live in the poorest areas, including temporary settlements which are often positioned without any concern in environmental “danger zones.”
If risk reduction is to reach the most vulnerable, it’s good to start with community-based disaster preparedness projects . A range of relief and development organizations – including Red Cross and Red Crescent – have successfully assisted hazard-prone communities in prioritising their risk reduction measures. These include such measures as disaster safety education, effective warning and evacuation systems, protection walls against sea waves, water and sanitation projects to ensure safe drinking water during floods, and river diversion walls.
While such projects are worthy of replication, the main challenge of risk reduction is to address the root causes of vulnerability. Risk reduction programmes must be part of wider development efforts with the ultimate aim of improving living standards so people are less inclined to settle in dangerous areas. These efforts must include protection of minorities, and socio-economic integration of marginalised groups.
Disaster preparedness and risk reduction is value for money. Last year alone natural disasters claimed the lives of 76,000 people, affected another 254 million and caused economic losses of US$55 billion. During the 1990’s, economic losses from natural disasters amounted to over US$600 billion. According to the World Bank, economic losses worldwide from natural disasters could be reduced by as much as US$280 billion by investing around one-seventh of that sum in risk reduction measures.
Governments, international organizations, NGOs, civil society as well as communities and individuals – we all face a steep learning curve on how to combine the relevant aspects of response preparedness, disaster mitigation, protection of livelihood, and poverty alleviation to provide real ‘risk reduction’. And we must be careful not to let the term ‘risk reduction’ turn into something so broad and vague that we lose sight of its individual components!
Addressing the key elements of risk reduction requires:
-
partnerships – not competition – between organisations with a specialised focus towards risk reduction,
-
coordination of the input from different organizations – a role mainly for governments and international organisations suchs as UN and the Red Cross and Red Crescent.
-
a shift in policies: national governments need to redirect some of their disaster relief funds towards support for mitigation initiatives before disasters strike. Likewise, international donors need to see development programmes and environmental rehabilitation and protection as proactive investments in future disaster risk reduction.
Real risk reduction equals long term development. This is the point many organizations are now learning.
*Jørgen Poulsen is the Secretary General of the Danish Red Cross