report capacity-building seminar on “collaborative approaches...
TRANSCRIPT
2014
REPORT
Capacity-building seminar on “Collaborative Approaches and Solutions
to Disasters Management Challenges for SIDS Municipalities in the
Context of Sustainable Development”
Report
Capacity-building seminar on “Collaborative Approaches
and Solutions to Disasters Management Challenges for SIDS
Municipalities in the Context of Sustainable Development”
Singapore, 10-12 November 2014
Table of Contents
Background…………………………………………………………………………………..1
Organisation of the Seminar………………………………………………………………2
Findings and Recommendations
DRR Institutional and Administrative Frameworks in SIDS
municipalities/local authorities including technology
transfer and capacity building…………………………………………………………...3
Environmental protection and strengthening the eco-system……………………..3
Multi Hazard Risk Assessment– Knowing SIDS Specific Risks………………………….4
Infrastructure protection, building regulations and land use planning……………4
Protection of vital facilities: education and health……………………………………5
Training, Education and Public Awareness………………………………………….….5
SIDS specific Financing and Resource Mobilization for DRR………………………...6
Partnerships for Effective Preparedness, Early Warning and
Response; Recovery and Rebuilding Communities……………………………….….6
Way Forward.............................................................................................................…...7
List of Participants…………………………………………………………………………....8
Background
he Capacity-building seminar on
“Collaborative Approaches and Solutions
to Disasters Management Challenges for
SIDS Municipalities in the Context of
Sustainable Development” was organized by
DESA/Division for Sustainable Development
(DSD), in cooperation with UN-OHRLLS and
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Singapore
through the Singapore Cooperation Pro-
gramme. The meeting took place in Singa-
pore from 10 to 12 November 2014 to address
SIDS’ Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) manage-
ment as these countries are located amongst
the world’s most vulnerable regions, facing
intense and frequent natural and
environmental disasters inflicting significant
damage on islands’ infrastructure and
livelihoods. Moreover, the increasing impact
of disasters is having a disproportionately
high economic, social and environmental
cost on small island developing States where
according to UNISDR, six of the top ten
countries with the highest proportion of
annual average losses against their yearly
production of gross capital are SIDS.
Twenty years after the Earth Summit, the out-
come document of the Rio+20 Conference
highlighted the fact that not only the
sustainable development of the Small Island
Developing States (SIDS) but even their sur-
vival and viability are intimately linked to their
capacity to reduce risks and their vulnerabili-
ties and to enhance the resilience of their
communities and infrastructure to natural
and anthropogenic disasters, sea-level rise
and other impacts of climate change, not to
mention their capacity to limit environmental
degradation.
The Conference firmly placed disaster risk
reduction on the sustainable development
agenda and governments called for
“disaster risk reduction and building of
resilience to disasters to be addressed with a
renewed sense of urgency in the context of
sustainable development and poverty
eradication….” This will be further reinforced
in the upcoming 2015 Third World
Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in
Sendai, Japan.
More recently, in September 2014, at the
Third International Conference on Small
Island Developing States, held in Apia,
Samoa, it was recognized that sustainable
development will not be achieved without
sound, efficient disaster risk management in
particular for SIDS’ municipalities. Member
states also recognized that SIDS continue to
grapple with the effects of disasters and that
the complexity and daunting nature of
building resilience of municipalities and local
communities in SIDS require a deeper
collaboration among different stakeholders.
Local governments/public utilities facing
enormous resource challenges in building
resilience and protecting their communities
are increasingly looking towards collabora-
tion and partnerships as a means to build
resilient communities.
The seminar brought together representatives
from local and national SIDS governments,
IGOs, NGOs, civil society, academia, the
private sector, local communities, and the
UN system including the World Bank. The list
of participants is appended at the end of the
report.
The seminar sought to:
1. Further identify major challenges facing
municipalities and local authorities (includ-
ing lack of institutional, technical and
financial capacities and flood -protection
infrastructure) and look at ways and
means for strengthening the capacities of
local authorities/municipalities to build
resilience to natural disasters including
through sharing of lessons learned and
experience gained, having a better
T
understanding of institutional and policy
frameworks requirements, identifying gaps
in policies and practices but most
importantly finding viable and
implementable solutions.
2. Promote peer learning through South-
South and North-South knowledge
exchange on experiences and good
practices related to DRR, climate change
and sustainable development and agree
on areas where cooperation is most
needed such as reliable data collection
for risk analysis and monitoring;
vulnerability assessments, knowledge
exchange in integrated community
development programmes. In practice,
such collaboration or partnerships should
create win-win solutions for SIDS
municipalities/local authorities and all
stakeholders including the private sector—
if duly supported by appropriate policy
frameworks.
Organization of the seminar
he three-day capacity-building seminar
included lectures delivered by experts,
presentations by participants and group
discussions.
The seminar was divided into the following
twelve sessions with sessions 10 to 12
focussing on Singapore’s experiences:
1. DRR Institutional and Administrative
Frameworks in SIDS municipalities/local
authorities including technology transfer
and capacity building(Exploring SIDS-
specific Best Practice, Lessons Learned
and Closing Gaps in building resilience)
2. Environmental Protection and Strengthen-
ing of Ecosystems (Addressing the im-
portance of environmental protection
and ecosystem services (including man-
groves, coral reefs etc) as a natural de-
fence against natural hazards)
3. Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment – Knowing
SIDS Specific Risks (Including Visualizing
Resilience: Using Mapping Tools to Plan for
Hazards – including Climate Change. This
session will also explore SIDS specific
natural disasters and draw on specific
lessons (including shortcomings) and best
practice)
4. Infrastructure Protection, Building Regula-
tions and Land Use Planning (Investing
and maintaining critical infrastructure
such as transport, hospitals, shelters,
electricity, water, telecommunications
etc. that ensures resilience and minimises
risk)
5. Protection of Vital Facilities: Education
and Health. (Focusing on the resilience of
facilities that provide essential social ser-
vices during and in the aftermath of a
disaster)
6. Training, Education and Public Awareness
(Innovative community based Public
Awareness Strategies; exploring Social
Media, Gamification, Mapping and other
creative strategies for effective outreach)
7. SIDS specific Financing and Resource
Mobilization for DRR (Focussing on
creative sources of financing for resilience
that are accessible to SIDS and exploring
the costs of building resilience in SIDS)
8. Partnerships for Effective Preparedness,
Early Warning and Response (Addressing
the types of partnerships required for
effective preparedness and early warning
response including discussions on
technology (ICTs))
9. Recovery and Rebuilding Communities
(Addressing priority areas for recovery
and rebuilding communities including
integrating disaster risk reduction criteria
as a cross-cutting measure and the im-
T
portance of community-based owner-
driven reconstruction)
10. Overview of Crisis Communications
11. Media Management in a Crisis
12. Case Study: Presentation of the SARS Crisis
At the beginning of each session (except for
the last three sessions entirely organized by
our partners from the Singapore Cooperation
Programme) 3-4 speakers were invited to
make a presentation (presentations were
discussed and cleared by DESA beforehand).
Each session was followed by an open floor
discussion.
At the conclusion of the seminar, meeting
participants reviewed the key messages and
recommendations of the three days. The
following findings and recommendations
were discussed and endorsed by all
participants.
Findings and Recommendations
DRR Institutional and Administrative Frame-
works in SIDS municipalities/local authorities
including technology transfer and capacity
building:
1. There is a positive trend of moving from
national to local and community based
DRR strategies and approaches.
2. Not all SIDS have municipal struc-
tures/systems to effectively interface with
communities. This generates new
challenges including the need of linking
them to national strategies. There is
equally a need for increasing decentrali-
zation of risk governance, greater
capacity development at local levels.
3. There is a need for mapping and
clarifying roles and responsibilities of
different levels of government – including
clarifying local responsibilities for land use
planning and implementation.
4. It is necessary to mobilize resources at lo-
cal levels (including by the private sector
and civil society), and to establish
appropriate financing as well as incentive
mechanisms, especially for private sector
partners.
5. Overall for DRR, there is a need for evi-
dence based research, greater coordina-
tion of international and regional
organizations actions at country level
while at the same time insuring that pov-
erty alleviation is addressed with a special
focus on poor people with special needs.
Environmental protection and strengthening
the eco-system:
1. There is an urgent need for ecosystem
based protection solutions, soft where
possible (protective landscapes), hard
only where necessary. These include sand
suppletions, mangrove restoration etc.
Multifunctional solutions are preferred,
which can help obtain financing (multi
stakeholder approach). It is recognised
that most situations will require mixed solu-
tions including soft and hard responses.
Multi-functional solutions should combine
“safety, sustainability and beauty”
2. There is a need for other eco-system
based adaptation solutions such as
reforestation.
3. Disasters and climate risk solutions should
be seen in a more holistic context includ-
ing within on-going development pro-
cesses. In this context, there is a need to
develop more resilient communities and
economically stable communities. To
facilitate such communities, sustainable fi-
nancing mechanisms need to be intro-
duced.
4. There is a need to take action based on
what is known about the value of existing
ecosystem services. Action may be
supported by PES (Payment for ecosystem
services) solutions. These models should
be scaled up and adapted to different
contexts.
5. Ecosystems play key roles in the reduction
of disaster risks. Protecting conserving and
sustaining the ecological resources is
essential for SIDS.
6. Particular attention needs to be paid to
those eco-systems that support economic
activity and how they may be affected
by climate change and other hazards.
Multi Hazard Risk Assessment– Knowing SIDS
Specific Risks:
1. There is a recognition of the important
role of existing regional centres for data
collection, modelling and analysis to
understand the disaster risk, which is quite
complex in SIDS context. However, there is
also a need for greater focus on capacity
development at the country level. More
financial and technical support for risk
assessment is a reality but sustainability of
projects is only possible if they are part of
national programmes. This requires build-
ing national capacities and not only relies
solely on regional data and analysis cen-
tres.
2. There is urgent need for a greater integra-
tion of strategies for risk reduction and CC
planning schemes. This has started in sev-
eral SIDS regions.
3. To be able to improve the in-country
capacities for risk assessment, it is im-
portant to move towards more open
source software, easy to use tools and
techniques so that these analysis become
more affordable for SIDS.
4. There is a need to further recognise the
importance of traditional knowledge in
the conduct of risk assessment.
5. There are successful models of learning
through south-south cooperation, for
example understanding the climate risk
and monsoon forum for risk communica-
tion in Asia.
6. Implementation of the risk assessment can
be improved not only for floods but also
for droughts by establishing minimum
base line risk information.
7. SIDS need to make greater use of GIS and
statistics to support multi-hazard risk
assessment in a cost effective way.
Infrastructure protection, building regulations
and land use planning:
1. There is a need for a mix of hard and soft
measures. The decisions on “which and
where” need to be site specific. This will
include ecosystem based solutions and
where possible appropriate technologies
2. There is a need for adapted designs given
the challenges of climate change and cli-
mate variability
3. Actions are usually taken after disasters to
resolve short term problems but they need
to be decided with a long term vision.
This can also obtain financing.
4. There needs to be lessons in relation to
appropriate siting for infrastructure (i. e.
sand public services). This would also set
the basis for more evidence based
approaches to planning.
5. Land use regulatory systems need to be
updated and improved but they need to
allow for site specific solutions – local ordi-
nances - since solutions may need to be
designed and implemented at
neighbourhood level.
6. There is a need to update, legislate, moni-
tor and enforce building codes and
standards.
7. The need for urban mutability needs to be
better defined and explored. There is no
need to always replace what was there
before a disaster.
8. There are some examples of good prac-
tices in land use legal and institutional
developments such is the case in the Sey-
chelles where the planning committee
have representation form Environmental
experts and DRR officers.
9. Insurance should be explored as a poten-
tial incentive for driving development
practices.
Protection of vital facilities: education and
health:
1. There is a need for greater understanding
of the dual role of public buildings such as
schools and community centres for disas-
ter relief. This requires that these facilities
are disaster resilient and equipped with
emergency utilities and possibly aug-
mented facilities functioning specifically
for periods of calamity. Schools need to
be returned to their normal functions as
soon as possible.
2. There is a need to promote sustainable
health centres equipped with water,
renewable power and communications
so they remain functional during and after
a disaster.
3. Some of these facilities may be built in
disaster prone areas and this requires that
there is mapping of these facilities and
their characteristics so as to be able to
analyse the potential effects under differ-
ent scenarios (of intensity of earth quakes,
for example) and emergency evacuation
plans to safer facilities. It is important that
private facilities/institutions be for-
mally/officially engaged to network and
augment emergency services both pre
and post disaster periods.
4. Information about the state of facilities
and on the situation during real time
emergencies need to be based on stake-
holder engagement however this requires
investments in maintaining sustainable
networks.
Training, Education and Public Awareness:
1. DRR related messages need to be simple,
targeted and coordinated. The same
message should be given by all agencies
to avoid confusion. The use of simple
graphics proved to be very useful.
2. It is important to know who has the man-
date to communicate, to whom and
what is to be achieved ( need
communication plans)
3. Importance of engaging the media can-
not be underestimated: the media are
key players in delivering messages.
4. Communities must have confidence
in/trust the message and the messenger
(use of celebrities is a good practice)
5. Climate change messages need to
acknowledge DRM as a means for mitiga-
tion
6. Mapping underpins all areas of DRM and
should be made available to the public
7. Prevention, preparedness and mitigation
are key to minimize risk. However a
coordinated response is vital.
8. It is important not to rely on one
communication tool only (i.e. SMS is more
useful for region specific or slow set
events. Cellular broadcast works for ur-
gent national messages. Radio can be
useful.
9. The use of traditional knowledge in
communication is highly recommended
SIDS specific Financing and Resource
Mobilization for DRR:
1. Existing funding is fragmented and needs
to be consolidated. In some cases coun-
tries need to use funds more effectively
and efficiently. Countries need to
develop frameworks to obtain and
expend funds with the support of the
international community and regional
agencies.
2. Development partners should respond to
SIDS DRR priorities.
3. Countries have to build their own reputa-
tion and good financial procurement sys-
tems to access funds.
4. Organisations such as the WB are moving
also to more integrated approaches in
their work in slums, providing economic
opportunities for dwellers make them also
more resilient to disasters.
5. Explore use of debt forgiveness for climate
adaptation and risk reduction.
6. There are some issues in relation to the
Risk pooling approach. There is a need to
further explore whether risk pooling is
diverting investments in countries.
7. SIDS also need to inform and influence
global policies for DRR. Stronger coordina-
tion and collaboration amongst SIDS is
needed to influence global policies.
8. There is a need to establish partnerships
with non-traditional donors.
9. There is a need for stronger coordination
between development partners and re-
gional organisations.
10. Access to international funding needs to
be facilitated for SIDS vulnerabilities and
limited capacity.
11. Local resource mobilization needs to be
better facilitated including involvement of
the private sector.
12. There is a strong need to build capacity of
local authorities to access funds. Local
resource mobilization needs to be better
facilitated including involvement of the
private sector.
13. There is a strong need to build capacity of
local authorities to access funds.
Partnerships for Effective Preparedness, Early
Warning and Response; Recovery and
Rebuilding Communities:
1. Information role and responsibilities need
to be clarified ahead of a period of disas-
ter
2. Early warning systems at country level
need to be consistent and interoperable
with existing international, regional and lo-
cal systems.
3. Partnerships can provide leverage and
access to wider networks
4. Informed and timely decision making
based on preparedness is key to survival
5. There is a need to understand the situa-
tions of those at risk and work to ensure
that they are better prepared
6. Ensure that the social, emotional and cul-
tural needs of displaced persons are
considered in the recovery and
reconstruction process- “Happy return”
versus an “early return “
7. The neighborhood community concept is
important not only for “happy return” but
also for preparedness.
8. There is a need to have social structures in
place before DRR is carried out
9. Community capacity needs to be
strengthened as sustainability of an
intervention is a function of community
cohesiveness.
Way forward
1. UNDESA jointly with UNESCAP and
relevant regional organizations to
develop SIDS inter-regional initiative under
the UN development account project.
2. Formalisation of cooperation by the three
SIDS regions by December 2016 (including
to promote peer learning through South-
South and North-South knowledge ex-
change on experiences and good prac-
tices related to DRR, climate change and
sustainable development).
3. UN-OHRLLS to continue to advocate
strongly on the importance of DRR for SIDS
including on building resilience of
communities and as a means of securing
livelihoods of SIDS communities. UN-
OHRLLS will work with all partners to raise
awareness on DRR issues for SIDS including
at the upcoming 2015 Third World
Conference on DRR in Sendai Japan.
Name
Country
Designation
Organisation
1 Mr Alvah Guishard Antigua G.I.S.
Specialist
National Office of Disaster
Services
2 Mr Stephen Russell Bahamas Director Cabinet & Disaster
Management (NEMA)
3 Ms Kerry Hinds Barbados Deputy
Director
Department of
Emergency Management
4 Dr Jose Rubiera Torres Cuba Director National Forecast Center
of the Institute of
Meteorology
5 Ms Alumeci Tuisawau Fiji Director of
Education
Ministry of Education
6 Mr Horace Glaze Jamaica Deputy
Director
General
Office of Disaster
Preparedness and
Emergency Management
7 Ms Mariyam Rifga Maldives Environment
Analyst
Environmental Protection
Agency
8 Ms Eunice Akiwo Palau Director Palau Bureau of Domestic
Affairs
9 Ms Velda Octave-Joseph Saint Lucia Director NEMO
10 Mr Cecilio Sacramento Sao Tome &
Principe
Deputy
Director
Council for the Prevention
and Response to Disasters
11 Mr James Chang-Tave Seychelles Director Development Control
12 Mr Tarakabu Tofinga Kiribati Senior Lands
Planning
Officer
Lands Management
Division,
Ministry of Environment,
Land and Agriculture
13 Dr Stephen Ramroop Trinidad
&Tobago
Chief
Executive
Officer
Office of Disaster
Preparedness and
Emergency Management
14 Dr Ronald Jackson Barbados Executive
Director
Carribean Disaster
Emergency Management
Agency
15 Ms Diane McFadzien Samoa Adaptation
Advisor
Secretariat of the Pacific
Regional Environment
Programme
16 Ms Mereoni Ketewai Fiji Assistant Risk
Mapping
Officer
Secretariat of the Pacific
Community, Applied
Geosciences and
Technology Division
(SOPAC)
17 Ms Frances Reupena Samoa Environment
Sector
Coordinator
Ministry of Natural
Resources and
Environment
18 Ms Venetia Bellers Mauritius Adviser Prime Minister's Office
19 Ms Divina Sabino Seychelles Manager Division of Risk and
Disaster Management,
Ministry of Environment
and Energy
United
Nations
20 Mr Gyan Chandra Acharya Under-
Secretary-
General
and High
Representat
ive
United Nations Office of
the High Representative
for the Least Developed
Countries, Landlocked
Developing Countries and
Small Island Developing
States
21 Ms Kenza Kaouakib-Robinson Senior
Sustainable
Developme-
nt Officer
United Nations
Department of Economic
and Social Affairs
(UNDESA)
22 Mr Jong Soo Yoon Head of
Office
UN Office for Sustainable
Development UNDESA
23 Ms Josefina Maestu Coordinator United Nations Office to
Support the International
Decade for Action
24 Mr Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Chief Disaster Risk Deduction
Division UN Economic and
Social Commission for AP
25 Mr Hans Damien Sass Associate
Programme
Officer
(UNOHRLLS)
World Bank
26 Mr Iwan Gunawan DRM Adviser World Bank
Private
Sector
27 Mr Bert Smolders Netherlands Shelter
Programme
Manager
ARCADIS
Civil Society
28 Dr Vasantha Chase Saint Lucia Consultant Community Leader
29 Mr Hideaki Oda Japan Co-Chair of
High Level
Expert Panel
on Water &
Sanitation
30 Mr Hiroshi Kawamura Japan President DAISY Consortium
Academia
31 Dr David Smith Coordinator Institute for Sustainable
Development, University
of The West Indies
32 Prof Jose Danilo Silvestre Philippines Professor University of the