building disaster resilient communities

United Nations

I S D RInternational Strategy for Disaster Reduction

Building Disaster Resilient Communities Good Practices and Lessons Learned

A Publication of the “Global Network of NGOs” for Disaster Risk Reduction

U ND P

2007

Building Disaster Resilient Communities

Good Practices and Lessons Learned A Publication of the “Global Network of NGOs” for Disaster Risk Reduction

Geneva, June 2007

ii

Disclaimer:The information and opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the policies of the UN/ISDR secretariat.

Please send your feedback and suggestions (including further case studies for consideration) to:

Michele CocchigliaNGO Liaison OfficerUN/ISDR [email protected]/ngos

iii

ForewordDisasters are first and foremost a “local” phenomenon. Local communities areon the frontlines of both the immediate impact of a disaster and the initial,emergency response, which, experience has shown, is crucial for saving themost lives.

It is therefore altogether fitting that we focus our energies on improving localcommunities’ resilience to natural hazards. Local communities are the essentialcornerstone in our effort to make the Hyogo Framework for Action a practical toolfor saving lives and livelihoods.

Disaster risk reduction begins at home – in our schools, places of work andworship, and throughout our local communities. It is here where we will eithersave lives – or lose them – depending on the steps we take today to reduce ourvulnerability to tomorrow’s hazards. For greatest impact, these steps must begrounded in local knowledge and communicated broadly so that everyone,from a local school child to a village grandmother to the municipal mayor,knows how to protect him or herself from nature’s vicissitudes.

Education is vital, as is the sharing of experience within and amongcommunities. As importantly, disaster risk managers need to listen and learnfrom the grassroots up – not vice versa – so that we can build upon examples ofrisk reduction that have been tried and tested in the crucible of localexperience.

This publication, “Building Disaster Resilient Communities: Good Practices &Lessons Learned”, has been developed with that purpose in mind. We hope itwill educate and inspire further practical efforts at the community level whilecontributing to the overall global “movement” for disaster risk reduction.Working together, we can – and will – save lives.

Margareta Wahlström UN Assistant Secretary-General, Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator

v

PrefaceThe Special Unit for South-South Cooperation (SU-SSC), through itsteam at the UNDP Regional Center in Bangkok, has been collaboratingwith the secretariat of the United Nations International Strategy forDisaster Reduction (UN/ISDR) in promoting disaster reduction at alllevels, since 2005. The SU-SSC is proud to jointly publish with theUN/ISDR secretariat a book entitled: "Building Disaster ResilientCommunities: Good Practices and Lessons Learned". This publication is acompilation of articles contributed by Non-Governmental Organizations(NGOs) working in various poor and vulnerable communities in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, Africa, Central Asia, South-East Asia andthe Pacific.

The SU-SSC acknowledges the important role the NGOs play at thelocal, national and international levels in the ongoing process of advocacyfor safer communities. The book clearly illustrates that NGOs workhand in hand with communities to develop their capacities to prevent,prepare for, cope with and respond to disasters. This publication is vitalfor learning lessons and sharing experiences amongst various entities indifferent parts of the world, which forms a solid ground for South-SouthCooperation. This exchange of experiences is consistent with the SU-SSC's Platform for "Sharing of Southern Development Knowledge andSolutions".

Since disasters are recognized to be one major stumbling block inattaining development goals, disaster reduction should be a majorconcern for all. There is a need to promote those disaster reductionactivities that can be replicated, as stated in the book. This book can beused by development practitioners as a reference in their own practice indisaster risk reduction. This knowledge product is another tangible resultof an ongoing meaningful collaboration with the UN/ISDR secretariat.

Yiping ZhouDirector, Special Unit for South-South Cooperation, UNDP

vii

IntroductionThis publication is a joint effort of the “Global Network of NGOs for Disaster Risk Reduction”, an emerging networkof national and international NGOs aiming to reduce disaster risk worldwide. The idea of publishing acompilation of good practices in Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) has come out from aconsultative meeting held with the core members of the “Global Network of NGOs” in Geneva, in October 2006.

This publication showcases the essential roles played by NGOs in addressing disaster risks at the local communitylevel. It makes the case for increased community-oriented DRR action, and is aimed to stimulate more interest inthe subject from donors, policy makers, as well as other stakeholders.

To this end, close to 100 case studies have been collected through the Network members from different parts ofthe world. To make the task easier, practitioners were only asked to fill-in a questionnaire by “bullet-pointing” veryspecific answers. To conclude the process, the “good practices” compiled in this publication were selected andpolished. The remaining ones will be used for other forthcoming publications and will be uploaded on the ISDRwebsite for consultation.

Most of the good practices were or are implemented by local NGOs, with support from international NGOs,donors, and regional organizations. All of the cases involve disaster-vulnerable communities, either directly orthrough community-based structures. The good practices selected also reflect the way disaster risk reduction is“understood” and implemented in different regions, and offer unique perspectives of and approaches to CBDRR.

For ease of reference, an abstract is provided at the beginning of each good practice and each of them is presentedin a format that enables the reader to go directly to a particular section of the case study (lessons learned, potentialfor replication, and so forth). Contact details for each of the case studies presented are also available at the end ofthe publication.

For a good practice to be of immediate practical use, it must be replicable in and relevant to the reader’s context.Hence, one of the criteria for selecting the present good practices in CBDRR was their potential for replication.Additionally, attention was also paid to geographical balance and thematic coverage.

As an initial step, this compilation provides a good introduction of the essential role of NGOs in reducingcommunity risks and vulnerabilities to disasters and guidance for various actors to learn from these good practicesand utilize them in their activities. The next step will be to improve and evolve this publication by adding furthercollections of similar case studies, as well as subsequent analyses of the trends and features observed.

Our hope is that this first publication will generate more interest in the subject, and allow for a morecomprehensive picture of community-based disaster risk reduction to be presented to the world.

R. Alain ValencyEditor

* For more information on the “Global Network of NGOs” visit www.unisdr.org/ngos

1

Afghanistan Raising Awareness of Risk through Radio Drama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Tearfund

xBangladesh Voluntary Formation of Community Organizations to Implement DRR . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Practical Action BangladeshxEcuador "Critical Video Analysis" of Volcanic Eruption Mitigation Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Catholic Relief Services (CRS)xEl Salvador Children and Youth at the Centre of Disaster Risk Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Plan InternationalxHaiti Community Members Design and Implement Information

Campaigns for Their Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Oxfam GB

xIndia Masons with a Disaster Risk Reduction Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

SEEDS IndiaxIndia Disaster Micro-Insurance Scheme for Low-Income Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

All India Disaster Mitigation Institute (AIDMI) xIndonesia Combining Science and Indigenous Knowledge to Build a

Community Early Warning System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26PMPB - Community Association for Disaster Management (In partnership with Yayasan Pikul)

xKenya Linking Relief and Development through the Drought Cycle

Management Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Catholic Organisation for Relief and Development (CORDAID) (In partnership with CODES, PISP and CIFA)

xKyrgyzstan Rural, School "Disaster Teams" to Boost Preparedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Christian Aid (In partnership with Shoola)xMalawi Small and Medium-Scale Initiatives to Control River Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Tearfund (In partnership with Eagles)xNamibia Supporting Local Decision Making with Inter-Community Platform

and Local-Level Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Desert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN)

xPeru Disaster Prevention among Native and Mestizo Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

German Agro Action (In partnership with ITDG - Soluciones Practicas)xPhilippines Mainstreaming Community-Based Mitigation in City Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

Center for Disaster Preparedness (CDP)xTajikistan Sustaining Community DRR with "Endowment Funds" and

Natural Resources Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49CARE International

xVietnam Flood and Typhoon-Resilient Homes through Cost-Effective Retrofitting . . . . . . . . . . .52

Development Workshop France (DWF)

Table of contents

3


Raising Awareness of Risk through Radio Drama Heightening Awareness of the Need for Disaster Risk Reduction in AfghanistanTearfund

Afghanistan

Afghanistan is not only a country that has suffered fromwars and conflicts; it is also prone to disasters (earthquakes,avalanches, floods, drought, etc.) and its humandevelopment index is one of the lowest in the world. Partlybecause of its mountain ranges, the country is alsohindered by lack of transport; hence the existence ofperhaps the most isolated villages in the world. Theseisolated villages are extremely vulnerable to disasters.

Inspired by Priority for Action Three1 of the HyogoFramework for Action (HFA), the international NGOTearfund is working alongside communities, partners andthe Government within Afghanistan to communicateDisaster Risk Reduction (DRR) messages. In August2006, Tearfund entered into an agreement with the BBCWorld Service Trust to integrate, for a one-year period,disaster risk reduction messages into the story lines of thevery successful BBC educational radio programme called"New Home, New Life", NHNL.

The BBC World Service Trust had launched NHNL 13years earlier to support returning internally displaced

persons. Its success is based on its commitment to researchissues that are most relevant to communities themselves.After reviewing the issues with experts, the BBC integratesappropriate community education messages into theprogramme's story lines.

The first four months of implementation of the Tearfund-BBC agreement saw the issues of earthquake, drought andflood explored through drama set in a fictional remotevillage of Afghanistan. Disaster story lines have beenintegrated into the NHNL programme at least every otherweek. The messages are broadcast at certain hours of theday to suit women as well as men. The DRR messageshave reached a wide audience because, among otherreasons, a large section of the Afghan population listens toNHNL.

It is early to assess the full impact of the DRR messages,but there are indications that the communities are keen tolisten and understand more about what they can do intimes of disaster. Also, reports from an evaluation teaminclude evidence of success from the previous story lines.

Abstract

An excerpt from the BBCcartoon publication whichsupports the radio drama

“New Home, New Life”

1 HFA Priority for Action Three: Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels.

4

Good Practices and Lessons Learned

This is a disaster riskcommunication project basedon the use of provencommunication practicestargeting local communities.disaster risk reductionmessages are integrated intothe story lines of the verysuccessful BBC educationalradio programme called "NewHome, New Life", NHNL.As the NHNL was launchedby the BBC World ServiceTrust 13 years earlier tosupport returning internallydisplaced Afghans, it isbroadcast in two Afghanlanguages. The DRR-relatedproject includes a disaster-based radio drama series set ina fictional remote village inAfghanistan.

As between 60 to 68 per centof those who have radio sets inAfghanistan listen to the BBCprogramme which is broadcastfive times a week in the Dariand Pashtu languages, theDRR messages have reached awide audience. Between two tofour times per month, aprogramme on the findings ofa research conducted atcommunity level and anexpert-advised story line ondisaster issues are broadcast.The story lines are generallyhazard specific and are run forup to a period of four monthsas a reoccurring theme (e.g.April to August onearthquakes). The programmesare rebroadcast at differenttimes of the day and are airedon a variety of radiofrequencies and channels toensure wider audience. Thestory lines have been operatingsince July 2006.

Goal and Objectives

Afghanistan is not only a country that has suffered from wars and conflicts; it is alsoa country prone to earthquakes, avalanches, floods and drought, and its humandevelopment index (HDI) is one of the lowest in the world. Partly because of itsmountain ranges, the country is also hindered by lack of transport; hence theexistence of perhaps the most isolated villages in the world. These isolated villageshappen to be extremely prone to disasters. In the light of this, and as 80 per cent ofAfghans have radio sets in their homes and between 60 to 68 per cent of them listento the above-mentioned NHNL, the idea of integrating disaster risk reduction(DRR) messages into the BBC programme was born.

Moreover, Afghanistan's 2003 National Disaster Management Plan stresses theneed to work closely with communities, yet much of the initial institutionalstrengthening was done at national and provincial levels. The Project thereforeprovided an entry point for community-level action. The idea was that DRRaware communities would be in a better position to engage with local governmentstructures in the development of local disaster management plans.

In view of the above, the major goal of the Project is to support the developmentof disaster-resilient communities across Afghanistan. Its major objectives are:

1. To raise community awareness of hazards and disaster risks; 2. To promote understanding of hazards and communities' vulnerabilities; and 3. To help communities enhance their capacities to address their vulnerabilities.

Outcomes and Activities

Following an initial period of research and consultation, Tearfund entered into acontract with the BBC World Service Trust in August 2006 for an initial one-yearperiod. Because a large section of the Afghan population listens to NHNL andits supporting programmes, research for the DRR-related radio programming isbeing conducted across a variety of different provinces, covering multiple hazardsand involving programme recording with trained actors in the capital, Kabul. Tomaximize impact, NHNL not only bases its messages on the research conductedat community level, it also ensures that the messages are broadcast at certainhours of the day that suit women as well as men.

A typical real-life community disaster reduction story picked by NHNL as anentry point for its programmes - and accompanying features and publications - isthe following. One community recalled when forests of tamarind treessurrounding their village had been cleared so that the trees could be sold, and thisresulted in heavy destruction caused by a flood. After hearing on NHNL, a fewyears ago, that destroying forests could lead to destructive flood impact on farmsand houses, the community established a local council and decided to fine anyonewho cuts trees. The forest trees have now been growing for 4-5 years and thecommunity is happy with the many benefits accruing from them: no flood impacton houses, less dust, good pastures for animals, etc.

It is early to understand the full impact of the DRR messages, but indications are thatthe communities are keen to listen and understand more about what they can do intimes of disaster. Also, reports from an evaluation team include evidence of success bythe previous story lines. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the messages is indeedbeing conducted, and those who use the programme material in their projects are alsobeing asked to provide information on their effectiveness.

The Initiative

5


The good practice in the Project lies in thecommitment of NHNL to make the programme asaccessible and acceptable as possible to Afghancommunities. The comprehensive research on thecontext of the issues faced by communities makes theprogramme very popular. Also, the programmedesign team has a clear understanding of dialects,accents and listeners' motivations. And theinvolvement of experts - such as Tearfund - tosupport and advise on key messages responding tothe communities' felt and expressed needs helpsensure relevance and effectiveness.

Moreover, an innovative element is the fact thatNHNL is also supported by a series ofsupplementary feature programmes which expand onsome of the issues raised in the dramas. The featureprogrammes pick the findings of the communityresearch and communicate actual examples ofcommunity actions or evidence of learnt messages.The feature programmes also provide supportinginformation for community structures to debate theissues raised. NHNL also has a quarterlypublication that repeats the messages in cartoonformat for partners to circulate and use in theirdiscussions with communities. The BBC WorldService Trust can also produce children'spublications relating to the messages, which can beused in formal and informal learning methods.

Another innovative element is the use of communityradio to reach some communities which sometimescan be reached only after a three-day donkey-ridingjourney. Community radio is a cost-effective andeffective way to reach the large section of thepopulation (80 per cent) who have radio sets in theirhomes. Indeed, the communities' remoteness makeshands-on community-based projects extremelydifficult, if not impossible

The Good PracticeLessons Learned

The key lessons learned from this project are:

• The messages need to be integrated effectivelyinto a drama that is entertaining. In-depthanalyses of issues are needed but they are notalways possible.

• The opportunity to get community socialnetworks or mobilizing structures to discuss themessages needs to be nurtured. It is hoped thatthe above-mentioned separate stand-alone audiostories will help trigger local debates.

• There is a need to work closely with the BBC toensure that its staff members have anunderstanding of the basic concepts of DRR.This would help script writers communicate themessages effectively in a culturally relevant way.

The key success factors are:

• NHNL can be integrated into any community-based DRR project implemented in Afghanistan.The programme story lines will be extracted ontoa separate set of audios which can be used in astand-alone setting. Also, Tearfund's currentchairmanship of the Disaster Risk ReductionConsortium in Afghanistan will facilitate thecirculation of the audios. The Consortium is anNGO network linked to the Government and theUN and which is dedicated to sharing goodpractices and lessons learnt.

• The programme can address multi-hazard issuesin one setting. Displacement and migration is stillcommon place in Afghanistan, and understandingthe different hazards that communities could facewhen they are displaced into a new location is alsobeneficial.

Potential for Replication

Even though it is not unusual for community messages to be communicated through radio drama in other countries,NHNL has been designed specifically for Afghanistan. Also, the cost of having consistent and long-term communityresearchers may be high, but it provides the most accurate understanding of the needs of communities and thereforethe best point of departures for effective and relevant messages. If these two issues are dealt with adequately, theProject can be easily replicated through state-funded radio programmes as part of an integrated package of DRRinitiatives at community level.

6


Voluntary Formation of CommunityOrganizations to Implement DRRForming and Strengthening CBOs to Implement DRR Activities in Communities Practical Action Bangladesh

Bangladesh

Bangladesh is known worldwide for its recurrent flooddisasters. To help address community vulnerability tofloods, Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) havebeen formed voluntarily by selected communityvolunteers under an ongoing project entitled"Mainstreaming Livelihood-Centered Approaches toDisaster Management". The CBOs are involved fromthe initial stage of problem and solution identificationand participate in the implementation of community-based activities through the country's ParticipatoryAction Plan Development (PAPD).

During the planning phase, the CBOs identify theirvulnerabilities and prioritize their needs with minimum

assistance from the project staff. The project aims tohelp reduce the vulnerability of the communities torecurrent flooding problems while lifting them fromextreme poverty and insecurity.

Adopting a participatory approach to problem andsolution identification has strengthened the socialbondage of the community. The approach creates self-confidence among the poorest and most vulnerablefamilies. In addition, the CBOs are responsible fordisseminating early warning messages to thecommunities and creating mass awareness. They arealso charged with rescuing marooned people in times offlood disaster.

Abstract

An informal meeting withcommunity members

7


This is a community-basedparticipatory project that is partof an ongoing larger projectentitled "MainstreamingLivelihood-Centered Approachesto Disaster Management." It is about forming voluntarycommunity-based organizationsand strengthening them toassume a leading role in theformulation and implementationof Disaster Risk Reduction(DRR) or disaster resilience-related projects initiated by thecommunity.

The project was launched inJanuary 2006, lasting five years.It is being implemented inNorthwestern Bangladesh in thefollowing unions (lowest tiers oflocal government): KamarganiUnion in Gaibanda District;Sariakandi and Norsi unions inBogra District; and Kazipur andMaizbari unions in SiraiganiDistrict. The three districts arelocated on the Western bank ofJamuna River in NorthwesternBangladesh.

Practical Action Bangladesh andits local partner NGOs areimplementing the project.Stakeholders are differentcommunity groups like marginalfarmers, fishermen, daily-wagelabourers, local elected bodies,local educational institutions andgovernment service providers.The project, which targets 33,000men, women and children from6,000 households, is funded bythe UK government Departmentfor International Development(DFID), based on previousPractical Action Bangladeshexperience of working with localcommunities susceptible toflooding.

Goal and Objectives

The project aims to demonstrate that increasing the resilience of poorcommunities' livelihoods reduces vulnerability to disaster risk whilecontributing to poverty reduction. Evidence of the impact of this approachis used to influence local government officials and policy makers to be moreresponsive to the needs of the poor.


The project supports CBOs to implement the identified activities bytransferring technology, strengthening capacity and providing input support.The baseline for solution identification is hazard analysis, together withvulnerability and capacity assessments, all based on the sustainablelivelihoods approach. In addition, the CBOs are responsible fordisseminating early warning messages to the communities and creating massawareness. They are also charged with rescuing marooned people in times offlood disaster.

As a result of this project, the livelihoods of community members have beenstrengthened and diversified. Union and upazila2 disaster managementcommittees have been cooperative, as are upazila service providers(Agriculture, Fisheries, Livestock, etc.). Liaison with district officialsindicates their willingness to try to incorporate a livelihoods approach intolocal and eventually national development and disaster plans, making themmore responsive and effective in enabling poor communities to reducedisaster risks that threaten their livelihoods.

Other outcomes of this project include: strengthened community cohesionand social bondage, communities' increased capacity to make informeddecisions regarding their own well-being, and increased self-confidenceamong the poorest and most vulnerable families, all as a result of CBOs'involvement in the decision-making process.

As this is an ongoing project, it is too early to identify concrete andverifiable results regarding policy influencing.

The Initiative

2 Upazila: Intermediate tier of local government between union and district

Participatory development of an action plan

8


The good practice lies in the fact that the project isbased on a participatory approach wherebyfacilitation techniques are used to empowercommunities to assess their vulnerabilities andcapacities in the face of identified hazards. Theirinvolvement in identifying their problems, solutionsand the implementation of their own strategiesempowers them. Appropriate technologies areintroduced to increase their capacity. The key to success is the involvement of thecommunity and the CBO in all stages of the process.Technologies which both strengthen local copingstrategies and diversify livelihood strategies areoffered on demand


The key lessons learnt from this practice are:

• Communities always try to adapt to changingsituations. Initially, they use their indigenousknowledge to cope with the situation.

• Coping strategies are often inadequate and needto be reinforced through training to enhance skillsin alternative livelihood options.

• Technological support is commonly needed bothduring and after flooding.


It would not be difficult to replicate this approach elsewhere. The community-led approach is suitable for any contextand geographical locations. As mentioned earlier, this project is about the voluntary formation of a community-basedorganization (CBO) which brings the community together and which can assume a leading role in the formulation andimplementation of projects initiated by the community. This means that the role of the NGO is only to facilitate andsupport this process. This practice can be replicated in a different context as long as this last principle is applied strictlyand fully.

9


"Critical Video Analysis" of VolcanicEruption Mitigation Project"Critical Video Analysis" of Project Entitled "Communities Affected by Tungurahua: Mitigating the Risks of Living Near an Active Volcano" Catholic Relief Services (CRS)

Ecuador

Tungurahua is one of the most active volcanoes inEcuador. After its eruptive period from 1916 to 1918, itentered a new phase of activity that intensified in 1999,culminating in new eruptions in 2003 and 2006. Thenew eruptions produced mud flows and volcanic ashthat are affecting the country's central provinces, withthe greatest impact in Tungurahua province. Across thearea, the volcano has caused serious damage to theeconomy and health of the affected populations.

In 2003, as new eruptions intensified and the riskspersisted, the roman catholic diocese of Ambato andCatholic Relief Services (CRS) developed a projectentitled "Communities Affected by Tungurahua:Mitigating the Risks of Living Near an ActiveVolcano". The project was financed by the EuropeanCommission Humanitarian aid Office (ECHO)through its disaster preparedness programme calledDIPECHO (Disaster Preparedness, EuropeanCommission Humanitarian aid Office), with supportfrom the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development(CAFOD). The project's objective was to strengthenthe capacity of the communities and institutions affected

by Tungurahua with the goal of reducing the impacts ofcurrent/future disasters through preparation, mitigationand prevention. It benefited 35 high-risk communitiesin Tungurahua province.

The project, which involved the development ofevacuation routes, education regarding threats andconducting risk mapping within at-risk communities,was implemented from 24 March 2005 to 7 December2005 (11 months). When the volcano erupted again on14 July and 16 August 2006, no single death wasreported from communities that participated in theproject.

The present case study is on a recent "Critical VideoAnalysis" of the project, an analysis that set out togather, using a non-traditional medium (videos), thebest practices and lessons learned from the project aswell as the challenges faced during its implementation.The videos are being used with donors, partners andproject promoters/implementers to advance work in thefields of emergency and risk mitigation.

Abstract

An interview in the community of Bilbao

10


The initiative is a "CriticalAnalysis" of a previoussuccesfully implemented multi-partner volcanic eruption riskmitigation project targetingcommunities living near an activevolcano.

The "Critical Analysis" wascarried out on a project entitled"Communities Affected byTungurahua: Mitigating theRisks of Living Near an ActiveVolcano", also referred to asDIPECHO III TungurahuaRisk Mitigation Project. Theproject was implemented incentral Ecuador in the two urbancities of Ambato and Quito andamong the rural communities ofBilbao, Cusua, Cotalo, Pingueand Chacauco, all being high-risk areas in close proximity toTungurahua Volcano inTungurahua Province, centralEcuador. The followingstakeholders were involved in theProject: CRS national andregional staff; EuropeanCommission staff; theEcuadorian Civil Defence;ECHO project beneficiaries,promoters/implementers andpartners (Diocese of Ambato);the National GeophysicalInstitute; provincial authorities;teachers; community leaders andmembers; and HASGAProductions (a media productioncompany).

Even though another phase ofthe DIPECHO III TungurahuaRisk Mitigation Project was notinitially planned, a new riskmitigation project (DIPECHOIV) focusing on flooding is beingdiscussed between CRSregional/national staff, ECHOand HASGA Productions.

Goal and Objectives

The objective of the "Critical Analysis" was to document the effectiveness andimpacts of and lessons learned from the above-mentioned DIPECHO IIITungurahua Risk Mitigation Project - through a non-traditional assessment(videos) of how participating communities responded to recent volcaniceruptions; hence the term "Critical Video Analysis". The assessment focusedon four main aspects: (1) Community emergency response structures; (2)Community emergency response committees and sub-committees; (3)Communications and early warning systems; and (4) Evacuation routes.

The Critical Video Analysis was prompted by the realization that best practicesand lessons learned from the DIPECHO III Risk Mitigation Project, as wellas the challenges faced during its implementation, had to be gathered andanalyzed in an innovative way to enable donors, partners and projectpromoters/implementers to advance similar work in the fields of emergencyand risk mitigation.


The Critical Video Analysis was carried out from November 2006 to 26January 2007. It was entirely funded by CRS, contracted to HASGAProductions, and involved five professionals (two media producers, anemergency expert and an international development expert) and 20interviewees.

Regarding beneficiaries of the initiative, their number is still to be determinedas it is contingent on the number of professionals, donors and beneficiariesthat have the opportunity to see the videos. To date, some 75 to 100development professionals have watched the videos.

The impact of the Critical Video Analysis is collective "re-visiting" of theProject, which has served as a constructive learning process for projectpromoters/implementers, donors and partners. For the project beneficiaries, ithas served as a content review and has given a chance to share concerns.

The concrete results of the Critical Video Analysis initiative are the two videosproduced (Video One lasting 10 and Video Two lasting 24 minutes). Itsverifiable results are the documented testimonies of project beneficiaries,promoters/implementers and partners.

The Initiative

A school roof collapsed under the weight of volcanic ash

11


This Critical Video Analysis initiative is considered a goodpractice not only because the knowledge gained allows forproject and programme improvement, but also the exercisewas more critical and objective than a traditional "lessonslearned" review. Indeed, contracting outside theorganization brought fresh perspectives and objectivecritical assessments, and eventually broadened the projectunderstanding within the field of internationaldevelopment.

The initiative is innovative as it contains a strong artisticelement which makes the delivery of the analyses more"user friendly" and therefore accessible to both specialists(donors, professionals, etc.) and the public at large in aquick, enjoyable medium rather than a verbose documentfull of technical jargons.

The initiative was implemented through the two videosthat were produced, involving 20 interviews with projectdonors, partners, promoters/implementers andbeneficiaries. The interviews include commentaries fromthe leadership of CRS, ECHO, the National CivilDefence, the National Geophysical Institute and localpartners, as well as thoughts and recommendations on theproject from civilians affected by the recent volcaniceruptions. The initiative was initiated by CRS andfacilitated by a CRS staff member in collaboration with twoHASGA Productions staff members.

Strategies and methods that were implemented includedparticipatory processes such as interviews and collaborativemeetings, and contracting project implementation outsidethe organization for the sake of greater objectivity.

The key success/failure factors include: (1) Logisticalchallenges posed by timely completion of interviews in twodifferent cities and five different rural communities locatedin difficult-to-reach regions near the volcano; (2)Extracting, re-phrasing and editing contents that wereappropriate but not "video friendly".

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe key lessons learned from this practice stemfrom the valuable feedback that came from bothproject promoters/implementers and beneficiaries,who indicated that the training worked as planned(i.e. saving lives) and that they were grateful forthe project's implementation. Their subjectivetestimonies also corroborated the facts that thecommunication systems, evacuation routes andemergency committees established weresuccessful, which was statistically supported byzero death among participating communitiesduring the most recent eruptions.

As mentioned above, one of the major challengeswas logistics. Coordinating all necessaryinterviewees, in a total of at least six differentcities/pueblos, in countless different settings(offices, communities, shelter sites, kitchens,destroyed buildings, etc.) and in difficult-to-reachareas was a significantly large hurdle. This wasovercome by solid communication and jointtravels by CRS and HASGA Productions staff aswell as through a shortened project timeframewhich required more focused and efficient work.

A critical conclusion from the project analysis isthat more emphasis could have been placed oncommunity post-disaster management and therestoration of livelihoods. Specifically mentionednumerous times was the lack of post-disasterpsychosocial support both for children and adults,and how unprepared beneficiaries were to thisparticular aspect of emergency. Also, certaincommunities now find themselves divided betweentwo different shelters, which obviously affect thefunctioning of both individual communitymembers and the community as a whole.


This project would be very easy to replicate, provided that organizational funds are available to hire a mediaproduction company, and that staff are available to facilitate and direct its implementation.

This said, the benefits of this project are directly linked to the context of implementation as the same partners andbeneficiaries involved in a previous project where also part of this one. This allowed for continued strengthening ofworking relations with partners and of previously established relationships with beneficiaries, as well as the ability toengage all project parties - donors, partners and individuals - into the critical analysis.

The practice could also be replicated in a different context through carrying out the critical analysis during the projectimplementation instead of after its completion.

12


Children and Youth at the Centreof Disaster Risk ReductionChildren in El Salvador at the Centre of Disaster Risk ReductionPlan International

El Salvador

Children represent more than a third of disastervictims, yet the humanitarian sector generally restrictstheir role in disasters to that of passive victims. Yet,involving children directly in Disaster Risk Reduction(DRR) activities enables them to develop skills to beprepared for any threat. Furthermore, the emphasison rights-based approaches to humanitarian workbrings forward the right of children and youth to beprotected from hazards and vulnerabilities throughtheir participation in disaster-related decisions andefforts.

In the light of all the above, Plan International hasmobilized children and youth in El Salvador, CentralAmerica, to play a significant role in environmentalresources management and disaster risk reduction. Thechildren and youth have worked with their communitiesin developing risk maps, designing communityemergency plans, setting up early warning systems, andimplementing response, mitigation and risk reductionplans, among other activities. Plan International'sexperience in El Salvador has already been replicated inother Central American countries.

Abstract

Children participating in Plan International’s

DRR activties

13


This project has evolved from an initialdisaster preparedness initiative targetingcommunities affected by Hurricane Mitch in1998, two earthquakes in 2001, and morerecently by Hurricane Stan in 2005. Previousresponse and preparedness work has sincebeen extended to disaster risk reduction. PlanInternational's disaster management activitiesin the targeted Salvadorian communitiesbegan in 2002, in response to the impacts ofHurricane Mitch in 1998. The DRR phaseof the work began in January 2006 withDecember 2010 as its completion date.

The project is implemented in 12municipalities of three departments (LaLibertad, Chalatenango and San Salvador) inEl Salvador, Central America. 56 targetedcommunities and youth groups are involvedin the project, as partners. They first cametogether in response to Hurricane Mitch in1998 and to the 2001 earthquakes.Stakeholders include: local and nationalauthorities (Health Ministry, EducationMinistry, Environment Ministry, theDepartment of Civil Defence, the NationalService for Territorial Studies); CSO/NGOsconcerned with disaster management;community leaders and volunteers'organizations; the National University'sFaculty of Medicine; the Central AmericanUniversity; ACISAM (Association forTraining and Research for Mental Health);the El Salvador Red Cross; the Centre forTropical Agriculture Research and Education(CATIE); and the Maquilishuat Foundation.

The targeted beneficiaries are: 56communities; 56 youth groups (1,120 girlsand boys); community emergencycommittees that were formed and trained atcommunity and municipal levels (1,740women and men); and 50 schools thatreceived disaster prevention training. Thedifferent phases of the project have beenfunded by the Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency (CIDA), the EuropeanCommission, the UK Government'sDepartment for International Development(DfID) and Plan International.

Goal and Objectives

The project's main goal is to reduce the impact of disasters onthe targeted communities, especially on children and youth. Theproject's purpose is to strengthen the capabilities of 56communities in El Salvador to withstand disasters, developingreplicable disaster risk reduction practices centred on children intheir communities, thus contributing to positive changes in local,national, and international policies and practices.

With children representing more than a third of disaster victims,the humanitarian sector can no longer restrict children's role indisasters to that of passive victims. Providing children theopportunity to be directly involved in DRR activities enablesthem to develop skills to be prepared for any threat.Furthermore, the emphasis on rights-based approaches tohumanitarian work brings forward the right of children andyouth to be protected from hazards and vulnerabilities throughtheir participation in decision making and efforts to addressdisaster management and risk reduction. This is in line with theinternational legal framework set under the UN Convention ofthe Rights of the Child, which upholds children's rights toprotection (Article 6) as well as participation (Articles 12, 13).


The project activities have expanded to cover training andcapacity building on risk reduction and mitigation through toolssuch as: participatory vulnerability assessment; risk vulnerabilityand capacity mapping; preparation of community plans;coordination and mobilization of groups with municipalgovernments, schools and CSOs. Support has also beenprovided for micro-projects defined by youth groups (to raiseawareness of risk reduction and assist an expanding range ofsmall disaster prevention projects) and to strengthen inter-institutional networks to ensure children's voice in these projects.

The Initiative

School children prepare disaster management and risk reduction plans

14


As a result, the following outcomes have been achieved:

• Increased community, CSO/NGO and government capacity to manage child-centred DRR processes, through theintegration of child and youth participation in planning, implementation and evaluation.

• Partnership established with the Education Ministry to integrate and scale up "School Protection Plans" whichensure DRR mainstreaming into school infrastructure, teacher training and curriculum integration, and theimplementation of complementary projects on environmental management and risk reduction.

• Increased knowledge, among policy makers and other national and international actors (international humanitarianNGOs, academics, media, etc.), of the importance of child and youth participation in DRR.

• Strengthening of risk management actions and DRR by youth in communities, schools and municipalities.• Incidence in public policies for the reduction of disaster risk with the participation of children.• Communication and dissemination of child-centred DRR learning material.• 50 schools have designed hazard maps and mobilized resources to implement their own disaster management plans

to address identified risks in their communities.• School-based emergency committees are now functional in 56 most vulnerable communities.• Regular meetings and interaction between 56 local emergency committees, school-based committees, health units,

municipal disaster preparedness task forces and other stakeholders.• Youth have advocated for greater attention and action on disaster prevention by authorities.• Children's participation in the following areas: managing evacuation centres, protecting river banks, protecting their

families and communities, and implementing environmental management projects3.

This project is a good practice because of its emphasis onintegrating children and youth in disaster management. Inparticular, it proves the need for inclusion of their voice andagency in ensuring a holistic approach to disastermanagement (including preparedness and mitigation), andsupports the value of a rights-based approach to child-centred DRR.

The innovative elements of the Project include the targetingof children as actors and agents of change - whereby child-focused risk reduction can tangibly help reduce disasterthreats and impacts. In particular, the Project offersimplications for conceptual approaches to riskcommunication and how this might influence the design ofearly warning systems and community mitigation planning.

Success has been observed, with noted added-value insupporting the children's and youth's roles in riskcommunication, education/awareness raising, advocacy andpractical risk reduction activities. The key success factors ofthis project are: (1) The communities' trust in an outsideagent helping support the organisation of youth groups; (2)The communities' strong sense of social cohesion; and (3)The communities' support for the establishment of anenvironment that is conducive to child participation.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedKey lessons learned from this practiceinclude:

• Not only do children and youth haveunique needs in disasters, they also offer apotential role as a resource or receiver ofinformation.

• Young people can act as informants withinunofficial communication networks whichevolve within a community setting as theneed arises, and thus have an importantrole in information dissemination.

• In communities with high poverty indices(i.e., where parents are illiterate, do nothave the time to attend training/meetings,share a strong sense of apathy orsubordination, or do not have access toinformation sources), children and youthalready play a major role as interpretersand relays of messages to their householdsand communities.

3 For instance, youths from 45 communities have participated in a waste recycling project, whereby tons of plastic waste have beencollected and sold to a recycling company.

15


• In all community and household settings, there is a need to promote greater awareness of thevalue of listening to children. In many societies, neither parents nor teachers believe thatchildren have a useful role or have relevant things to say.

• Children are able to convey messages with a meaning shared by their families and friends, andthey are generally trusted by message recipients. As the child is embedded within the familystructure, this relationship means risk information and mitigation actions may be continuallyreaffirmed, whereas external messages rely on small windows of opportunity to conveyinformation and influence action.

• Risk maps carried out with youth groups show that children understand and can respondconstructively to and communicate effectively about the risks they recognize4.

• Children recognize the wider nature of risk reduction (e.g. how seemingly unrelated externalfactors such as abuse and lack of love can greatly influence their vulnerability). This points tothe need for a holistic approach to DRR - addressing vulnerabilities related to health,environment, education, religion, household economic security and other sectors, which impacttogether on a community and individual's wellbeing.

• Children offer immense creativity and the will to reduce risk. When given the resources and theopportunity to take action, children can become catalysts of simple yet significant strategies tomake their communities safer.

• Children are able to participate beyond a disaster preparedness role, into taking action in riskreduction and even disaster prevention work. This includes taking charge of their riskenvironment, acting to control it, and through their actions obliging not only their parents andpeers to take notice but also promoting changes in local government policies .

• Direct involvement in disaster management work gives children a better sense of community andcivic consciousness while they are still young.

Major challenges faced by this initiative include:

• The existing gap between stated positions and the practice of humanitarian agencies on applyingadult participation in itself; with most agency representatives dismissing child participation asimpractical and marginal compared to other DRR stakeholders .

• As power and authority on disaster management are being increasingly granted to technical andsectoral agencies, non-participatory practices are undermining the ability of local communities torespond (including children and youth who form up to 50 per cent of vulnerable populations).

• In El Salvador, one of the Project's key humanitarian partners was at first quite sceptical aboutengaging children and youth in disaster management and mitigation. However, the Project hasprovided evidence that children bring with them dynamism to add to adult experience, and thepartner now believes that "working with children and youth in communities leads tosustainability; adults have certain taboos and will accommodate to disasters but children aremore prepared to change and develop a culture of prevention and mitigation". The localhumanitarian partner had never originally planned or appreciated the need to work withchildren, but this project has shown them that children bring with them dynamism to add toadult experience.

4 Agencies attribute the constraints of engaging with children as: the difficulties experienced in an emergency, the culture of the societyexperiencing the disaster, as well as the attitudes and approaches of other external stakeholders.

16



With appropriate capacity building on child protection and child participation skills as well as a conducive policyenvironment whereby stakeholders (those in authority - including parents and teachers) are appreciative andsupportive of children and youth participation, the practice of child-centred disaster risk reduction can be replicatedelsewhere and in different contexts.

The Project's outcome to date has benefited from Plan International's operational programme approach centred onchild participation in community development being implemented in the localities. Therefore, Plan International'soverall work has provided a platform for carrying out the child-centred disaster risk reduction initiative.

Plan International is working on developing replicable tools for implementing child and youth-centred DRR as a wayto contribute to positive changes in local, national, and international disaster management policies and practices.

Meanwhile, Plan International's experience in El Salvador has already been replicated in other Central Americancountries affected by Hurricane Mitch and other natural hazards. Lessons learnt from El Salvador's experience inchild-centred DRR have also been adopted in Plan International's disaster management initiatives in Asia and Africa.

17


Community Members Design and Implement Information Campaigns for Their CommunitiesCommunity-Based Information Campaigns for Disaster PreparednessOxfam UK

Haiti

Haiti is known for its extreme vulnerability to naturalhazards. In 2004, innovative community-basedinformation campaigns were developed in the NorthernHaiti town of Cap-Haitian, as part of a "Community-Based Disaster Preparedness Project". The approach tocommunication and public awareness allowed 22 newlycreated Local Civil Protection Committees (LCPCs) todesign and implement their own information campaignsfor their communities. Each of the 22 local committeeswas given technical support and project funding todesign and implement its own disaster risk reductioncampaign.

Because the local actors were asked to develop their owncampaigns, the communication methods used weregenuinely adapted and "acceptable" and proved to beeffective. Final evaluations of the project showed thatthe approach to risk communication contributedsignificantly to developing a "culture of safety" amongthe 22 communities targeted. It modified the risk-related attitude and behaviour of the people at risk andstimulated community participation in disastermitigation.

Abstract

A panel created by the LocalCivil Protection Committees

in September 2004

18


The project was acommunity information andawareness sub-component ofa larger "Community-BasedDisaster PreparednessProject".

The information campaignswere carried out in 22 high-risk outlying settlementareas of the Northern Haititown of Cap-Haitian. Someof the communities targeted(nine) were located on theprecarious mountainsideoverlooking the town, whilethe others were in thelowlands along the banks ofHaut-du-Cap River. Thetotal population of the 22settlements in 2004 wasbetween 124,900 and368,600 people. Such a bigdifference between the twofigures was due to constantmigration and the difficultyof conducting censussurveys in the areas. Twenty-two newly created LocalCivil Protection Committees(LCPCs) were involved inthe planning andimplementation of theinformation campaign,which amounts to some 550people (as each committeehad about 25 members).The local Oxfam GB teamwhich developed andsupervised the initiative wasalso involved through aproject coordinator, a projectofficer and six promoters.

The project was funded bythe Directorate-General ofthe European CommissionHumanitarian aid Office -Disaster Preparedness (DGECHO - DIPECHO).

Goal and Objectives

The larger project's goal was to reduce the vulnerability to natural hazards of some80,000 people living in the most high-risk outlying settlement areas of the NorthernHaiti town of Cap Haitian. The larger project was implemented between the secondhalf of 2003 and October 2004. The planning of the information campaign began inJune-July 2004 and the information campaigns culminated in August-September2004. The larger "Community-Based Disaster Preparedness Project" was only the firstof a series of projects that are part of Oxfam GB's overall disaster risk reductionstrategy in Haiti. From October 2004 to 2007, this disaster preparedness project wasfollowed up by several other projects and was replicated in 15 other municipalities.Nevertheless, the specific community-based information campaign component,successful though it may be, has not been replicated per se yet.

Among the expected results of the larger project were: (1) Improved disasterpreparation and mitigation for 22 high-risk urban settlements; (2) Improvedawareness and knowledge of and attitude in relation to risks and disasters among thetargeted communities.


First, workshops on the communication and information campaigns were conductedwith members of the 22 Local Civil Protection Committees (LCPCs). During theworkshops and follow-up meetings, the LCPCs planned and developed theircampaign activities. As a general pattern, they all decided to combine twocommunication methods that are very popular in Haiti: festive event/communityassembly and information billboard.

To implement these activities, each LCPC received a grant worth 5,000 gourdes(about 150 USD) under a funding protocol. (Each LCPC also raised at least anadditional 150 USD from LCPC members themselves and from other communitymembers). To motivate further the LCPCs' commitment to developing good qualitycampaigns, it was decided that an incentive would be awarded to the best campaign- in the form of cash toward a community disaster fund worth about 2,000 USD.Indicators were also developed and shared with LCPC members to evaluate thecampaigns.

As a result, 22 two-sided billboards were set up and strategically positioned in thecommunities, and 22 half-day community assemblies/events were held, each timegathering over 400 people. To gather people, the events usually started with a soccermatch and ended with a dance party. In all the settlements, big decorated podiumswere installed with complete sound systems where the Committees organized disasterquiz with small prizes, rescue demonstration, short drama plays as well as formalpresentation of the Committee members and their roles, the community warningsystem and evacuation system, the contingency plans, etc. Some of the LCPCs alsoinvited local singers and dance groups for some traditional performance.

Finally, because of the high quality of the campaigns, each Committee received aprize. The eight best campaigns received 20,000 gourdes (about 600 USD) for theircommunity disaster funds; the rest received 10,000 gourdes (about 300 USD) alsofor their community disaster funds. Most of the committees used their funds tocomplete their disaster response kits (rescue, clearing and communicationequipment); others used them to organize and duplicate more training (specificallyon water rescue - with support from City Council fire-fighters and the Red Cross)or open bank accounts to support their operating costs.

The Initiative

19


This was a good practice because it served successfullytwo purposes - public awareness and capacity building -and it effectively helped enhance the safety of thepopulation at risk.

An innovative aspect was real optimization of localknowledge and local resources by local stakeholders, aswell as significant mobilization of the creative andinnovative energies of local actors (including local artists- Haiti is well known for its paintings - and localtraditions to facilitate community assemblies - wherelocal voodoo groups presented traditional dances, etc.).These resulted in genuine ownership by andempowerment of local actors and groups.

At the end of the project, two types of evaluation werecarried out: (1) A traditional evaluation; (2) AKnowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) survey. Bothshowed similar findings: In terms of socialvulnerability/capacity, the larger project facilitated andencouraged the creation of a new social dynamics wherepeople shared values and behaviours towardscooperation amongst themselves but also a proactiveresponsibility towards the community. Regardingindividual attitudes and behaviours, a more responsibleand proactive conduct was observed as the populationwas keener to evacuate preventively. Indeed, it was thefirst time that people in Cap Haitian evacuated willingly,with their belongings, before it started raining heavily.The presence of about 430 families (2,550 people) fromthe most high-risk areas was recorded in LCPC-managed evacuation centres the night before HurricaneJeanne struck.

A key success factor of this initiative was thecombination of two main communication modes: (1) Apermanent one - the billboard (most of the billboardswere still standing and visible two years after the end ofthe project); (2) A one-off one - the festiveevent/assembly.


Key lessons learned from this practice were:

• It is essential that public awareness activities onpreparedness and risk reduction are carried out on asustained basis with the active participation andimplication of local actors. One-off public awarenessand information campaigns have little positiveimpact on risk reduction. However, even though thecampaigns were a one-off activity, they werefollowed by several other initiatives (more traditionalones like the use of broadcast media, radio soapopera especially designed for Cap-Haitian, printbrochures, calendars, celebration of the internationalDay for Disaster Reduction, etc.). These initiativeswere also combined with labour intensive low-costmitigation activities as demonstrative measures toreduce risks (cleaning and rehabilitation of drainage,evacuation stairs, protection walls, etc.). Now in2007, the Committees and the population haveremained actively mobilized and engaged in disasterrisk reduction.

This said, several difficulties were encountered duringthe project, including:

• To be able to provide adequate support to thedevelopment of the campaigns, the project teamneeded to have good knowledge and experience intwo disciplines: communication and disaster riskmanagement.

• The information campaign initiative was very time-consuming and the project team had to deploy lotsof efforts and demonstrate tenacity (in supervisionand support) to ensure a good quality campaign andgood financial management by the Committees.


As this practice is driven exclusively by local practices and local resources, it has a great potential for replication.

20


Masons with a Disaster RiskReduction Mission Toward a Disaster-Resilient Built Environment: Creating a Culture of Safe BuildingsSustainable Environment and Ecological Development Society(SEEDS)

India

Following the devastating 2001 earthquake in GujaratState, Western India, rehabilitation programmesincorporated several Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)features. Among them was an initiative by theSustainable Environment and Ecological DevelopmentSociety (SEEDS) to create a pool of masons trained inearthquake-resistant construction. The cadre of trainedmasons was expected to address the immediate need forreconstruction and a long-term need for a culture ofsafe buildings.

Over the years, the SEEDS Mason Association (SMA)has expanded to an 800-member organization, of which200 have been certified by the Government for having

reached internationally accepted standards inconstruction skills. The masons are now serving theirlocal communities, educating fellow masons in otherregions at similar risk, as well as responding in disaster-hit areas for shelter reconstruction and capacitybuilding.

The SMA initiative is an effort in consolidating trainingand research on good quality safe construction practiceat grassroots level. The Association also acts as aninformation centre for dissemination of moderntechnologies in construction through newsletters andpublic meetings.

Abstract

Masons certificationprogramme in Datrana village,

Patan District of Gujarat

21


This is a disaster risk reductionprogramme aimed at creating aculture of safe buildings under thefollowing vision: "A Disaster-Resilient Built Environment".

Training activities were initiated inGujarat State, Western India, in2001, but the SMA was formed in2004. The first members of theAssociation were fromcommunities affected by the 2001Gujarat earthquake. They weretrained by engineers and architectsfrom SEEDS. It was their wish tosustain their learning and share itwith more like-minded individuals.

Over the years, the SEEDSMason Association (SMA) hasexpanded to an 800-memberorganization, of which 200 havebeen certified by the Governmentfor reaching internationallyaccepted standards in constructionskills. It is expected that theAssociation, which has now acountrywide presence, willcontinue to grow and serve theneeds of the burgeoning buildingindustry in the country. It wouldfocus its efforts in creatingresilience among communities atrisk to natural disasters.

Goal and Objectives

Following the devastating 2001 earthquake in the Indian State ofGujarat, the Sustainable Environment and Ecological DevelopmentSociety (SEEDS), an NGO with a focus on DRR, resolved to create apool of masons trained in earthquake-resistant construction. The trainedmasons were expected to address the immediate need for reconstructionand a long-term need for a culture of safe buildings.

The programme's objectives are:

• To respond to the shelter needs of communities affected by disasters; • To address the needs of trained construction workers in the fast-

growing construction industry; and • To promote disaster-resistant building technologies among

communities in high-risk areas.


The masons are now serving their local communities, educating fellowmasons in other regions at similar risk, as well as responding in disaster-hit areas for shelter reconstruction and capacity building. TheAssociation also acts as an information centre for dissemination ofmodern technologies in construction through newsletters and publicmeetings.

The Association has received recognition and support from theGovernment. Donor support has come in the form of specificreconstruction projects. Members of the Association also pay regularmembership fees.

In regions where activities have been carried out, there is clear evidenceof communities learning from the training imparted by the SEEDSMason Association.

The SEEDS Mason Association is currently active in five locationsacross the country:

• In tsunami-affected Andaman & Nicobar Islands, it has promotedbamboo-based demonstration housing. The Association constructedtemporary shelters for 354 families.

• Following the Kashmir earthquake in 2005, the SMA constructedshelters for 404 families. A local chapter of the SMA was launched.The local chapter is now imparting training in local communities aspart of the rehabilitation exercise.

• The SMA is training local building contractors and masons in Shimlaon retrofitting of school buildings.

• The SMA is involved, in the Western State of Barmer, in thereconstruction of 300 shelters.

• In Gujarat State, which was affected by the 2001 earthquake, SMAmembers sat exams and have been certified by the Governmentthrough a unique internationally designed certification programme.

The Initiative

22


This initiative is considered a good practicebecause: (1) It has been mainstreamed intodevelopment from the very beginning; (2) Itaddresses an important need for safe buildings;(3) It has a grassroots reach; (4) It is veryaccessible to the poor and to vulnerablehouseholds.

It is also innovative as it promotes peer learningas well as a single-point access fordisseminating information related to safebuildings. A key success factor of this initiativeis that the Association is supported by SEEDS,an NGO with a focus on DRR. SEEDSensures that the Association is partnered within every related initiative.

Overall, such a grassroots movement hastremendous potential as over 57 per cent ofIndia's national territory is prone toearthquakes, and vulnerabilities to otherdisasters put India's one billion people at risk.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe key lessons learned from this initiative are:

• Disasters are opportunities for bringing in change such asdisaster-resistant construction as part of reconstruction;

• Peer-level exchange and learning at grassroots level hasproved to be effective in building capacity; and

• Institutionalization of efforts is important for promotingbuilding safety.

The major challenges of this initiative are:

• Difficulty to overcome the inertia among existingconstruction workers to absorb new technologies;

• High demand from the building industry and limitedsupply has led to poor quality that characterizes thebuilding sector - which has increased disaster risk; and

• Recognition and acceptance by communities that havenot been affected by disasters yet, has been sluggish.


Such models exist in other parts of the world, though not necessarily focused on disaster reduction. Moreover, theyseldom look into training and up-gradation needs. Such models can be introduced where they do not exist.Alternatively, existing institutions of construction workers should be sufficiently equipped to disseminate disaster-resistant technologies at grassroots level.

In the light of many unsustainable practices of post-disaster training in safe construction, a grassroots institutionalizedapproach should preferably be adopted. Moreover, the larger issue of availability of skilled construction labour is keyto the success of similar initiatives.

23


Disaster Micro-Insurance Scheme for Low-Income Groups A Case Study of the "Afat Vimo" Disaster Insurance SchemeAll India Disaster Mitigation Institute (AIDMI)

India

In 2002, the majority of the 2001 Gujarat earthquakerelief beneficiaries were still exposed to disaster-inducedfinancial losses. Various studies - including the GujaratCommunity Survey of 2002 by the Gujarat-based AllIndia Disaster Mitigation Institute (AIDMI) andProVention Consortium - revealed that access to risktransfer was correlated with sustainable economic recoveryamong victims5, yet only two per cent of those surveyedhad insurance. A micro-insurance scheme was designed toaugment AIDMI's ongoing Livelihood Relief Fund6

activities. The resultant scheme, called "Afat Vimo", wasthe result of extensive discussions and negotiations withinsurance providers who could be interested in supplyinglow-premium insurance policies to poor clients.

Afat Vimo policyholders are covered for damage or lossup to the value of 1,744 US dollars for non-life assetsand 465 US dollars for loss of life, which gives a totaldamage and loss coverage of 2,209 US dollars. CurrentAfat Vimo clients include 5,054 individuals from low-income households with an annual income of 280 US

dollars. These households are mainly involved in smallenterprises in the informal sector and have assets worthapproximately 209 US dollars. It is striking that 94 percent of the clients did not have any other insurance priorto Afat Vimo, and 98 per cent today have no otherinsurance besides Afat Vimo.

The scheme covers 19 disasters including fires,explosions, riots, malicious damage, aircraft damage,cyclones, tempests, floods, inundation, earthquakes,lightening, implosions, strikes, impact damage, storms,typhoons, hurricanes, tornados and landslides. Afat Vimopolicyholders are also supported with micro-mitigationmeasures such as fire-safety training, seismic-safeconstruction practices and business developmentservices. The policy is available for an annual premiumof less than 5 US dollars (about a four-day wage).Damage to policyholders' houses, household assets,trade-stock and losses of wages due to accidents arecovered. The earning household member's life is alsocovered.

Abstract

5 All India Disaster Mitigation Institute. (2002). Community Survey: Gujarat Earthquake 2001. AIDMI and ProVention.

6 Established after the 1998 Kandla cyclone, the Livelihood Relief Fund (LRF) of AIDMI has supported livelihood recovery of 13,336victims to date. This demand-driven and tailor-made relief worked in the 2001 Gujarat earthquake, 2002 riots, December 2004 tsunami,2004 Gujarat floods and 2005 Jammu and Kashmir earthquake.

AIDMI presents theAfat Vimo insurance scheme

in a tsunami-affected area

24


This is a disaster micro-insurance scheme for low-income households. TheAfat Vimo scheme is part ofthe Regional Risk TransferInitiative (RRTI), anaction learning project(ALP) of the Gujarat-based All India DisasterMitigation Institute(AIDMI). The RRTIteaches insurancecompanies, authorities,donor communities andNGOs how to facilitate aconvergence betweenmicro-finance tools anddisaster risk reductionstrategies.

The RRTI was launchedon 25 September 2003. Itis an ongoing initiative.The Afat Vimo scheme hasbeen implemented in theIndian states of Gujarat,Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry,and Jammu and Kashmir.Lessons have been sharedin Sri Lanka, Pakistan,Iran and other Asiancountries through policydialogues, regional courses,and publications. The AfatVimo insurance scheme isimplemented withProVention Consortium,the Indian Chamber ofCommerce and Industryfor Small-Scale Business(CCISB) and localinsurance companies.

Goal and Objectives

Various studies - including the Gujarat Community Survey of 2002 by AIDMI andProVention Consortium - indicated that access to risk transfer was correlated withsustainable economic recovery among victims, yet only two per cent of those surveyedhad insurance. The Afat Vimo micro-insurance scheme was designed to augmentAIDMI's Livelihood Relief Fund activities.

The poor amongst disaster victims are repeatedly exposed to and affected andimpoverished by disasters. They are also perpetually restricted in their access to vitalfinancial services such as micro-insurance, which has recently made progress inreducing disaster risk among the poor. As spreading further such micro-insuranceproducts requires continued innovations, the Afat Vimo was developed bearing in mindlocal conditions and contexts.


Feedback from beneficiaries who made claims under the Afat Vimo policy has been verypositive and encouraging. To date, 204 claims were made to insurance companies. Ofthese, 155 were successfully settled, giving a combined payout of 21,940 US dollars. Itemerged from a 2006 internal evaluation survey of Afat Vimo clients that 100 per centof the surveyed clients were willing to renew their policy. Seventy-five per cent of thosesurveyed felt that Afat Vimo offered them better protection and 24 per cent said itoffered them significant protection.

All the surveyed clients said the Afat Vimo scheme needed to be extended to morepeople in other disaster-affected states. The main reasons given for this view were thevalue of having insurance in times of crisis (36 per cent), reduced dependence onoutside relief (33 per cent) and the affordability of the scheme compared to otherinsurance schemes (20 per cent).

A participatory review of the Regional Risk Transfer Initiative (RRTI) was conducted inJanuary 2007 by an international consultant. The review found that the scheme wasclearly welcomed by clients and that there was pressure to extend it. The review alsoconcluded that most of the practical problems encountered were addressed. Theinsurance companies have proved to be quick in resolving claims (average about 20 days)and flexible in adjusting and clarifying the terms of insurance. Evidence collected for thereview suggested that the main value of micro-insurance lies in limiting indebtedness thatcan quickly be triggered by an event such as disaster, accident or death.

The Initiative

A household affected by the 2006 Gujarat floods and reimbursed by the insurance scheme

25


The good practice in Afat Vimo lies in the factthat risk is transferred from the individual levelto the community or inter-community levels,which include groups based in differentgeographic locations and which are not equallydisaster prone.

The Afat Vimo scheme represents an innovativeapproach to risk identification, pooling andtransfer, which recognizes the fact that themajority of poor disaster victims have little orno access to risk transfer schemes. Accordingto a recent study of micro insurance policies inIndia by the International LabourOrganization7, 45 per cent of micro-insuranceschemes researched cover only a single riskand only 16 per cent cover three risks. As AfatVimo covers 19 disaster risks, it is one of themost comprehensive products in India. Thisnot only makes the policy more attractive toclients, but also makes investment in the policymore efficient in economic terms. Anotheraspect of Afat Vimo that sets it apart from othermicro-insurance policies is the extensive rangeof eventualities covered under the policy.

Last but not least, Afat Vimo policyholders arealso supported with micro-mitigation measuressuch as fire-safety training, seismic-safeconstruction practices and businessdevelopment services. The policy is availablefor an annual premium of less than 5 USdollars (about a four-day wage). Damage topolicyholders' houses, household assets, trade-stock and losses of wages due to accidents arecovered. The earning household member's lifeis also covered.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedAIDMI has learned that operational know-how onpromoting risk identification, risk transfer, risk poolingand advocacy in favour of disaster risk transfer from smallbusinesses is hugely lacking in India and South Asia. Theproject has also taught AIDMI that extending micro-insurance services to the poor faces many challenges atmicro-level such as affordability, access, service delivery,lower renewal rates and long-term sustainability.

The Afat Vimo case study also shows that micro-insurancecannot be used as stand-alone measure for disaster riskreduction. To ensure the viability of such products from acommercial point of view, they should be backed up byother micro-finance services and risk mitigation measures.To succeed, both poverty and risk must be reduced - notmerely transferred. In this connection, as mentionedearlier, damage to Afat Vimo policyholders' houses,household assets, trade-stock and losses of wages due toaccidents are covered, as well as the life of the earninghousehold member. Afat Vimo policyholders are alsosupported with micro-mitigation measures such as seismic-safe construction practices and business developmentservices.

Similarly, macro-level challenges such as creatingincentives for risk reduction, balancing public-private rolesand responsibilities, and making up-to-date data availableto decision-makers have been identified as key barriers inenhancing benefits of micro-insurance to the poor. Toaddress these key challenges and achieve higherpenetration levels, a greater need for learning acrossdisaster events and stakeholders - including governments,insurance companies and civil society organizations - isenvisaged as a way forward.


The key for extending micro-insurance benefits to the poor affected by disasters lies in a combination of devolution tolocal organizations, scaling-up, tougher bargaining for commissions from the insurance companies and strengtheningthe policy framework to put more pressure on the companies. Risk comes at poor people from many angles and it isonly a combination of savings, credit and organization can help them overcome the obstacles.

7 International Labour Organization (2005). India: An Inventory of Microinsurance Schemes. Geneva: ILO.

26


Combining Science and Indigenous Knowledge to Build aCommunity Early Warning SystemPreventing Drought-Induced Food Shortage in Southeastern Indonesia PMPB - Community Association for Disaster Management (In partnership with Yayasan Pikul)

Indonesia

The eastern part of Nusa Tenggara (SoutheasternIndonesian islands) has a three-month rainy seasonand a nine-month drought season. Over the last 100years or so, food shortage has characterized itsdrought season as lack of climate-related knowledgeand information within the local population oftenleads to crop failure.

A Community-Based Disaster Risk Management(CBDRM) initiative was launched in 2005 to address

the issue in a highly vulnerable community of ruralfarmers. The initiative seeks to build a monitoringsystem for food security and livelihood with the aim ofpreventing the food shortage.

With help from a local NGO and the CommunityAssociation for Disaster Management8, the communityhas developed its own food early warning system.

Abstract

In the Oeniko village, mother and daughter have to walk

five km to get drinking water

8 A local network of NGOs working on food security, emergecy response and disaster management.

27


This initiative is about buildinga monitoring system for foodsecurity and livelihood throughCommunity-Based DisasterRisk Management (CBDRM).

The initiative was launched in2005 after the local NGOYayasan Pikul had gatheredsome information oncommunities that were at riskof food shortage. The initiativeis still under way as a 3-5 yearprogramme in Sikka District(to the West of East Timor).

It is implemented by the localNGO Yayasan Pikul and theKupang CommunityAssociation for DisasterManagement - known locallyas PMPB -Kupang, withsupport from the targeted localfarmers themselves. They alloperate directly at kecamatan(village) level through aParticipatory Risk Assessment(PRA) approach.

Goal and Objectives

East Nusa Tenggara in Southeastern Indonesia has a three-month rainyseason and a nine-month drought season. Over the last 100 years or so, foodshortage invariably has characterized its drought season as lack of climate-related knowledge and information within the local population often leads tocrop failure.

Hence, the major goal of this project is to prevent food shortage observedduring prolonged drought. As such, its intended outcome is theestablishment of a food shortage prevention mechanism that increasescommunity resilience to drought. Its major objectives are:

1. Awareness: Raising awareness to such an extent that the communitydevelops its own indicators to monitor food security and livelihood.

2. Community early warning system: Ensuring that the community developsits own early warning system to prepare for food shortage.

3. Advocacy: Advocating the government not to promote agriculturalsystems that are not appropriate to Eastern Nusa Tenggara conditions.


The key components of this initiative are: (1) Participatory Risk Assessment(PRA); (2) community gathering; (3) capacity building for local farmers bysending them to learn in other places; (4) assistance to the development of theearly warning system; and (5) advocacy to government

The concrete and verifiable outcomes of this initiative are as follows:

• The 13 local farmers targeted have acquired the capacity to manage drylands, now have their own early warning system and know what issues torefer to the government.

• The community early warning system has been built through locallydeveloped monitoring indicators for food security and livelihood through aparticipatory approach.

The Initiative

Maize planted between rocks in the community of Pulau Pura

28


This initiative is a good practice because:

• It was initiated by the community itself toaddress crop failures that were also broughtabout by agricultural approaches from JavaIsland which were not suitable to drought-proneEast Nusa Tenggara.

• It incorporates indigenous knowledge anddevelops mechanisms that help prevent foodshortage and build community resilience toprolonged drought.

One of the innovative elements of this initiative isthe fact that the locally developed early warningsystem has been developed using a combination ofboth modern science and indigenous knowledge.

A key success factor of this initiative is theinvolvement of local people on the basis of theirlocal agricultural conditions.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedA key lesson learned from this initiative is that localcommunities do have basic capacity, what they need isonly little additional capacity. The following challengeshave been observed while implementing this initiative:

• All the activities are still being funded by localfarmers. Even though such a financial self-reliancemay be in itself a good practice, supporting a 3-5 yearprogramme is a real challenge for farmers that are atrisk of food shortage. To ensure that the entireinitiative does not collapse because of lack of funds,efforts are under way to identify donors.

• Something has to be done to enhance coordinationwith the other NGOs. Indeed, each NGO comeswith its own approach and the great variety ofapproaches ends up creating confusion among theproject beneficiaries.


This practice can be easily replicated in a community with a low level of education that lives in an area highly prone toprolonged drought.

To improve similar initiatives in the same area:

• There is a need to approach local development agencies and establish a joint secretariat for the government and localNGOs. As a matter of fact, the local government is not highly supportive of the initiative.

• One should be aware that crop failures are also linked to population growth, as well as shift of production andconsumption patterns.

• Community members' knowledge should be enhanced further to enable a more participatory assessment of the area'senvironmental context.

29


Linking Relief and Developmentthrough the Drought CycleManagement Approach Drought Cycle Management and Community-Managed Disaster Risk ReductionCatholic Organization for Relief and Development Aid(CORDAID)(In partnership with CODES, PISP and CIFA)

Kenya

The people who live in the arid and semi-arid areas of theHorn of Africa are subject and vulnerable to many risks,the most obvious one being drought. Whenever a disasterstrikes, emergency appeals will lead to a coordinated effortto respond to the situation to try and save lives.Conventional responses to disaster are not alwayssufficiently effective though, and it is often observed thatdevelopment initiatives and emergency responses in acertain area are treated as separate issues and thatdevelopment activities are halted, while there are costlydelays in putting the disaster responses in place. It is moreeffective to combine development and relief and thus planfor long-term investment to reduce risks and at the sametime protect people's acute needs when necessary.

This is the essence of Drought Cycle Management(DCM) and Community Managed Disaster RiskReduction as practised by the Catholic Organization forRelief and Development Aid (CORDAID) and localpartner organizations in parts of Kenya, Ethiopia and

Uganda. These community-based approaches aim tostrengthen people's livelihoods throughout normal, alert,emergency and recovery stages, matching realities on theground (i.e. doing the right things at the right time).

During the drought that affected parts of Kenya in2005/2006, CORDAID and its partner organizationsCODES (Community Organization for DevelopmentSupport), PISP (Pastoralist Integrated Support Program)and CIFA (Community Initiative Facilitation andAssistance) responded to the emerging disaster as part oftheir Drought Cycle Management Programme strategywith additional funding by ECHO (EuropeanCommission Humanitarian aid Office). This DroughtEmergency Intervention Programme (DEIP 2006) wasevaluated by Acacia Consultants Ltd. This case studylooks into the concept of Drought Cycle Management inrelation to an emerging disaster like the drought of2005/2006 and to the lessons that can be learned in orderto be better prepared for a next drought.

Abstract

A local communityparticipating in the project

30


The Drought EmergencyIntervention Programme(DEIP) was a response toa developing emergencysituation after a longperiod of alert. DEIP wasimplemented in Samburu,Marsabit and Moyaledistricts in Northern Kenyabetween March andAugust 2006, and was co-funded by ECHO andCORDAID. Theprogramme wasimplemented in the widercontext of CORDAID'slong-term Drought CycleManagement programmesin the three districts.

The purpose of DEIP wasto improve access to waterand animal protein in orderto reduce the impact ofdrought and to ensurelivelihood security inSamburu, Marsabit andMoyale districts. DEIPwas implemented throughthree local partners: theCommunity InitiativeFacilitation and Assistance(CIFA), CommunityOrganization forDevelopment Support(CODES) and thePastoralist IntegratedSupport Programme(PISP) in Moyale,Samburu and Marsabitdistricts respectively.

Goal and Objectives

People living in arid and semi-arid areas in the Horn of Africa are subject andvulnerable to many hazards, the most obvious one being drought. It is often observedthat development initiatives and emergency responses in a certain area are treated asseparate issues and that development activities are halted, while there are costly delaysin putting the disaster responses in place. It is more effective to combine developmentand relief and thus plan for long-term investment to reduce risks and at the same timeprotect people's acute needs when necessary. This is the essence of drought cyclemanagement and community-managed disaster risk reduction as practised byCORDAID and local partner organizations in parts of Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda.

In particular, DEIP was implemented in Moyale, Marsabit and Samburu districts innorthern Kenya from March through August 2006, as a logical and integrated part ofthe wider ongoing Drought Cycle Management Program. DEIP aimed to improveaccess to water for 162,375 drought-affected pastoralists and sedentary peoplecomprising 86,059 women and 76,316 men, as well as 297,000 tropical livestock units(TLUs). In addition, the project was to improve access to animal protein for 34,800people (from women-headed and destitute households, orphans and school children)and ensure livelihood security for the target populations. The indirect beneficiariesfrom the catchment's population were estimated at 78,187 pastoralists, 41,439 womenand 36,748 men. Other categories of beneficiaries were expected to be localinstitutions, district steering committees and national/local drought managementgroups/teams.


Two different sectors were covered (i.e. water and food security) by the three projects inthe respective districts. The water sector aimed to improve access to water by humanand livestock populations while the food security aimed to provide animal feeds andde-stocking that went hand in hand with provision of animal protein to vulnerablesegments of the population.

The evaluation carried out by Acacia Consultants Ltd. concluded that DEIP wasrelevant (the most crucial needs of the communities were addressed), and as result ofthe activities, lives and livelihoods were saved. The programme was judged to beeffective as the planned results were realized. The cost-benefit analysis indicates thatthe input-output ratios were also favourable. Finally, the initiatives were related to andform an integrated part of longer-term development in the areas, like for instance themaking of water pans and livestock marketing.

The Initiative

31


As indicated by the headline, the practice of DCM aims to linkrelief and development. Droughts and other emergencies normallytrigger responses that are separated from ongoing developmentefforts. When applied in isolation from ongoing developmentefforts, relief aid may save lives but may not necessarily savelivelihoods. In fact, the opposite may happen for a number ofreasons which inculde:

• People may become dependent on relief supplies.• Free handouts interfere with local market mechanisms.• Relief distorts traditional coping mechanisms and does not help

reduce vulnerabilities.• Relief distribution centres encourage inappropriate settlement.• Relief is expensive, while money may be better spent on

reducing people's vulnerabilities.• Relief responses by external actors normally come late, while

early warnings often do not trigger timely responses.

Innovative concepts like the "Community-Based Drought CycleManagement" and the "Community Managed Disaster RiskReduction" will not only be cheaper than dealing with the ensuingemergencies. By supporting livelihoods, the effects of disaster maybe reduced as well as the consequences of a next drought or flood.Here follow the principles of these concepts, which could indeedprove to be more efficient and effective in dealing with recurrentdisasters:

• They are participatory in process and content.• Activities are responsive to the community's felt and real needs.• The approach is integrated and activities are not implemented in

isolation from the community's environment.• The approach is proactive and emphasizes preparation and

prevention.• They are also multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary. • Communities are empowered as their capacity and control to

response increase.• The concepts are developmental and reduce vulnerabilities,

while contributing to long-term development and povertyreduction.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe overall conclusion of theevaluation of DEIP was that theemergency initiative realized itsobjectives. The other conclusion wasthat impacts of drought-relatedemergencies will continue to worsenunless four factors are addressed:

1. Reduction in livestock numbers inthe pastoralist areas;

2. Re-introduction of community-based grazing management withcommunity bylaws enforced by boththe community and theGovernment;

3. Insecurity and therefore opening uplarge tracks of pasture land thatremains inaccessible. Linkingpastoralists to the rest of theeconomy is an important strategythat needs to be explored; and

4. Strategic preparation for droughtsduring the preparedness phase.

The last point reflects the emphasis ofthis case study, namely the paradigmshift that periods of drought can beprepared for as long as projects andactivities are planned for andimplemented within the logicalframework of the drought cycle, andas long as planning andimplementation are community based.Development and relief can thus belinked and help prevent or lessen theintensity of a disaster.

32



Probably the most important precondition for replication is the willingness of donor organizations to become flexible inbudget allocation, allowing different kinds of activities depending on the phase of the risk cycle, including preparingfor emergencies. Contingency funds must be set aside to be made available during actual emergency situations.

Development organizations must thus develop the capacity to prepare for and deal with emergencies, andhumanitarian organizations must shift their emphasis more into the direction of preparedness and prevention. It is inthis way that ECHO and CORDAID now cooperate in funding longer-term drought cycle managementprogrammes, in addition to specifically support preparedness activities and set contingency funds aside in case of theonset of an actual emergency.

MI T I G A T I O N

PR

EP

AR

ED

NE

SS

RE

LIE

FA

SS

I ST

AN

CE

- Community development- Contingency planning- Capacity building- Infrastructural development

- Strategic stockpiling of cerealsand grains- Rehabilitation

of criticalboreholes

- Livestockmarketing

- Animal health- Human health

- Supplementaryfeeding oflivestock

- Animal health interventions- Human health interventions- Emergency water supply systems- Supplementary feeding of

vulnerable groups

- Restocking- Rehabilitation

of dams- Capacity building

- Infrastructuraldevelopment

- Food for work- Cash for work- Natural resource

managementinterventions

Normal

Recovery

Emergency

Monitoringand

AssessmentInformation

AlertAlarm

The Drought Cycle

33


Rural, School "Disaster Teams" to Boost Preparedness Mobilising Rural Communities for Disaster Preparedness in the Kyrgyz RepublicChristian Aid (In partnership with Shoola)

Kyrgyzstan

The initiative described below has targeted five villagesand local government representatives over a one-yearperiod in the Eastern part of the Kyrgyz Republic. Ineach village, "rural disaster teams" and "school disasterteams" were formed and supported in their developmentthrough a simple and transparent process.

The local disaster teams underwent theoretical andpractical training on disaster management, preparedness

and risk reduction. This enabled them to raisecommunity members' awareness of existing andpotential hazards and disaster risks.

After an early warning system was developed, and theteam members trained in first aid and on how torespond to emergency situations, they were able to plancommunity response to disasters.

Abstract

Training of “school disasterteams” on preparedness

and first aid

34


This is a communitycapacity building andsmall-scale structuralmitigation project thatinvolved bothcommunities and localgovernment authorities inproject implementation,for the sake ofsustainability.

The first phase of theproject was implementedfrom January 2006 toDecember 2006. A secondphase is planned in 2007covering the same targetvillages. The project wasimplemented by ChristianAid's partner Shoola, withfunding fromDIPECHO (DisasterPreparedness, EuropeanCommissionHumanitarian aid Office).

The followingstakeholders were involvedin the project: (1) Primarystakeholders - Rural andschool disaster teammembers in five villages(approximately 100 adultsand 125 children); staff ofregional, district and localgovernment; 11,301community members ofthe five targeted villages;(2) Secondary stakeholders -100,000 residents ofIssyk-Kul Region thatwere informed abouthazards and disaster risksthrough a video and othermaterial broadcast by thelocal TV channel.

Goal and Objectives

The project sought to enhance disaster mitigation and preparedness among villagers. Thefive villages targeted were located in Ton, Djetioguz, Aksuu, and Tjup districts in Issyk-KulRegion in the Eastern part of the Kyrgyz Republic, Central Asia9.


Over a period of two months, rural and school disaster teams were formed. They underwenttraining and engaged in capacity building activities involving other community members.The preparation of village maps and risk areas, and preparedness and contingency plans wasdone in a participatory manner under the leadership of the disaster teams. They alsosupported Shoola in facilitating repair and construction work using the ashar method (freecommunity labour).

The rural disaster teams and school disaster teams were formed in the five villages to supportthe development of community awareness and preparedness measures. The teams receivedcapacity building support in the form of training on disaster risk reduction and management,and were equipped with tools and kits for emergency preparedness and response includingspades and shovels, first aid kits and stretches, flashlights, tents, etc.Each rural disaster team consisted of 20 adult members, and each school disaster team of 23-25 school children. The teams drew disaster risk maps of the villages, planned escape routes,and prepared contingency plans. They also facilitated structural mitigation work includingstrengthening river banks, reconstructing reservoirs and building dikes.

To ensure sustainability and continuity, each school disaster team formed one "duplicate"disaster team consisting of younger children who had not been involved in the initialactivities. The school disaster teams also conducted training on disaster risk in the schools ofneighbouring villages, which were not directly involved in the project.Competitions and summer camps were organised for the youth, where they coulddemonstrate their skills and knowledge. These events and construction activities in thevillages were broadcasted by the local TV channel for the residents of the whole Issyk-KulProvince.

Overall, the major outcomes of this project were raised awareness, structural mitigation workand enhanced disaster preparedness. Concrete and verifiable results achieved by this initiativeinclude:

• Five rural disaster teams and five school disaster teams formed in the five villages. Eachrural disaster team consisted of 20 adult members, and each school disaster team of 23-25school children. In other words, the five villages are supported permanently by 100 adultsand 125 or so school children who are key disaster reduction actors.

• Disaster risk maps of the villages, planned escape routes and contingency plans developed. • Structural mitigation work completed: river banks strengthened, reservoirs rebuilt and

dikes built.• Five "duplicate" disaster teams consisting of younger children formed by the five school

disaster teams to ensure sustainability and continuity. • Children actively engaged in disaster issues and learnt about the importance of community

initiative in disasters through innovative methods and in a playful manner.• 11,301 community members of the five villages benefited from structural mitigation,

raised awareness and the early warning systems.• 100,000 residents of Issyk-Kul Region informed about hazards and disaster risks through

a video and other material broadcast by the local TV channel.

The Initiative

9 The villages were identified in an assessment undertaken in December 2006.

35


This can be considered a good practicebecause:

• The involvement of both communities andlocal government authorities meant thatraising awareness about existing andpotential risks reached all relevantstakeholders. Moreover, the rural and schooldisaster teams were linked to the localgovernment in that they were both activelyinvolved in the project implementation.

• Forming the rural disaster teams fromcommunity members and training themhelped build sustainability into the structuralmitigation components of the project.Indeed, the teams facilitated maintenanceand repair work, and passed on theirknowledge to other community membersand neighbouring communities throughformal training and informalcommunication.

• The school disaster teams ensured thatchildren were actively engaged in the issuesand learnt from an early age about theimportance of community initiative indisasters. Knowledge about disaster risksand response was conveyed using innovativemethods and in a playful manner.

• Linking capacity building with small-scalestructural mitigation work - that includedcommunity contribution - providedmotivation and tangible results for thecommunities to build on.

The Good PracticeLessons Learned• A major challenge was the political and administrative

culture still prevalent in the Central Asian region: top-down approaches and government-led planning remaindominant and the concept of participation is a relativelynew phenomenon. Furthermore, NGOs are put at adisadvantage by an unclear perception and muchscepticism from government towards private, non-governmental and community-based developmentorganizations. In the light of this, the project aimed tolink local government and communities, and Shoola triedto play a merely facilitating role.

• Receiving funding or contributions from governmentdepartments remains problematic. Therefore, it can beseen as a success that the project managed to securecontributions from local government in the form ofproviding their relevant staff to get involved in theplanning and implementation of the project. Thisincluded staff participating in training as well as expertssupporting the structural mitigation work.

• Ensuring and keeping up community participation isanother key challenge, also due to a history of top-downdecision making. Shoola had to remain directly engagedin motivating the disaster teams and visiting thecommunities on a regular basis to ensure participationthroughout the project period.

• The one-year project duration was too short because theactivity was new to both Shoola and the targetcommunities. Therefore, Shoola and Christian Aid havedecided to implement a second phase to achieve moresustainable collaboration between the communities andthe local government authorities.


The project approach can be easily replicated as it made sole use of local experts and locally available materials.However, a key challenge for replication and scaling up will be the commitment of local and national governmentauthorities. This is an area which Shoola and Christian Aid are aiming to develop further over the next year and insimilar initiatives in South and Central Asia.

36


Small, Medium-Scale Initiatives to Control River Flow"Together, We Can Make a Difference":Benefits of Multi-Stakeholder Flood ManagementTearfund (In partnership with Eagles)

Malawi

Over 10 to 15 years, the district of Chikwawa insouthern Malawi suffered from the increased impact offlooding from Mthumba River, including disruption ofagricultural production, loss of lives and destroyedbuildings. This not only re-enforced the local cycle ofpoverty but also reduced the impact of developmentgains in the district.

In 2003, Tearfund’s partner NGO "Eagles" undertooka "Participatory Assessment for Disaster Risk" with fivevillages. The villages' specific vulnerabilities to floodingwere assessed, and their capacities to address theproblem reviewed. Some of the root causes of theirvulnerability were identified, as well as the reasons for amore frequent occurrence of the hazard. In conjunctionwith the villages, Eagles initiated small-scale mitigationinitiatives, including the creation of a wood lot and astorm drain.

In 2005-2006, Eagles consulted with another 11villages and the local government authorities, as itbecame clear that a multi-stakeholder approach wasneeded. Sufficiently motivated after two years ofawareness raising efforts by Eagles, the villagersestablished a community-based task force. Oncecreated, the task force along with governmentauthorities and experts widely consulted with allcommunities and designed an earthen dike that wouldre-instate the previous river course of Mthumba Riverand reduce the impact of flooding on a wide area. The impact of the project was felt virtually immediately.During the 2005-2006 rainy season, excess run-off wasdiverted by the storm drain, rainfall run-off wasreduced by the wood lot, and the original river course ofMthumba River was restored through the earthen dike.

Abstract

Villagers from Pende villagereinforce dyke with sand bags

37


This was a flood mitigation project consisting of multiplesmall to medium-scale initiatives aimed at controllingriver flow during rainy seasons. The project was launchedin 2003. Even though the proposed flood mitigationstructures (wood lot, storm drain, earthen dike, etc.) havebeen completed, Eagles' relationship with thecommunities and villages is still ongoing and thestructures are managed by the community and thegovernment through a community-based task forceestablished in 2005-2006. The task force, made up ofcommunity members, operates under the coordination ofthe District Civil Protection Committee mandated by thelocal District Executive Committee to look after disastermitigation and response within the District Assembly.

The project was initially implemented in five villages inthe area of Mthumba, Chikwawa District, Malawi. Thedistrict lies in the Great Rift Valley in the southern part ofthe country, through which passes Shire River which isthe single outlet for Lake Malawi. After some initialresearch and consultation, the project was extended toanother 11 villages when it was realized that themitigation work would require their support and wouldalso benefit them. Relationships were also built at districtlevel, specifically with the District Civil ProtectionCommittee of the District Assembly, and with the DistrictExecutive Committee.

Involved in the project were: Eagles' Relief andDevelopment Programme (for project initiation andmanagement); the District Executive Committee (fordecision making); the District Civil ProtectionCommittee (for coordination); the District Assembly (forratification and endorsement); Illovo Sugar Company andvarious government departments (for resource inputs);the community-based task force (managed by the DistrictCivil Protection Committee); Forestry and AgriculturalDepartments (training support and advice); localchurches (for community mobilization and consultation);two traditional elders and local chiefs (for communitymobilization and consultation); and all villagecommunities (for broad consultation, indigenousknowledge and local labour).

The project was implemented by Tearfund's partnerNGO Eagles under initial funding from Tearfund.Eagles' ongoing relationship with the communities andvillages is supported by Tearfund through a DFID-funded global DRR programme.

Goal and Objectives

As mentioned earlier, the major goal of this projectwas to reduce food insecurity through floodmanagement. Overall, the project targeted 4,706flood-affected farming families in over 52 villages.


The implementation of this project required thefollowing activities:

• Building a storm drain in 2004 in Nedi village toprotect people, their houses and their communitychild care centre.

• Establishing a small local tree plantation (woodlot) in 2003 in Chikalumpha village to slow downflood waters and forcing them into drains, awayfrom the people, houses and fields behind.

• Building an earthen flood dike in 2006 inSantana village to protect crop fields. The labourfor the dike was predominantly provided by thetask force, with local churches and traditionalauthorities that agreed to work with the task forceto take responsibility for its ongoing maintenance.

During the course of the design and construction ofthese structures, the communities were made awareof what actions they had done to cause the increasedflooding. They were given new skills in tree andgrass planting. They were also made aware of theconsequences of tree felling and overgrazing. Thetask force, made up of community members, learntto advocate to local businesses to provide inputs inkind for the project, as well as negotiate withgovernment authorities to provide inputs such astraining. As a result, the villages increased inconfidence in their ability to negotiate with localgovernment authorities and to manage and ownsolutions to their problems.

The project was implemented through the adoptionof the following strategies:

• New multi-sectoral approach: After acomprehensive risk assessment, a new multi-sectoral approach was developed to resolve theflood problem.

• Advocacy: (1) Advocacy with governmentdepartments and District Assembly to draw theirattention on the problem; (2) Advocacy to re-enforce a bye-law to prevent farmers from

The Initiative

38


planting within 20 m of rivers/streams; (3) Advocacy with private and public sectors to provide extra resourceinputs.

• Networking: (1) Improve networking with existing government mechanisms (mainly the District Civil ProtectionCommittee) to support disaster mitigation and response; (2) Use expertise for advice and supervision to ensuresustainable mitigation structures.

• Community mobilization: (1) Sensitize traditional and church leaders to take responsibility in their areas; (2)Mobilize communities to understand and take responsibility in their areas, and consequently develop action plans;(3) Undertake review, with all stakeholders, of previous flood mitigation efforts to understand what did and whatdid not work.

The following methods were used:

• Participatory Assessment for Disaster Risk methodology (a form of Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment, VCA) toidentify main hazards, root causes and subsequent community capacity to draw together action plans.

• Environmental resource management training of communities by government and institutional experts, especially onthe use of trees and grasses on river banks to prevent soil and river erosion.

• Use of community elders to identify the previous course of the river, which led to the choice of mitigation structuresneeded to re-establish the previous route of the river away from community structures and agricultural lands.

• Development of a community task force to rear tree saplings, dig the storm drain and build the earthen dike, alongwith the use of heavy equipment funded through the project.

The overall impact for all the villages issignificant. There has been a decreased incidencein water-borne diseases during the rainy seasonand also increased school attendance. Indeed,schools and clinics in the past had been disruptedeither from the temporary closure of publicbuildings or through lack of access. Agriculturallands have also increased their yield andproduction, and there is increased food security.All parties agree that with collective discussion,agreement and action, they managed to address aproblem that was previously deemed impossible tomanage.

In particular, the following specific impacts havebeen observed from 2005-2006 onwards:

• Significant reduction of flooding in primeagricultural lands, including the re-enforcementof a river bank with a 400-metre section;

• Reduced water-borne diseases in flood-affectedvillages;

• Increased school attendance (flooding stoppedschools from operating or prevented childrenfrom attending class during rainy season);

• Provision of food through food-for-workprogrammes;

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe key lessons learned from this practice are:

• Communities need to be involved in the project sothat they can understand how their own practices canincrease flooding.

• Communities need to be mobilized to accept and ownsubsequent mitigation activities and for the long-termsustainability of the project.

• Local government officials' endorsement and supportare needed as encouragement and as a source ofresources.

The major challenges were:

• How to maintain the communities' consensus andbehavioural change needed to address the underlyingcauses of flooding. The key was to ensure that churchand traditional leaders maintained the momentumand understanding of sustainable environmentalmanagement.

• The threat of climate variability leading to changes inthe seasonality and volume of the precipitation: thismay lead to new levels of unexpected flooding oralternatively agricultural drought affecting the growthof the wood lot and agricultural crops. Tearfund is

39



The following aspects of the project are generic and can be replicated almost anywhere in the world:

• The multi-stakeholder approach leading to awareness raising and consultation with communities, and theinvolvement of local government structures;

• Use of risk assessment methodologies to correctly assess the underlying causes of flooding and the design ofappropriate technologies; and

• The development of a multi-stakeholder community-based task force as central to the sustainability and ownershipof mitigation structures.

This said, the administrative and governance structures were conducive to encouraging and mobilizing the communityto participate and own their own resolutions. Subsequently, in countries where there are limited administrative orgovernance structures related to disaster management, replication of this approach would need to be reconsidered, orat least undertaken concurrently with advocacy measures to help governments design appropriate mechanisms tosupporting community-based disaster risk reduction.

Furthermore, there was an already existing strong understanding of what mitigation structures did and did not work inMalawi, which was helpful in identifying appropriate solutions. Again, in countries where there are no appropriateexamples of mitigation structures available, pilot initiatives should be encouraged in collaboration with the governmentin active consultation with high-level experts. The project design should also have a strong component fordisseminating learning across the country after completion of the pilot.

• Communities' better understanding ofcauses of flooding;

• Communities' increased skills in plantingand raising tree saplings; and

• Communities' increased confidence throughall the above to solve their flood-relatedproblems.

Furthermore, this project can be regarded as agood practice because:

• All stakeholders were consulted during theproject

• Disaster risks leading to effective initiativeswere analyzed in a participatory manner

• Learning was also explored from historicaland indigenous knowledge

• Use of intermediate technology enabledlocal community involvement

• Communities were sensitized on theunderlying causes of flooding.

now working with partners to understand how VCAs(Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis) can be modifiedto appropriately cater for scenario forecasting of climatevariability.

The key success factors of this initiative were:

• Willingness of all stakeholders to discuss and learnduring the lifespan of the project.

• Multiple appropriate technologies that were wellconsidered and integrated back into wider governmentthinking and policies, yet owned by the community.

The key failure factors were:

• Protection of young trees, especially from livestock andin drought periods.

• Slow decision making with a volunteer task force whosemobilization was based on good will and motivation.

40


Supporting Local Decision Makingwith Inter-Community Platform andLocal-Level Monitoring Community Organization: The Essential Basis forCommunity-Based Disaster Risk Reduction andManagementDesert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN)

Namibia

Drought and desertification are slow-onset disasters thatimpact on livelihoods of people living in drylands. Theyare often exacerbated by poverty and a naturally variableclimate and compounded by lack of organization incommunities affected. With increasing population,urbanization, climate change, evolving policy andpolitical frameworks and other pressures, capacity ofdrylands residents to cope with and adapt to naturalclimate variability and intervening extreme events isdiminished. Increased understanding of variable naturalenvironmental conditions and potential effects of climatechange, enhanced cooperation amongst the growingpopulation, appropriate organizational andcommunication structures and community-basedmonitoring to support local decision making are allessential components of community-based disastermanagement and risk reduction.

In Namibia, in Southwestern Africa, an approachknown as "Forums for Integrated ResourceManagement" has provided the platform fororganization and communication within and amongstcommunities. This approach has contributed to placing

communities at the centre of their own development.Whether based, inter alia, on a water point committee ora farmers' association, the approach strengthens capacityamongst the community to coordinate their ownactivities in conjunction with service providers throughplanning, monitoring and adjustment of mutuallyagreed upon development plans.

To support information exchange and decision making,an approach known as "Local Level Monitoring" isdesigned by communities with support from serviceproviders. Communities identify relevant indicators tomonitor their livelihoods including key environmentalelements. Service providers contribute to design of amonitoring and information capturing system. Thecommunities discuss the results, analyze them and usethem where appropriate for decision making. Thisprovides a tool for identification of environmentalchanges affecting livelihoods that may be based onmanagement actions, climate variability, policy changesor other factors. At the same time, this information canbe used to identify and track evolving drought anddecreasing productivity and apply the results to decisionmaking related to coping with the identified risks.

Abstract

41


This initiative started as part ofNamibia's programme to combatdesertification, which represented thecountry's National Action Programme.The "Forums for Integrated ResourceManagement" (FIRM) and "LocalLevel Monitoring" (LLM) approachesdescribed in the abstract were initiated inthe mid 1990s. The programme thatdeveloped them was completed in 2004.Since then, they have been adopted byextension services and new projects andprogrammes.

The initial programme was implementedin the Central North (villages andextension services in nine constituenciesin Oshikoto Region), North-East andEast (five Villages and extensionservices), North-West (three villages),West (a management committee) andSouth (four villages). Several spin-offprojects, ongoing and planned, haveadopted this approach as has the FSRE(Farming Systems Research andExtension) of agriculture extension.

The following stakeholders wereinvolved in the initiative: the DesertResearch Foundation of Namibia(DRFN), an NGO, and the Directorateof Extension and Engineering Services(DEES) in the Ministry of Agriculture,Water and Forestry (MAWF). Thepersonnel involved included a variety ofstaff members at different times rangingfrom the Director of the DEES to fieldfacilitators such as agricultural extensiontechnicians (AETs). Over 1,000 peoplewere targeted and were directly ortangentially involved in the initiativeimplemented by the DRFN workingwith the DEES under the guidance of aSteering Committee chaired by theMinistry of Environment and Tourism(MET). The initiative was fundedprimarily by the German developmentagency GTZ though other donorssupported various activities and sub-projects during the 10-year programme.

Goal and Objectives

The major goals and objectives were to understand drought anddesertification in the Namibian context, to develop awareness andcapacity to deal with their various forms, particularly amongstcommunal farmers and their service providers, and to contributeto relevant policy formulation.


The impact of this initiative has been extensive and is ongoing atcommunity level and amongst service providers. Several policyinstruments have been influenced by the project and a number ofderivative projects are ongoing.

As a result of this initiative:

• The Farming Systems Research and Extension (FSRE)programme of the Directorate of Extension and EngineeringServices (DEES) has adopted the FIRM approach and uses it,with greater or lesser success, at many AgriculturalDevelopment Centres (ADCs) throughout Namibia.

• Local Level Monitoring (LLM) is actively implemented bycommunities in five of the 13 regions of Namibia and lessactively at other communities with ADCs in other regions.

• The Drought Policy and Strategy has been elaborated under theprogramme but is yet to be fully implemented. Several otherpolicies take drought and desertification into consideration, e.g.Agriculture, Water.

• A number of programmes, such as the Desert MarginsProgramme (Global Environment Facility, GEF), EphemeralRiver Basins (Norway), Oshikoto Livestock DevelopmentProject (EU) and several planned programmes as well asongoing activities (e.g. Kuiseb Basin Management Committee)follow the FIRM approach and/or use LLM as a decisionsupport tool.

The Initiative

FIRM meeting near Okakarare, where LLM results were presented and discussed

42


This can be considered good practicebecause it contributes to capacity buildingand institutional development amongstrural farming communities so they canenhance their own resource managementand livelihoods and thereby enhance theircapacity to manage and reduce risksrelated to drought and desertification andother potential disasters.

The FIRM approach is an innovative,flexible approach to enhancing individualand institutional capacity of ruralcommunities; the LLM is an innovativeway to monitor livelihood andenvironmental changes based on thecommunities' own interests and used bythe communities for their own decisionmaking. The LLM approach is beingexpanded to provide community-derivedinformation to national level with the aimof national coverage in support of riskreduction and management.

The programme was implementedthrough a joint venture between NGOsand government departments workingwith farming communities. While NGOstaff and resources undertook thecommunity-level facilitation, theprogramme was guided by a nationalSteering Committee.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe key lesson learned from this initiative is that communitycapacity building requires time from the community and theservice providers involved with the community. There must beobvious benefits for the community, and facilitators must beable to elaborate on these benefits from the first engagement.Since time is a key factor, funding to support the ongoingfacilitation is also essential, something which is rarely availablefrom donor programmes. Consequently, involvement of therelevant government departments is also essential - from thehead office to the extension level on the ground.

Major challenges to be overcome during the project involvedchanging personnel in government who often were not aware ofor convinced of the benefits to be derived from communitycapacity development. Limited capacity amongst newlyappointed extension personnel was part of the ongoing capacitystrengthening associated with the project.

Another major challenge was the degree of expectation fromgovernment by communities in newly independent Namibia.Communities still expect the government to provide freedrought relief food, water and energy, and overcoming thisperception has been an ongoing challenge to the programme.Although an enlightened drought policy and strategy wasdeveloped by the government during the 10-year programme,there has been reluctance by the government to adopt some ofthe key elements challenging its use to guide and enhancecommunity capacity.


If the implementers and the communities and the government structure all have the will and the time and the interest,it would be easy to replicate this project. Governments are usually interested in DRR but do not know how to reachlocal communities in a non-bureaucratic manner. Governments often want to support local development but forget thestep of helping communities to organize and gain capacity so they can participate fully in their own development.FIRM represents a communication platform between decision makers, communities and service providers andresearch workers and others contributing to addressing drought and desertification, slow-onset disasters prevalent inthe region.

However, to replicate this project in a different context, the tacit support of government and the appropriate policyframework supporting participation should be in place. The establishment of some sort of communication platform,such as FIRM, requires attention. Full participation from the communities themselves is essential and not the usualtop-down approach.

43


Disaster Prevention among Nativeand Mestizo10 Communities Disaster Prevention and Emergency Response with Native and Mestizo Communities in the AmazonasRegion of PeruGerman Agro Action (In partnership with ITDG - Soluciones Practicas)

Peru

Some native and mestizo communities in Peru areextremely vulnerable to natural hazards such as floods,landslides and sludge avalanches. As their vulnerabilityis mainly due to poor economic conditions and lack ofdisaster prevention and response mechanisms andservices, German Agro Action and ITDG - SolucionesPracticas11 embarked on an innovative disasterprevention and response capacity building projectinvolving the communities. The project aims to enhancetheir capacity to respond to disasters and reduce theirvulnerability through a participatory process.

Even though winning the support and participation ofthe communities was a major challenge, the projectfinally took off with the help of local Civil DefenceCommittees formed by community membersthemselves. The establishment of the local CivilDefence Committees had a positive catalytic effect on

general participation. Native elders and leaders,women's and men's representatives, teachers andstudents, as well as local government officials joined theproject, discussing disaster issues, devising riskreduction plans, assessing flood damage, promotingdisaster prevention on local radio stations, integratingthe topic into schools, establishing an educationalnetwork, identifying pilot projects, and so forth. Theproject, launched in March 2006, will be completed inJune 2007.

Even though this is a first disaster prevention initiativewith native and mestizo communities in Peru, it hasachieved impressive results over its first 12 months ofimplementation. Better still, it can easily be replicated incommunities with participatory decision makingprocesses - provided that their "political" commitment issecured.

Abstract

10 Mestizo: Half-caste, of mixed race (white and Indian)

11 ITDG - Soluciones Practicas : Intermediate Technology Development Group - Practical Action

Construction of gabions toprevent inundations in

San Martin Alao

44


This is a disaster response andprevention capacity buildingproject aimed at enhancing thecapacity of native and Mestizocommunities in three provincesof San Martin Department,Amazonas Region (Peru), torespond to disasters and reducevulnerability to natural hazardsthrough a participatory processincluding training and otheractivities.

The project kicked off on 1stMarch 2006 and will end inJune 2007. Being aDIPECHO-funded project, itcannot be extended butexperiences, results and lessonsfrom the project can betransmitted to other disaster-prone and vulnerable regions.The project is under way inPeru in three provinces of SanMartin Department, AmazonasRegion, targeting about 8,150direct beneficiaries among nativeAwajun, Kechua and Mestizocommunities in El Dorado,Rioja and Moyobambaprovinces.

These communities live in areasat high risk of flood, landslideand sludge avalanche, and areextremely vulnerable due to pooreconomic conditions and lack ofdisaster prevention and responsemechanisms and services.Involved in the project aremembers of the communities -including native elders andleaders (apus), women's andmen's representatives, teachersand students from 21 schools, aswell as municipality officials.The project is beingimplemented by ITDG -Soluciones Practicas withfunding from DIPECHO andGerman Agro Action.

Goal and Objectives

As mentioned above, this project is aimed at enhancing the capacity of native andMestizo communities to respond to disasters and reduce vulnerability to naturalhazards.


The following project impacts and results have been observed:

• Establishment and training of native communities' Civil Defence Committeesand implementation of disaster prevention activities.

• Evaluation of flood damage by members of the Civil Defence Committeesfollowing the above-mentioned training.

• Disaster prevention mainstreamed into schools and learning activities.• Training of local communicators to advocate risk reduction activities on local

radio stations. • Educational material (stories, posters, puzzles) developed to support school

learning process. • Educational network formed and owned by teachers to promote topics related

to disaster prevention. • Native communities' Civil Defence Committees entered in local government

budget and given premises at town council headquarters. • Pilot projects identified by communities and implemented by the Civil Defence

Committees.

The Initiative

A students´ campaign to raise awareness on disaster preparedness

45


The project is a good practice because:

• It has achieved activity coordination between schools andcommunities.

• The civil defence committees have been created and trainedand are able to provide technical assistance to civil defencegroups in schools.

• Students have formed learning circles for risk managementwhich are part of the project's group of communicators.

• The above-mentioned civil defence groups are operationaland provide assistance to community based mitigation work.

The project also includes innovative elements such as:

• Working with native communities and forming nativepromoters of disaster prevention.

• Producing educational material in the native Awajun andKechua languages.

• Forming students' working groups which facilitate thelearning process and help promote DRR activities in thecommunities.

The project activities are being implemented through aparticipatory process supported by local elders and leaders.Beneficiaries are integrated into the learning process, thedevelopment of risk reduction plans and the prioritization ofactivities to reduce vulnerability to natural hazards. A key success factor is people's awareness of the disaster risksand their awareness of the fact that they need to reduce theirvulnerabilities.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedKey lessons learned from this practice are:

• Work coordination and activityidentification among schools andcommunities have enhanced people'sparticipation.

• Local involvement and local "political"commitment are fundamental to thesuccess of risk management processes.From the outset, local decision makers,elders, leaders and officials wereintegrated into the process and into thedevelopment of risk reduction plans.

One of the major challenges of this projectwas how to win the support of the nativecommunities. Native communities had to beconvinced that the process was genuinelyparticipatory and that community memberswould make their own decisions on how therisk reduction process would proceed andwhat activities to implement. Thecommunities have been reassured that theirsocial systems and cultures would berespected.


The project is easy to be replicated in communities with participatory decision making processes. One precondition islocal "political" commitment of all the individuals and organizations involved.

46


Mainstreaming Community-BasedMitigation in City GovernanceCommunity-Based Disaster Risk Management & Local GovernanceCenter for Disaster Preparedness (CDP)(In partnership with ADPC)

Philippines

The present project is part of a larger initiative called"Program for Hydro-Meteorological Mitigation forSecondary Cities in Asia" (PROMISE), a programmethat covers several countries in Asia.

It is considered to be innovative because it seeks tomainstream community-based disaster risk managementproject (CBDRM) into city good governance.Implemented in the City of Dagupan, north of Manilaon Luzon Island in northern Philippines, by the"Center for Disaster Preparedness" (CDP), the projecthas provided an opportunity for city officials to go back

to the city's (urban) village communities and train themon CBDRM. Barangay12 Disaster CoordinatingCouncils were revitalized, which helped develop villagedisaster risk reduction plans that have benefited the city.

The project has been instrumental in bridging the gapbetween high-level officials and the community throughdisaster risk communication and understanding ofdevelopment projects. The project experience is beingshared with regional partners and donors.

Abstract

12 Barangay means "village". It is the smallest administrative unit in both rural and urban settings in the Philippines.

A focus group discussion in Barangay Lasip Chico

47


This project, entitled"Community-Based Disaster RiskManagement (CBDRM) andLocal Governance", is part of alarger initiative called "Programfor Hydro-MeteorologicalMitigation for Secondary Cities inAsia" (PROMISE), a programmethat covers several countries inAsia.

The project was launched inFebruary 2006. It is still underway and a next phase is beingplanned. It is being implementedin Dagupan City, North ofManila, Pangasinan Province,Luzon Island, NorthernPhilippines. Involved in theproject are Dagupan City officials,the Philippines-based Center forDisaster Preparedness (CDP) - anNGO working on disaster riskreduction - and the Asian DisasterPreparedness Center (ADPC)which is both a regional partnerand a facilitator. The projectcreated a Technical WorkingGroup (TWG) composed of Cityheads and staff who are alsomembers of the City DisasterCoordinating Council (CDCC).

The five components of thisproject are: (1) CBDRMParticipatory Risk Assessment(PRA) Training of Trainers (ToT)for the City Officials, who in turnprovide training to communities;(2) Reactivation of the CDCC(City Disaster CoordinatingCouncil) and BDCC (BarangayDisaster Coordinating Council);(3) Institutionalization of a school"Disaster Safety Day"; (4)Celebration of the Disaster SafetyDay in all schools in PangasinanProvince (where Dagupan City islocated); (5) Developing andimplementing a City Disaster RiskReduction Plan.

Goal and Objectives

Increased involvement of stakeholders in CBDRM has encouraged DagupanCity heads and staff to address the vulnerability of some of the city's villages tohydro-meteorological hazards, especially after they saw for themselves the plightof the villagers.

The project seeks to mainstream CBDRM into city governance. Its objectivesare:• Adoption of specific hydro-meteorological disaster preparedness and mitigation

measures to enable stakeholders to address hydro-meteorological disaster risks.• Increased stakeholders involvement and further enhancement of strategies, tools

and methodologies related to community preparedness and mitigation of hydro-meteorological disasters in urban communities.

• Enhanced coordination with donors to promote sustainability and to ensureprogramme activities in agreement with donor countries and regional strategies.

• Strengthened networks and stronger regional links among relevant riskmanagement institutions/organizations for improving potential and capacity forapplication and dissemination of lessons learned.


The TWG and CDP promoted CBDRM and governance in the eight mostvulnerable communities first, then within the remaining 23 barangays of DagupanCity. The revitalization of Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils (BDCCs)was implemented by the community members themselves with guidance from theTWG and CDP.

Open dialogues allowed members of the eight target vulnerable communities toair their grievances and sentiments to the city government officials who, in turn,explained the various issues faced by the city. A wholesome atmosphere wasdeveloped, which helped the communities implement a number of disastermitigation activities in consultation with the city officials. As a result of this projectthe following major outcomes and results have been achieved:

• Gap between high-level officials and the community were bridged throughdisaster risk communication and understanding of development projects.

• DRR plans were developed by eight target vulnerable communities andintegrated into the City Disaster Risk Reduction Plan.

• Four community early warning and evacuation plans were completed.• CBDRM and governance were promoted in eight most vulnerable

communities and in the remaining 23 barangays of Dagupan City. • Revitalization of Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils (BDCCs) was

achieved by community members themselves with guidance from TWG andCDP.

• The "Disaster Safety Day" was marked in the City on 16 July every year.• The "Disaster Safety Day" was extended into a month-long event called "City

Wide Disaster Consciousness Month" in 2006. • A day for "River Clean Up and Mangrove Revegetation" was organized in the

City. • Earthquake and evacuation drills were carried out in various schools. The city

government claimed some 55,000 students and teachers from both public andprivate schools took part in the drills.

The Initiative

48


Mainstreaming CBDRM in good governanceis a good practice. Indeed, when the NGOand other partner agencies leave the city,residents are already equipped with tools toadvance disaster risk reduction. Theconvergence of a community-level approachand City government's participation also helpsenduring sustainability and ownership. Theregional network facilitated by the AsianDisaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)ensures replication and wider practice. Andthe active involvement of City Governmentand village officials ensures the overall successof the project.

This project is innovative because, unlikeother CBDRM projects that are usuallyimplemented by NGOs with communities, itis implemented in partnership with a Citygovernment.

A key success factor of this project was theCity mayor's continuous support to the largerprogramme. The mayor's support hassignificantly contributed to the smoothimplementation of the project.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedKey lessons learned from the project are:

• Consultation with the Asian Disaster PreparednessCentre (ADPC) is essential for effective reporting ofupdates, logistical requirements and the overall flow ofthe project.

• Flexibility towards community and city schedulesensures acceptance and participation from communitymembers.

• Children's participation ensures that their needs areconsidered and included.

• Networking is deemed essential in early warningsystem.

• Building linkages with both local and internationalNGOs helps in resource mobilization and inenhancing partnerships.

• Barangay residents are very supportive of theprogramme on disaster preparedness, especially if theyare involved in events that showcase their experienceto other agencies, partners and organizations.


The project can be replicated in other cities and other contexts with political will, commitment from other stakeholdersand government support.

49


Sustaining Community DRR with"Endowment Funds" and NaturalResources Management The "Disaster Preparedness Action Plan Tajikistan" Project CARE International

Tajikistan

Tajikistan is prone to a variety of disasters triggered bynatural hazards. In 2003, CARE International launched acommunity-based project entitled "Disaster PreparednessAction Plan Tajikistan". The project seeks to reducedisaster risk through better preparedness amongvulnerable people in three districts of central Tajikistan.

Sixty-four village committees - in the form of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) - have been formed to bethe driving force. The CBOs facilitated the achievementof a number of activities, including: develop hazard, riskand evacuation maps at the community level; small-scalemitigation projects; community drills; training on riskassessment, disaster management, financial management,organization building, leadership, project design,monitoring and evaluation; and dissemination ofinformation by youth volunteers.

Over 54,000 people have benefited from the project:CBO members, community members, other communitymembers, school children, school teachers, localgovernment officials and staff. Better still, for the sake of long-term sustainability, eachCBO has established an "endowment fund" whichenables the community to tackle existing problems locallyand finance other DRR activities with its own resources.Recently, in February 2007, the fourth phase of theproject was launched, featuring another innovative factorof sustainability - a "sustainable natural resourcesmanagement" component.

The project demonstrates that long-term sustainability ofDRR activities can be pursued with the commitment,involvement and resourcefulness of local communities.

Abstract

A disaster simulation exercise at the

community level

50


This project, called "DisasterPreparedness Action PlanTajikistan", focuses oncommunity mobilization,disaster mitigation and capacitybuilding to sustain DisasterPreparedness Management(DPM). Sixty-four villagecommittees - in the form ofcommunity-based organizations(CBOs) - have been formed asdriving forces for disasterpreparedness. The CBOs havebeen trained to handle disasterpreparedness and mitigationissues.

The project was launched in2003, involving three separateprojects or project phases (July2003 - June 2004; June 2004-August 2005; September 2005-November 2006) with aninnovative methodology thatestablishes "endowment funds"for the sake of sustainability. Afourth project was launched inFebruary 2007, incorporatingsustainable Natural ResourcesManagement (NRM) intoDRR.

Funded by DIPECHO, theproject is being implemented indisaster-prone areas of Varzob,Vahdat and Yovon districts inKhatlon region, centralTajikistan. Involved in theproject are communitymembers, school children, localauthorities, the district branch ofthe Ministry of EmergencySituations, the district branch ofthe Ministry of Education, aswell as officials and experts fromthe Institute of Botany and theTajikistan Red Cross/RedCrescent Society.

Goal and Objectives

Tajikistan is prone to a variety of disasters triggered by natural hazards. This, aswell as other factors - including increased interest in disaster reduction in thecountry - led to the project idea. The main goal of the project is to reduce disaster risk in Tajikistan through betterpreparedness among vulnerable people living in areas most affected by recurrentnatural hazards.


The concrete outcomes of the first three projects (or project phases) are asfollows:

• 45 Youth Rescue Groups (volunteer groups) have been organized todisseminate disaster preparedness information to their families and communitymembers.

• 64 hazard, risk and evacuation maps were developed at the community level.• 64 small-scale mitigation projects were completed.• Training were conducted for all 64 CBOs on community risk assessment,

disaster management, financial management, organization building, leadership,fire fighting, first aid health, natural resource management, project design andproject Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).

• 124 community drills were conducted. • 32 project proposals on DRR have been submitted to other donors by CBOs.• Guidelines for using Endowment Funds (EFs) and realization of small-scale

mitigation projects were developed and distributed to CBOs.• Better coordination has been enforced at national, district and local levels and

within CARE, providing a strong system of support to CBOs' preparednessand mitigation activities, as well as an effective venue for sharing lessons.

• Public awareness on disaster preparedness was raised through training, schoolcompetitions, evacuation drills and IEC (Information-Education-Communication) material.

In order to implement the project, CARE International suggested the formationof village committees (referred to as CBOs) for the purpose of disasterpreparedness. Sixty-four CBOs, with an average membership of 31 (includingmen and women), have been established since 2003, getting training and supportfrom CARE. Many of the CBOs have since become very active, taking disasterpreparedness and village development into their own hands, with support fromlocal authorities (jamoats13) that are involved in all project stages. Small grantshave also been provided to each CBO to carry out a sample "small-scalemitigation project" (e.g. building a flood protection wall in their village) withsupport from and under the supervision of an engineer provided by CARE. Lastbut not least, CARE developed a Monitoring & Evaluation matrix andconducted monitoring using an M&E checklist.

Overall, 54,601 people have benefited from the three project phases so far,including 1,981 members of at least 64 community-based organizations, 41,000other community members, 11,400 school children, 90 school teachers and 130local government officials and staff.

The Initiative

13 Jamoat is often referred to as "village" or "neighbourhood".

51


This is a good practice because itsresults can have a long-term impact.For instance, for the sake ofsustainability, each CBO has set up itsown "Endowment Fund" which enablesthe community to tackle existingproblems locally and finance otherDRR activities with its own resources.Another innovative factor ofsustainability was incorporated into theongoing fourth project phase launchedin February 2007: a "sustainable naturalresource management" component.Another innovative element is raisingpublic awareness on disasterpreparedness and response throughschool volunteers.

A key success factor of the project iscross visits among CBOs.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe project demonstrates that the community itself should be akey actor of disaster preparedness, and that long-termsustainability of DRR activities can be pursued with thecommitment, involvement and resoluteness of local communities.The following key lessons were also learned from the threeprevious projects and incorporated into the ongoing fourthproject:

• Include earthquake-safe construction techniques in the project.• Introduce good quality training on project proposal writing for

other NGOs (DIPECHO partners).• Establish, in one pilot jamoat, a (CBO-based) "Emergency

Response Coordination Centre" (ERCC) to coordinatemobilization for efficient and effective disaster response.

• Incorporate sustainable natural resource management (NRM)into disaster risk reduction.


The methodology of working with and through village committees (CBOs) is likely to work in many countries -provided that local authorities cooperate. In more segregated societies (e.g. with strong ethnic or gender differences,etc.), the composition and representation of CBOs may be a challenge.

52


Flood and Typhoon-ResilientHomes through Cost-EffectiveRetrofitting "Vaccinate Your Home" - Preventive Action toReduce Damage Caused by Floods and Typhoons inVietnam Development Workshop France (DWF)

Vietnam

Vietnam's disaster risk reduction strategy paysinsufficient attention to the capacity of families and localcommunities to play a key role. Top-down approachesneed to mesh with community-based disaster riskreduction potential.

A Development Workshop France (DWF) programmeefficiently demonstrates that communities can be adynamic force in reducing risks directly related to localcontexts, and that their potential can be mobilizedthrough participatory commune-level disaster riskreduction planning, training and outreach, andpreventive strengthening of housing and publicbuildings.

The DWF Programme seeks to help reduce the impactof typhoons and floods on housing and publicbuildings; loss of housing being specifically a majorfamily setback with repercussions on all other aspects offamily life and development.

The Programme is practical, efficient and cost effective.Even though financial institutions have not taken up yetthe idea of granting credit to people concerned, manyfamilies and communities immediately put their moneyinto it after seeing its concrete and tangible results.

Abstract

Trainig builders onkey safety points

53


This initiative is a disasterreduction programme aimingto reduce the impact oftyphoons and floods onhousing; loss of housing beinga major family setback withrepercussions on all otheraspects of family life anddevelopment.

The Programme kicked off in1999 and is still continuingwith further phases planned.Phases 1 and 2 wereimplemented from 1999 to2003 funded by the CanadianInternational DevelopmentAgency (CIDA), and Phases3, 4 and 5 supported by theEuropean CommissionHumanitarian aid Office(ECHO) through its DisasterPreparedness programmeknown as DIPECHO(Disaster Preparedness,European CommissionHumanitarian aid Office). Thecurrent phase runs through to2008

Implemented by DevelopmentWorkshop France (DWF) incollaboration with the ThuaThien Hué ConstructionConsultants Stock Company,the Programme has been runin Thua Thien Hué (TTH)Province in Central Vietnam,involving over 100,000 peopleannually in awarenesscampaigns, including:commune, district andprovincial people's committees;some 600 teachers; 1,500school children; and 550builders. The programmetargets every year some 4,000direct beneficiaries, includingsome 250 families.

Goal and Objectives

The initiative has been launched because Vietnam's disaster risk reductionstrategy pays insufficient attention to the capacity of families and localcommunities to play a key role, suggesting that top-down approaches shouldmesh with community-based disaster risk reduction potential. The otherreason for launching the initiative is to reduce the general impact of loss ofhousing caused by typhoons and floods.


Based on risk identification and the need to show how preventive action canreduce the identified risks, the Programme involves local and grassrootsconsultation and preventive action planning. Its central theme is to makefamilies and the community active players in the process of reducing thevulnerability through the integration of storm resistant techniques in existingand future building. Demonstration and training have equally been keycomponents of the Programme's strategy.

DWF promotes the preventive strengthening of existing houses and publicbuildings based on ten essentially generic key principles of typhoon resistantconstruction. It encourages the application of these same principles to theconstruction of new buildings by both government and the private sector andin particular as part of the Vietnam Government's "Temporary HouseReplacement" programmes that aim to provide a more secure environment inwhich the extremely poor can improve their situation.

Each of the ten key points of typhoon resistant construction describes aprinciple that either reduces the risk of damage to the building structure orreduces the risk of loss of materials, such as roof covering. For example, theveranda roof (a high risk item) should be structurally separate from the mainroof of the house. The connections between all individual parts of thestructure, from the ground to the ridge, have to be strong. Doors andshutters should allow the building to be closed up. All parts of the roof andwall structure must be firmly connected. Roof sheets or tiles must be held ortied down. Trees should be planted to form wind breaks. The ten key points

The Initiative

A model house travels to the communes to show safe construction techniques

54


The DWF programme is a good practice because itis both practical and efficient. This is evidenced bythe fact that families and communities immediatelyput their money into the DWF approach afterseeing its concrete and tangible results.

One innovative aspect of the Programme is the keyrole of participatory communication actions thatinvolve people from all levels in getting theprevention message across. Another innovation isthe demonstrative value of showing how housingand public buildings can be made to resistdisasters. The third innovation consists in showingthat the whole process is economically viable.

A long-term success/failure factor of this initiativemay be the fact that financial institutions have nottaken up the idea of granting credit for preventivestrengthening of houses, yet the idea has been wellreceived by beneficiary families. This issue still hasto be addressed. A possible link with disasterinsurance should be explored.

The Good PracticeLessons LearnedThe key lessons learned from this initiative are:

• Once convinced, people and families are wellprepared to commit their own funds to takepreventive action to reduce the risk of loss ordamage to their own homes;

• Community residents can give equal treatment tocommunity facilities and public facilities as long asthe "common good" dimension is perceived ; and

• Scepticism about the value of retrofitting houseshas been replaced by confidence.

The major challenge is that government policiesconsider disaster risk reduction (DRR) in macro top-down terms and dismiss the capacity and needs oflocal communities and families. They do not perceivethem as possible key partners in DRR. As a result,national financial commitment does not cover localneeds and families have to find their own resources.


Replicating this practice is easy. DWF has done so in Indonesia (Banda Aceh), and has a long history of training localbuilders to integrate disaster resistant construction techniques into building as far afield as Iran, Afghanistan and inthe Republic of Guinea in Africa.

Some characteristics of the Programme are context specific, but the approach applied in this DWF Programme hasbeen tested in other countries and it works in different contexts.

can be applied to almost any type of building in the communes, regardless of the type of structure or the type ofmaterials that have been used. All but the frailest of houses can be strengthened.

The average cost of preventive strengthening is 250 $ per house. Since the start of the programme families have alwayscontributed to such preventive action, covering some 60% of the costs. From 2002 DWF has piloted the provision ofcredit for house strengthening, and families have amply demonstrated that they will borrow and repay these short termloans (18 months) to cover part of the costs.

Overall, the Programme shows that preventive strengthening of housing and public buildings is viable, cheap andeffective. As hundreds of families have participated, the impact is now both popular - people now trust the approach -and official - provincial authorities have issued orders telling people to apply the DWF prevention approach. Last butnot least, Typhoon Xangsang in 2006 clearly demonstrated that the DWF approach works.

55


Afghanistan: Raising Awareness of Risk through RadioDramaMs. Oenone Chadburn, Tearfund [email protected]

Bangladesh: Voluntary Formation of CommunityOrganizations to Implement DRRMr. Pieter van den Ende, Practical Action [email protected]

Ecuador: “Critical Video Analysis” of Volcanic EruptionMitigation ProjectMs. Alexandra Moncada, Catholic Relief Services (CRS)[email protected]

El Salvador: Children and Youth at the Centre of Disaster Risk ReductionMr. Nick Hall, Plan [email protected]

Haiti: Community Members Design and Implement InformationCampaigns for Their CommunitiesMs. Marilise Turnbull, Oxfam [email protected]

India: Masons with a Disaster Risk Reduction Mission Mr. Manu Gupta, SEEDS [email protected]

India: Disaster Micro-Insurance Scheme for Low-Income GroupsMr. Mihir Bhatt, All India Disaster Mitigation Institute (AIDMI) [email protected]

Indonesia: Combining Science and Indigenous Knowledge toBuild a Community Early Warning System Mr. Jus Nakmofa, PMPB – Community Association for Disaster [email protected]

Kenya: Linking Relief and Development Through the Drought Cycle Management Approach Mr. Ton Haverkort, Catholic Organisation for Relief andDevelopment (CORDAID)[email protected]

Kyrgyzstan: Rural, School “Disaster Teams” to Boost Preparedness Ms. Bina Desai, Christian Aid [email protected]

Malawi: Small and Medium-Scale Initiatives to Control River FlowMs. Oenone Chadburn, Tearfund [email protected]

Namibia: Supporting Local Decision Making with Inter-Community Platform and Local-Level Monitoring Ms. Mary Seely, Desert Research Foundation of Namibia(DRFN)[email protected]

Peru: Disaster Prevention among Native and Mestizo Communities Ms. Susanne Scholaen, German Agro Action [email protected]

Tajikistan: Sustaining Community DRR with “EndowmentFunds” and Natural Resources ManagementMr. Paul Borsboom, CARE [email protected]

Philippines: Mainstreaming Community-Based Mitigation in City GovernanceMs. Lorna Victoria, Center for Disaster Preparedness (CDP) [email protected]

Vietnam: Flood and Typhoon-Resilient Homes through Cost-Effective Retrofitting Mr. John Norton, Development Workshop France (DWF)[email protected]

For more information on the good practices presented in this publication, please contact:

56


UN/ISDR-06-2007-Geneva

Secretariat, Africa, [email protected]/africa

Secretariat, The Americas, [email protected] www.eird.org

Secretariat, Asia and the Pacific, [email protected]/asiapacific

Secretariat, Central Asia, [email protected] www.unisdr.org/asiapacific

Platform for the Promotion of Early [email protected]

Secretariat, GenevaTel. :(+41) 22 917 8908/8907Fax : (+41) 22 917 8964 [email protected] www.unisdr.org

International Environment House II 7-9 Chemin de Balexert CH 1219 ChâtelaineGeneva, Switzerland

Postal Address:Palais des Nations, CH-1211Geneva, Switzerland

I S D RUnited Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

Cover photo by Desert Research Foundation of Namibia (DRFN)

U ND P

Special Unit for South-South Cooperation

South-South CooperationUNDP Regional Center in BangkokUnited Nations Building, 3rd floorRajdamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200Thailandhttp://tcdc.undp.org/

building disaster resilient communities

Documents