1. Safe Cities Session 1 World Bank Institute Fouad Bendimerad, Ph.D., P.E Disaster risk and its management In the context of local government 1

2. Safe Cities Who is impacted by disasters  Everyone  The poor will see the chances they may have had to come out of poverty become even dimmer. “Disasters seek out the poor and make sure they remain poor”  Children, the old and the less-privileged elements of society suffer long-term losses  A portion of the “middle class” instantly becomes poor because it loses its means for well-being  Small businesses and family enterprises often sustain catastrophic losses 2

3. Safe Cities Cost of disasters  In the decade from 1990 to 1999, close to 2 billion people have been affected by disasters worldwide with a median loss of about $50 billion.  An average of 100,000 people lose their lives every year from disasters.  Average cost has increased six-fold in the last 30 years and could reach $300 billion per year by 2030. 3

4. Safe Cities Cost of disasters in the developing world  Disasters disproportionably impact developing and least developed countries compared to developed countries 97% of the deaths 10-times the loss (as measured by GDP)  Recovery is immeasurably longer  Badly needed infrastructure is demolished  Development is pushed back (Resources are diverted from basic services and from development projects towards reconstruction)  The poor are most impacted and human suffering becomes more pervasive 4

5. Safe Cities Unsustainable development unsustainable risk  Disasters are not natural phenomena; they are the direct results of development  Unsustainable development has increased exposure to natural hazards due to: Increased of concentration of population in hazardous areas Increased vulnerability of the built environment due to shoddy and illicit construction Increased fragility of socio-economic systems due to inappropriate development practices and environmental mismanagement Unprepared populations and institutions Social destitution and social injustice  Together these correlated factors create a trend of increasing societal susceptibility and diminishing resilience. 5

6. Safe Cities  In 1950, 18% of the developing world lived in cities; by 2030, this percentage will increase to 60%  In 2002, the developing world had 15 cities with population greater than 8 million people  In 2010, 8 out of 10 largest cities will be in the developing world, including Mexico City, Dhaka, Mumbai, Lagos  Many of these cities are located in earthquake-prone areas, tropical cyclone tracks and flood-prone areas 6 Stunning urban demographics World’s 50 Largest Cities Threatened Worldwide Threatened in Developing Countries Earthquake Threatened Population Million

7. Safe Cities Earthquake risk to megacities  About 70 of the largest cities in the world can expect a strong earthquake on average once every 50 years  Cities like Istanbul, Dhaka, Manila, Cairo, Mexico City, Kathmandu, Bogotá, Algiers and many others are threatened by earthquakes  An earthquake in these cities would cause a catastrophe of unparalleled proportions 7 Earthquakes constitute the most disastrous hazard and the largest challenge for preparation and mitigation

8. Safe Cities Recent major urban earthquakes 8 Developed countries have been able to control life loss from earthquakes by improving construction and land-use practices and raising awareness. EarthquakePeople killedFinancial damage Tangshan, China – 1975250,000 Kobe, Japan –19956,000$120 billion Izmit, Turkey, 199919,000$10 billion Gujarat, India, 200118,000$3billion Boumerdes, Algeria2,300$5 billion Bam, Iran45,000?? Northridge, USA, 199457 dead$46billion

9. Safe Cities Losses from disasters  Direct material losses: Property, crops, infrastructure, lifelines, livestock, and critical facilities  Human Losses: Death, injury, population displacement, long term trauma.  Environmental Losses: Deforestation, hazardous material release.  Weakening of institutions and disturbance of social structures.  Reduction of economic and human potential of society: Exacerbated poverty, impaired small business and industry, disabled lifelines and infrastructure.  Diversion of funds from development and from social services. 9

10. Safe Cities Impediments to disaster risk reduction (DRR )  Factor No. 1: Lack of mechanisms to mainstream disaster risk reduction within institutional functions and missions: DRR takes place when it is inherently embedded in the day-to-day functions and mission of every single institution of the local government; Through targeted policies, organizational changes and awareness raising, local governments can progressively mainstream DRR in day-to-day practice of its institutions. 10

11. Safe Cities Impediments to disaster risk reduction (cont.)  Factor No. 2: Rigid bureaucratic structures that are not suited for cross-organizational cooperation and integration: DRR involves integration of knowledge from several disciplines: Urban planning, building and construction, earth science, environmental science, sociology, finance, law, etc.; DRR involves exchange of information and practices across institutions and across sectors of the local government; Further, DRR require acquisition of new and specialized expertise; Hence, the implementation of DRR requires flexibility in structures and mechanisms for sharing knowledge and information. 11

12. Safe Cities Impediments to disaster risk reduction (cont.)  Factor No. 3: Lack of capacity and inefficient use of resources: Local governments usually lack capacity to understand risks and implement DRR Existing community and social resources are often inefficiently used (e.g., universities, professional organizations, etc.) Local governments must seek partnerships and find resources among the active agents of the community.  Factor No. 4: Lack of knowledge of disaster risk factors and options for disaster risk reduction: Most often local governments and communities do not understand the risk parameters of their environment and the DRR options available to them. 12

13. Safe Cities Impediments to disaster risk reduction (cont.)  Factor No. 5: Lack of awareness on the part of institutions and civil society, which relegates disaster risk reduction among public policy priorities: In front of competing priorities for resources, DRR often gets low attention Lack of awareness by communities and the general public inhibits social pressure on government Public policy requires the development of a common agenda, leadership, and advocacy. 13

14. Safe Cities Disasters in the context of local government  Local government is aware of community issues and its own potential  Local government knows the stakeholders and their agenda  Local Government understands the cultural intricacies  Local Government is in charge of providing services, and in particular urban planning, construction permits, transportation, health care  Local Government is part of the “first responders” The importance of decentralization of disaster risk management has yet to be fully recognized and systematically applied in developing countries. 14

15. Safe Cities The importance of decentralization  When decision-making and resources are concentrated at the central level, local governments cannot effectively undertake disaster management.  The lack of local authority on disaster management de-links land- use planning, urban settlement and construction control from risk reduction efforts, and thus further exacerbates the vulnerabilities of communities.  Decentralization is necessary in order to build local capacity 15

16. Safe Cities In sum…  A national issue for each country.  The responsibility of all the active agents of a country’s society.  A concern to each community.  A central government’s problem or a local government’s problem.  An academician’s problem or a politician’s problem.  A citizen’s problem or a destiny problem. Disaster risk management is … 16 Disaster risk mitigation is not…