Towards a post-2015 framework for Disaster Risk Reduction BUILDING THE RESILIENCE OF NATIONS AND COMMUNITIES TO DISASTERS

Dear colleagues:

I would like to address question 3 on enhancing cooperation between citizen groups and local governments for effective risk reduction. In effect my answer to question 3 also addresses the issues raised in the first two questions.

In urban areas, presence of informed and aware citizenry provides a useful opportunity for greater cooperation between citizens and local governments. Citizens being first responders in any disaster are well placed to meet their own and their neighbors’ immediate needs during emergencies. Public emergency services may be overwhelmed during such situations as demand would far outstrip available resources. Supplanting citizen resources can help meet crucial needs. Such resources are available in various forms – as trained manpower in first aid, search and rescue, dissemination of vital public messages, emergency relief supplies and safe refuge areas. Pre-positioning such citizen based resources would be required if they have to be utilized when needed. Municipal governments need to work much in advance with neighborhood groups, market associations, local schools, colleges, hospitals and other public institutions to know what resources are available and how best they can they be mobilized.

Citizen led committees and forums can provide enabling environment for sustained government citizen partnership in disaster risk management. Practiced successfully in a few countries, similar local forums are pro-actively engaged with their governments in risk identification, mitigation, preparedness, relief and recovery actions. Citizen forums for risk reduction may be considered as informal institutions, that are convened especially to address issues related to disaster risk. Forums in turn would represent smaller but larger number of constituencies and/or institutions in the city thereby having a wide outreach for raising appropriate knowledge and awareness on risk reduction .

Partnerships with local governments enable improved mainstreaming of risk reduction and resilience building in local development programs. Further, through their own resources, citizen forums demonstrate proof of action by volunteering in local level action. Over a period of time such forums contribute to better risk governance and emergency preparedness.

Moving away from mere “preparedness for response”, citizen forums help address “everyday disasters” that reveal some of the underlying causes leading to large scale disaster events. These are achieved through a two pronged strategy – prioritizing risk mitigation action by local governments, and raising voices against actions that potentially increase exposure and vulnerability of citizens.

Enabling citizen forums in urban areas, would require governments to recognize potential participants to such partnership program, for humanitarian agencies to step forward and facilitate citizen action and for local research and academic institutions to provide technical assistance where needed. In India, SEEDS is working with its partners in mobilizing 8 such citizen forums on a pilot basis. The response has been very encouraging. From using local sporting events as opportunities to send out messages on well being and safety, to raising strong voices against road building activity that is leading to local flooding, citizen groups may have solutions for the long standing need of resources and the governance to practice gap in urban risk reduction.

I hope my comments are useful,

Thanking you,
Manu Gupta

Director, SEEDS, India

To prioritize disaster risk reduction for local government is the necessity for national, regional and global efforts, recognize the importance of international cooperation and its promotion in support of national efforts, in particular for developing countries.

Consultations organized by the Ministry represent academia, industry, communities, NGOs, experts and victims of disasters to discuss the work in development for disaster reductions and resilience. The priorities need to be debated, information to be shared, communication by global partners and evidence of data.

Dear Friends with common mission, all our thoughts are valuable to find a way forward to make DRR people centric, people led and people owned process and minimize losses in urban areas where a large group of people are migrating and vulnerable. The political leadership will be interested to reach to such groups of people who are prepared to take responsibility and recognize their duties to empower at individual,family and community levels. I am Director General of Saritsa Foundation which has inspired local political leaders to give opportunity to its members and volunteers to be prepared to minimize losses in disasters. The result, you shall be happy to know is that there is a competition at Mumbai/Ahmedabad and Jaipur amongst political groups to build capacity of their volunteers. One more initiative taken by us which has worked is societal/religious organizations have recognized the need to prepare their volunteers to help their community groups to develop Safety culture and help members of their society. These volunteers are awareness raisers and motivators for their community.
It is a learning which is worth sharing that we have been able to impacts mind and heart of people in urban areas to invest in capacity building by understanding their role and responsibility to build resilience and culture of safety by education and training with use of local resources. The local government representatives are slowly recognizing the importance of this change,however the initiative taken by them so far are far from satisfactory. How and why Saritsa Foundation has successfully interwoven schoolchildren,women of urban and rural areas,disabled and common citizens,hospital staff and employees of corporate employees,political groups and religious forums,army families, police personnel and many others because it has developed their faith for partnership . We have no international donors ,no projects, yet, there is an event of building local capacity for past 13 years with minimal resources big resultsThere are people who are helping us to reach to them.A very inspiring example is a Director of vocational training for visually impiared women and men run by National Association for Blinds,INDIA at MUMBAI.They run 6 months training for visually impaired who come from all over INDIA invite the team of Saritsa Foundation regularly to educate and provide them equal opportunity. This change of mindsets is an indicator where we motivate people to contribute for this cause.Governments and political leaders always do their best which may be more of the claims and little on the ground.
UNISDR has a critical responsibility to take DRR to local needy with effective mechanisms and motivation and more revolutionary approach where local government institutions are made accountable by people who want them to support them under their leadership.It is a very vital dimension which I want to share that large amount of resources are spent on the name of infrastructure and response forces where rescue is predominate factor which facilitates serving the aims of people in power not the purpose of empowering people.

Dear All

I have recently joined the private sector after more than 15 years working at senior levels in both state and local governments in Australia. Australia like many other countries is exposed to extensive natural hazards including flooding, bushfire, landslide, earthquakes, etc. From an economic perspective though, flooding is the major natural disaster affecting Australia.

Most recently prior to joining MWH Global, I lead the Land Use Planning Team of the Queensland Reconstruction Authority (QRA) and our objective was to build a stronger, more resilient Queensland. In particular, I lead to state government's involvement in the relocation of Grantham (a small town west of Brisbane) in which 20 people lost their lives to flash flooding - a project in which the Council (with the support of the state) moved the entire town above the floodplain. I also lead numerous other projects including the development of fit for purpose flood mapping for the entire state of Queensland in less than a year.

All of the relevant information can be found at http://www.qldreconstruction.org.au/publications-guides/resilience-rebuilding-guidelines or http://www.qldreconstruction.org.au/publications-guides/land-use-planning

The QRA received 2 Awards for Planning Excellence at the Planning Institute of Australia National Awards Ceremony on 26 April 2013 in acknowledgement of this work. This work is capable of being applied both within Australia and internationally.

The four key elements crucial for all Local Governments in DRR and resilience include:

1. Technical
2. Governance
3. Strategy
4. Funding

Unfortunately, without all of these ingredients, it is almost impossible for any level of government to competently invest in DRR and resilience. More often than not, Local Governments are more than capable of managing the Governance and Strategy elements of decision making, but may not have the technical information to decide on the optimised resilience strategy, and will almost always not have the funds to implement.

From my experience, if we adopt a fit for purpose approach to data collection and technical analysis around mitigation options, then decision making on funding can be linked more accurately to optimised funding strategies.

In Australia the capacity for Local Government to invest in DRR and resilience is severley constrained for funding reasons. Local Governments have limited opportunities to generate revenue. They do however lead Land Use Planning which can be the single biggest driver in effecting resilience in the medium term. Land Use Planning can be used to improve the risk profile of our communties and limit inappropriate future development from occuring in areas susceptible to unacceptable hazards.

The primary disaster recovery arrangements in Australia whilst very effective at rebuilding communities following a disaster event, require no direct contribution from Local Government (generally funded 75% Commonwealth Government and 25% State Government). Over the last 8-9 years, the Commonwealth Government has spent approximately 98% on rebuilding disaster affected community infrastucture and only 2% on mitigation works to protect communities from future events. More recently this focus is changing, but there needs to be a fundamental change in the way in which resilience projects are prioritised and funded from the Commonwealth and State Governments. The stratgy must involve substaintial funds being allocated for the next decade to improve the resilience of the many veulnerable communities.

Nationally, decisions on resilience strategies have been limited by lack of available baseline data to justify investment decisions. It is imperative that any strategies for disaster mitigation/resilience / RDD are accompanied by justifiable investment strategies.

Therefore, in response to the questions posed:

I think there is a general motivation by local government leaders to support DRR and resiience but there isnt the financial capacity to invest the resources required.

In order to provide the resources required, the Commonwealth / State governments need a detailed optimisationation strategy of resilience projects prioritised according to hazard exposure, social impact, economic impact, etc. The ability to provide this has been limited by lack of available data.

The role of citizen groups and local governments should be to collect the data to enable informed decisions on mitigation strategies and to ensure that future land use decisions don't worsen an existing situtation and that future strategic planning starts to address areas where there is an unacceptable risk to members of the community.

Please contact me at brendan.nelson@mwhglobal.com if you would like any further information or practical experience in DRR and resilience.

Kind Regards
Brendan

The technical part of the labor community knowledge; governance with citizen participation by Social audit programs, projects, plans and activities in DRR funding in co-responsibility with stakeholders and sectors, in partnership and alliance for logistic assurance interventions; update data (mapping of actors, resources and inventories) from communities identifying and prioritizing threats and finally, institutionalization achieved with the appropriation of actors at all levels, which improve performance and better inform proposals for sustainable actions.

Estimados todos.
Muy contenta por poder participar en este foro, especiales agradecimientos a Bernadia.

Dear all.
Very glad to participate in this forum, special thanks to Bernadia.

For the three questions of this fórum, there are my answers:

1.-
Español:
- Evidenciando impactos de riesgos potenciales de las distintas localidades, haciendo énfasis en impactos económicos, políticos y sobre las personas.
- Evidenciar que los desastres ocurrirán de todos modos, pero la preparación para enfrentarlos con adecuadas metodologías de gestión de riesgo y de continuidad de servicios genera un control sobre los impactos.
- Generando políticas públicas con incentivos desde el gobierno central hacia los gobiernos locales.
- Política pública con enfoque de derechos, inclusiva y participativa.
- Gobiernos locales con participación ciudadana (El buen gobierno local (Rosales, 2005))

English:
- Showing impacts of potential risks from different localities, emphasizing economic, political and people.
-Evidence that disasters will occur anyway, but preparing to face them with adequate risk management methodologies and continuity of services metodologies generates control over impacts.
- Generating public policies with incentives from the central government to local governments.
- Public policy focused on rights, inclusive and participatory.
- Local governments with participation (local governance (Rosales, 2005))

2.-
Español:
- Política pública con enfoque de derechos que permita el acceso de los beneficios a toda la nación.
- Planificación estratégica para implementación de sistema de ER.
- Campañas de comunicación efectiva con enfoques definidos, impulsadas desde el gobierno central.

English:
- Public policy with rights vision for nation benefit.
- Strategic planning for implementation of ER system.
- Effective communication campaigns with defined approaches, promoted by the central government.

3.-
Español:
- Política pública con enfoque de derechos.
- Técnicas de buen gobierno local: planificación estratégica negociada, planificación participativa, comunicación efectiva, liderazgo democrático, presupuesto participativo.

English:
- Public policy focused on rights.
- Techniques Local Governance: negotiated strategic planning, participatory planning, effective communication, leadership, democratic, participatory budgeting.

Regards for all from Chile.

Marcela.

Local Governments are at the forefront of disaster risk reduction management since they have access to local information and have the potential to mobilize local participation to implement disaster risk management activities locally.Collaboration with citizen groups is very crucial during planning and decision making process as they are the key partners who can help identify resources which are already available and needs to be addressed.It is important empowering vulnerable livelihoods and communities in making cities and communities safer .

Estimados/as participantes:
He leído con suma atención los valiosos aportes de Uds. Esperè un tiempo prudencial para enviar mis ideas, que son acciones en mi trabajo cotidiano.

La motivación de los líderes de gobiernos locales para invertir en la RRDy la resiliencia , está basada , según mi experiencia y conocimiento, en el diseño de "Estrategias de Comunicación". La comunicación es un instrumento de gestión, en nuestro caso, el motor que moviliza todas las propuestas que Uds. han enunciado con claridad y buen criterio.
Se puede motivar, promover, sensibilizar, atraer, persuadir para que los responsables de buscar iniciativas que fortalezcan la institucionalidad de la RRD, se convenzan de que es el mejor camino y trabajen en forma sostenida y permanentemente actualizada.
Les sugiero que, en cada una de las ponencias, hasta aquí enviadas, se incorpore la Gestión de la Comunicación para la RRD" en forma transversal , a toda aspiración de la búsqueda de un compromiso real con la prevención-mitigación de riesgos.

Gestionar la comunicación implica un gran desafío, pero ya hemos podido comprobar que aquello que no se informa adecuadamente, o a destiempo, o improvisadamente, genera confusiones, desarticula cualquier planificación para la RRD, altera la comprensión de los hechos, genera muchas veces caos ( por ejemplo en atención de emergencias), y, sobre todo, no contribuye a una economía de recursos.
Comunicar en la RRD es también un "insumo básico para la supervivencia". Tanto a nivel organizacional , comunitario e individual, se necesita ser tácticos en el uso de distintos instrumentos de comunicación. La mirada es integral y también propicia la centralización de la información, las propuestas interdisciplinarias, la utilización de canales de comunicación adaptados a cada público, la sostenibilidad de los proyectos institucionales, etc.

Abogamos e insistimos en este enfoque, porque también partimos de los axiomas que nos advierten que "lo que no se comunica no existe", " todo comunica" y " no se puede no comunicar". Agregamos , además, que la Gestión de la Comunicación para la RRD debe estar en manos responsables, profesionales, éticas y adecuadamente capacitadas, con un perfil que permita la transdisciplinareidad y el trabajo en equipo

Ya tenemos diagnósticos bastante certeros sobre el estado de la Comunicación para la RRD y qué debemos hacer para promover resiliencia.
Cuando de realizó la I Sesión de la Plataforma Regional, en Panamá, en marzo de 2009, se emitió un informe en donde se destacaban los siguientes items ( enuncio algunos ):

a) La Comunicación, como proceso y propulsor de la RRD todavía no es prioridad y no se la considera como un eje trasversal. Debe ser la columna vertebral de la reducción del riesgo.
. Los tomadores de decisión no tienen clara la diferencia entre " sólo informar y comunicar" . Por ello, se limitan a buscar contactos con los medios de comunicación y no estimulan relaciones sostenibles. Un aspecto a tener en cuenta es la gestión óptima de las TIC, dentro de los planes comuniacionales Las relaciones con los mass mdia también es un componente esencial de la Comunicación Estratégica

b) Debe incluirse la comunicación estratégica en todo proyecto de gestión del riesgo.
c) Se facilita así, la democratización del conocimiento , mayor y mejor orientación de las acciones en la regiones para la reducción de la vulnerabilidad.
d) La comunidad entonces autopercibe su debibilidad y descubre sus capacidades para disminuir el impacto del riesgo. Las poblaciones e intituciones sensibilizadas modifican su conducta y actitud , siendo participes activas de la gestión del riesgo.
e) La comunicación, si es considerada como un tema transversal, propicia la aplicación y el cumplimiento de las Prioridades de Acción del MAH y genera el compromiso multisectorial
d) Debemos fomentar un cambio de paradigma para utilizar instrumentos de
comunicación alternativos y participativos, incluyendo creatividad e innovación
e) Las Plataformas Nacionales y Regionales para la RRD tienen mayor incidencia en la comunidad e instituciones cuando incorporan la gestión de la comunicación

Si bien lo expuesto es una síntesis del Informe , creo que da algunas pautas de cómo lograr mejores resultados, destinados a la motivación de los líderes de gobiernos locales para invertir en la RRD y la resiliencia.
Es pertinente, además, aclarar que la Gestión de la Comunicación es quien selecciona cada instrumento ( RRPP, relaciones con la comunidad, marketing, relaciones con los mass media, uso de las TIC, jornadas, seminarios, comunicación interna, talleres de capacitación, soportes gráficos y audiovisuales, contenidos en la web, etc.) de modo que los resultados esperados, desde todo proyecto, sean positivos. Es también oportuno que se aplique la evaluación continua de las metas alcanzadas, tanto ex ante como ex post.
Muchas gracias por su amable atención.
Estoy a vuestra disposición
Un cordial saludo desde Mendoza

In order to encourage national action to improve DRR implementation at local level, we must, in my view, proceed along the following lines:

INSTITUTIONAL
1. Understand the decision making process regarding DRR at both the national and local levels. this entails understanding what are the demands and oppositions for DRR, who are the agents for change and who are the "gatekeepers" against change. This would allow an understanding of the institutional setup related to DRR and in particular the decision making process.
2. Based on the above, build coalitions for effecting DRR change at the local level - by bringing together civil society organisation, local community organisations, local and national media, local authorities, academics and champions for DRR within various stakeholders organizations including local and national govenrment officials.

GOVERNANCE
3. using the above coalition promote the idea of a forum for discussing national and local DRR related decisions affecting the local level. This entails understanding the decision making process referred to in (1) in order to be able to pinpoint who is taking which decision (or who is NOT taking any decision).

AWARENESS RAISING
4. Raise awareness on the negative long term effects on various stakeholders, the economy and investors in case certain cities are conceived as "not-prepared". Highlight success stories from within the country under consideration, the region and beyond.

CAPACITY BUILDING
5. build capacity on how to move from national strategies and policies to local level strategies and policies
6. build capacities on how to move from strategies and policies to action plans, with a schedule for implementation
7. build capacity on how to develop long term programs in cities (spanning 15 to 20 years for example); where vulnerabilities are assessed (physical, social, economic, institutional and natural) and plans to reduce vulnerabilities are devised with a long term implementation plan. This would allow for: a. avoid duplicity if and when donors offer assistance; b. more realistic budget as a percentage of total/sectoral budget when spanning 20 years, c. raise awareness on complex issues under consideration.

Finally, spread the word that if risk has been accumulating for decades due to unplanned development and investment that did not sufficiently account for disaster risk management considerations, it cannot be solved except by long term, system-based, multi-sectoral interventions.

I think there is enough legal frameworks exists for DRR, good enough resources to carry out DRR and capacity for DRR implementation but what is missing is lack of commitment and linking the three for better future. Their may be many reasons but simplest are higher Govt. not really keen for effective decentralization of powers & responsibility where as Local Government often short of Leadership to capitalize the DRR as an opportunity to reach their citizens of voters with effective communications. On the other side institutions that were designed two or one decades ago are still practicing the same old skills in building the capacity of Local Governments irrespective having access to all latest knowledge & exposure. In other words some way other way both Higher Government and institutions suppose to build Capacity never took confidence of Local Government while delivering or designing policy or trainings etc. rather took business as usual resulting in poor implementation of DRR.
Second many local government even today does not understand true spirits of HFA & DRR and interestingly many don't know about guidelines on National DRR; as many were never involved in designing or framing of national DRR policy or plan.

Third we need to look beyond existing institutional framework. Who are over the year has becoming White Elephants with cash rich and other side new age institutions are rich in knowledge but lack in access to financial support. So we need to look for a momentum for new age institutions that are capable of taking local government on board convincing them importance of DRR.

Fourth, UNISDR and other also need to look for re structuring its Partners and Knowledge Network.

Fifth, More professional advocacy with proper communication i.e. language be used for case studies / posters / video / linking local issues for wider dissemination. We have some examples of posters that we are using in India and accessible by others outside though our network.

Sixth, Media Capacity building is essential along with DRR/DM professionals together and not in parallel at the local level.

Seventh, Campaign needs reinforcement beyond web portals.

Eighth, LGSat needs momentum beyond Govt. mechanism.

Ninth, encourage local governments to use Mayors Toolkit while preparing DRR / DM plans. Even it was learned hat various other UN agencies are not using it while preparing DRR / DM plans

Tenth build effective communication strategy with focus of local languages suitable to Local Government Leaders.

With Best Regards

Piyush

Buenas noches a todos.
Primeramente deseo recordar el rol que está jugando UNISDR, en todos los países del mundo para tomar conciencia sobre un tema tan antiguo como el hombre,pero con soluciones tan nuevas y propias del presente siglo.
En este contexto, es deseable que los líderes locales tengan conciencia que el riesgo es un tema que es parte de nuestras sociedades, esto significa que deben tener CONOCIMIENTO, no sólo a nivel de información sino además en términos conceptuales.Cada país tiene sus propias amenazas y por lo tanto, son los líderes locales quienes deben estar preparados para identificar los riesgos, y no sólo eso sino además identificar quienes son los más vulnerables a estos riesgos.Por ejemplo es necesario conocer a nivel local quienes son en términos individuales quienes serán los más afectados si hay un determinado desastre.Los estudios científicos han definido que los ancianos y niños son altamente vulnerables a los riesgos provocados por ejemplo a un desastre sea un terremoto o tsunami. Talvez la situación frente a una sequía tenga impactos más homogéneos para toda una población.Así los líderes deben informarse y tener conocimientos para decidir la sustentabilidad del desarrollo local.
Para los líderes locales es fundamental saber que invertir en el presente para evitar los riesgos de un desastre será en el futuro,tener una población con mejor calidad de vida,pero también saber que las víctimas disminuirán así como también las perdidas materiales.En cuanto al logro de la resiliencia, es vital que se comprenda que son capacidades que todos debemos tener para salir adelante frente a los impactos de un desastre, esto no es tarea sólo de líderes,sino es de todos.Muchos países tienen experiencias en relación como la población a tenido comportamientos resilientes frente a diversos desastres, quienes estudian la población en condición de pobreza, saben que ellos sobreviven a diferentes desastres pues han aprendido con audacia, y perseverancia a sobreponerse a desastres de todo tipo.

Aciones nacionales para mejorar la aplicación de RRD a nivel local.En este contexto es fundamental el diseño de estrategias y políticas que específicamente tomen en cuenta el tema de RRD ello como como cualquier otro asunto, que es considerado en los instrumentos de planificación tanto nacional como local.
En algunos países existen recursos que se utilizan en la etapa de emergencia provocada por un desastre ,pero en igual condición debe considerarse recursos para las etapas de prevención del desastre.
En nuestros países la prevención debe ser parte de todas la acciones que realicen los grupos sociales, y se debe rescatar el conocimiento tradicional que existe en las sociedades en relación a este conocimiento.
Dependiendo de las formas como se gestiona el poder publico en cada país , si el país se ha comprometido a nivel de Naciones Unidas respetar las normas de gestión de los RRD y ayudar a crear comunidades más resilientes, es un deber de las autoridades nacionales involucrar a los distintos niveles de líderes hasta llegar a lo local.
En este marco, no debe olvidarse que los países que desean un desarrollo sustentable deben también destinar recursos no sólo cuando los desastres muestran sus efectos, sino se debe invertir para evitar los efectos de los RRD en la población.
Mejorar la colaboración entre los grupos de ciudadanos y gobiernos locales para la reducción eficaz de RRD. A medida que las sociedades alcanzan mejores niveles de calidad de vidas, se observa que determinadas capacidades son parte de los diferentes grupos de ciudadanos.Así se verifica que las empresas privadas bajo la llamada Responsabilidad Social se involucran en las etapas de emergencia y reconstrucción después de conocer los impactos de un desastre, pero cada vez más en un mundo globalizado ,las empresas también comienzan a cooperar en la prevención eficaz de las amenazas frente a los riesgos.
Los ciudadanos comunes desean colaborar para prevenir y ello debe ser conocido por los líderes pues nadie quiere vivir los efectos de un desastre,a medida que las sociedades viven toda suerte de desastres, también se crean nuevas institucionalidades tanto, a nivel de escuelas, como de otros formas de representación a nivel local.Es más en muchas comunidades tratan de tener lugares identificados para protegerse frente a los riesgos , parece que esta es un medio lógico frente a las guerras, pero en la actualidad muchas sociedades han aprendido que es necesario dar seguridad frente a riesgos de otros tipos
Gracias por vuestra atención.Saludos cordiales.

Dear Bernadia, all colleagues and friends, warm greetings from Kobe! With some apologies for joining this late, below are some of my thoughts on the 3 questions posed:How do we:

Motivate local government leaders to invest in DRR and resilience?
• Mention and discuss with them the benefits/gains (quantitative and qualitative) of investing in DRR and resilience that would have impact for long-term and sustainable socio-economic development;
• Mention and discuss with them the harms/losses (quantitative and qualitative) of non-investment in DRR and resilience that would bring about loss of lives and properties and would halt or reverse hard-earned development;
• Cite specific illustrative examples of local governments which were rewarded for acting on the virtuous cycle and local governments which were penalized by a vicious cycle but nonetheless learned lessons;
• Challenge local government leaders to leave a package of cultural heritage (laws and regulations; frameworks and strategies; manual of operations and contingency plans; disaster museum such as the one in Kobe/Hyogo; etc) of DRR and resilience to the next generation;

Encourage national actions to improve DRR implementation at the local level?
• Continue awareness-raising activities on the acceleration of the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015: building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters (and its next version) and the 10 essentials for making cities resilient institutionalized in the Ministry of Education as reflected in school/university curricula;
• Recognize and celebrate the progress that 168 Member States (which originally committed to HFA and more) have already accomplished on DRR implementation through the Ministry of Local Government or ministries which oversee local governance;
• Communicate a global reminder (multi-media) to all concerned (emails, tweets, etc) to not be complacent with achievements and current capacities as there is a general consensus that disaster risks have increased due to increased hazards and increased vulnerabilities;

Enhance collaboration between citizen groups and local governments for effective risk reduction?
• Support (technical and financial) grassroots/”village-level” bottom-up approach in collaborating with local governments;
• Recognize the efforts of citizen groups working with local governments during local cultural activities (e.g., town or city feasts, UN days, etc) and through capacity building programmes;
• Use social media and innovative technologies from DRR project/programme conceptualization to implementation to monitoring and evaluation that would appeal and engage people across life courses (children, youth, adults, older people).

I think that a lot of examples (what to do) and lessons learned (what not to do) have already been given and shared by colleagues and friends. The bottom-line is that we need to communicate and share our inspiring stories (like through this on-line dialogue) trying to learn well from each other in our quest for safe, healthy and resilient nations and communities. At WHO, we are promoting strongly the concept of universal health coverage - a powerful equalizer that abolishes distinctions between the rich and the poor, the privileged and the marginalized, the young and the old, ethnic groups, and women and men, and I think an investment which would protect all in times of emergencies and disasters.

Best regards and all the best,
Jaz
Technical Officer, WHO Kobe Centre

Dear Bernadia,

Thank you for the comprehensive summary of what has been discussed to date. As Executive Officer of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS), I could not help but notice the number of critical areas you identify where Earth Observation can make a compelling contribution. I wonder if it is not worth highlighting this in the framework we are considering for post 2015.

In particular, there is a recurring need for consistent disaster risk information, without which informed national policy decisions are not possible. Satellite-based Earth observations can provide a homogenous and easily updatable overview of risk exposure on a local, national, regional and global basis. This is particularly relevant in areas where risk is evolving rapidly such as mega-cities in Southeast Asia. In Jakarta for instance, annual subsidence can be counted in tens of centimeters, with a dramatic impact on seasonal flood risk exposure. Data from Japan’s ALOS satellite and Italy’s COSMO-Skymed satellites have been used to monitor this subsidence on a local and regional basis.

Another area of emphasis you highlight is the need for enhanced collaboration between citizen groups and local governments on disaster risk and resilience issues. In a recent project in Haiti (Kal Haiti – http://kal-haiti.kalimsat.fr/spip.php?article42 ) , the French Space Agency CNES has collected a wide range of satellite data to support reconstruction efforts and engaged the local community in disaster risk reduction efforts. The establishment of a data base providing high resolution imagery and key information on land use, water run-off and other important elements has generated significant interest from local community groups who have taken the initiative to propose their own risk reduction projects using data from the project and benefiting from capacity development support. Projects such as Kal Haiti provide an excellent showcase of what becomes possible when appropriate tools and data sets are made available to local communities, even in areas where resources and existing capacity are limited.

Earth Observation satellites also have a critical role to play in documenting the rapidly changing state of our climate. Whether in regard to rising sea temperatures and levels, atmospheric changes or reduced ice cover, satellites from CEOS Member Agencies have played, and continue to play, a leading role in providing data that contribute to quantifying large and accelerating changes to the Earth's climate. Several recent reports have highlighted the likelihood of increased climate-related extreme hazards. A related concern is the growing exposure of populations through population growth in sensitive areas, such as coastal plains, and in coastal-mega cities, particularly in Asia. Over and above climate change-related phenomena, the satellites operated by CEOS Agencies also provide key ground motion datasets used in improving our understanding of seismic and volcanic hazards, for example. These changes create serious new risks that are often poorly understood and documented.

In November 2011, at the 25th CEOS Plenary Meeting in Lucca, Italy, CEOS Agencies created an ad hoc disaster risk management team to consider how space agencies could contribute to improving disaster risk management (DRM) on a global basis, for all phases of the disaster management cycle. The team, made up of ten space agencies, spent the last year preparing a report and action plan for CEOS Agencies to endorse. At the 26th Plenary Meeting in November 2012, in Bangalore, India, the report and a number of proposed actions were approved and steps to implement the recommendations are underway. In particular, CEOS is preparing a Global Satellite Observation Strategy to support DRM and a series of pilot demonstrations that highlight how satellites can improve our understanding of changing risk and support measures to prevent disasters, and better manage them when they do occur.

It is clear that the static view of hazard intensity and extent on one hand and exposure on the other must evolve to better capture the dynamic nature of these phenomena. New dynamic models where hazards and exposure can be tracked and updated constantly are needed. New satellite-based data, obtained through improved space agency coordination, and new tools to interpret them will allow us to better understand hazards than ever before. In the coming years, DRM stakeholders can better integrate the benefits of such technological advances into our decision-making and planning processes to ensure that we are better prepared to address risk than before.

Ivan Petiteville, European Space Agency (ESA) on behalf of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS)

National level action can be clearly enhanced by establishing a national platform that can promote work to identify and fill the gaps in DRR. The platform needs to be mandated by the national government and should support local authorities in the ways they have requested.
Janet Edwards
International coordinator for Swedens National Platfirm for DRR

In Canada, the disincentive for local governments to invest in DRR at the property development or redevelopment level is based on a disconnect between those who benefit from, and those who pay for, poorly selected development sites. The solution is to make the same group responsible for both of these two areas.

To demonstrate, it's the local government who benefits from any development permit costs and property tax contributions for the developments occuring in their community. Should any Disaster Financial Assistance be required to support the property owner as a result of having incurred damaged for developing property in areas of high risk, that responsibility falls upon the Provincial and Federal Governments.

If the same organization who receives the initial and ongoing income from development were responsible to pay for damage when the development falls victim to a foreseeable risk, the development decisions would begin to match the risk.