Indonesia - community based risk management: a case study

615 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
615
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Indonesia - community based risk management: a case study

  1. 1. Community Based Disaster Risk Management In Juwana River bank In Pati District – Central Java Supported by ICCO Yayasan Society for Health Education Environment and Peace (SHEEP) Indonesia nd F o u a ti o n Indonesia
  2. 2. Background  The destruction in the Juwana river bank area ( Muria and Kendheng Utara ) has increased society risks and vulnerability  Uncertainty of society means of living caused by disaster  Society basic needs that are neglected when disaster happens
  3. 3. YSI Working ARea Map of YSI focus area on the overflow of Juwana river
  4. 4. Yayasan SHEEP Indonesia (YSI) Roles  Vulnerable society in Villages in Juwana river bank has the capacity in reducing the vulnerability in the local level, becomes the goal of YSI in disaster risk reduction  The approach that us used by YSI is Society Management by using methods, such as: Live In, PRA, Village meeting, Participative Mapping, Advocacy or Lobby  Advocacy & Lobby are held in the village, District or Province level
  5. 5. Process INPUT OUTPUT • Fulfillment of basic need and society • Strengthening society based livelihood resource in facing disaster risks organisation capacity • Village has disaster hazard map • Village had Village regulation on Disaster • Strengthening OMS capacity response • Supporting livelihood • Assisted village society has knowledge on sustainability DRR concept • Villager has emergency mechanism and • Policy advocacy DRR based on the local (culture and norm) context (Balai Rakyat) • Disaster Contingency plan in • District government has commitment on local (village) level DRR effort in Pati through civil society involvement
  6. 6. Findings  Society has knowledge on understanding hazards signs (natural signs)  Society has preparedness system and/or as a coping mechanism in facing disaster, e.g. : make faster-slower the planting season, making the house foundation higher, boat ownership as a transportation tools, putting household instrument/furniture higher (bed, kitchen, electronic stuff, etc.) up to relocate to other area or change profession to make sure that the livelihood resource is enough.  Local government tends to neglect society effort as a form of DRR on the development plan (especially in village area).  Project arientation by government (assistance/aid), not knowing and overlapping of policies in the local level regulation  no policy (sectoral)
  7. 7. Lesson learn  Society has the ability to recognise coping mechanism  Society adaptation on the risks need huge “energy”  Active comunication with stakeholders in DRR
  8. 8. Network  Local : Pati Farmer Union, Jaringan Masyarakat Peduli Pegunungan Kendheng (JMPPK), Jaringan Masyarakat Sungai Juwana (JAMPI SAWAN)  Government (local and regional)  ORNOP National : WALHI, MPBI & CSO Forum on Climate justice  Academics : UNIKA Soegijopranata, UPN ‘Veteran’ Yogyakarta & IPB

×