Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Disaster Risks and Capacities in Central Asia
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Disaster Risks and Capacities in Central Asia


UNDP presentation - Michael Thurman, Regional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor, ECIS …

UNDP presentation - Michael Thurman, Regional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor, ECIS
"Improving Regional Coordination in Managing Compound Risks in Central Asia“ 14-15 April 2011

Published in Technology , Self Improvement
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • Urbanization has significantly increased exposure to seismic hazards.


  • 1. Disaster Risks andCapacities inCentral AsiaMichael ThurmanRegional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor, ECIS"Improving Regional Coordination in ManagingCompound Risks in Central Asia“ 14-15 April 2011
  • 2. Contents1. Risk = hazard exposure x vulnerability2. Capacity Averages (from CACDRR Capacity Assessment)3. Capacity Gaps and capacity Development Priorities (from Group Work for HFA 1, 3, and 4)
  • 3. Geophysical Hazards• All major cities are highly exposed and contain a high concentration of population and economic activity.• Secondary effects include landslides, mudflows, and GLOFs. Not enough is known concerning the triggering effect.• Landslides triggered by geological, seismic, and meteorological processes• Landslides will become more frequent and intensify with climate change.• Transboundary hazards in Ferghana Valley and northern Tien Shan.
  • 4. Meteorological Hazards• 1991-2007: hydrologicalvariability increased.• Downstream exposure tofloods and hydrological droughtoften due to poor managementat all levels.•Ferghana Valley and upperAmu Darya basin highlyexposed to transboundarymudflow and GLOF hazards.•GLOFs are a growing concern,due to glacier melt.• Climate change will amplifyexposure to all meteorologicalhazards.
  • 5. Compound Hazards• Hydrological drought and extreme cold: o “Compound crisis” of 2007-08: natural and man- made factors contributed to exposure o Climate change expected to result in warmer winters, but hydrological drought more severe• Technogenic hazards: Mayli Suu and other toxic waste particularly a concern in the Ferghana Valley
  • 6. Economic Vulnerability• Lack of adequate data, due tocollection and analysisprocedures for global andnational datasets.• Potential for losses as % ofGDP highest for Tajikistan andKyrgyzstan.• Absolute amount of potentiallosses for other countries arehigher.• Vulnerable to meteorologicalhazards: weather-dependentsectors account for 40-60% ofGDP.
  • 7. Structural Vulnerability • Intense earthquake in a major city in Central Asia would collapse or severely damage around half of the residential building stock. • Water infrastructure deteriorated and vulnerable to flood hazards • Outdated building codes and lax enforcement attenuate structural vulnerability
  • 8. Socioeconomic Vulnerabilities• Poverty, income disparities,and social status significantlylower resilience.• Poor municipal and land useplanning place populations,infrastructure, and livelihoods inthe way of hazards.• Unsustainable operations andmaintenance of infrastructure,especially for water, increasesboth exposure and vulnerability.• Agriculture requiresdevelopment to lowervulnerability to drought andfloods.• Environmental degradationcontributes to exposure andvulnerability.
  • 9. CACDRRR Capacity Assessment Averages Capacity indicators per priority areas of the Hyogo Framework for Action Assessment of the existing capacity level 1 …… 5 Desired capacity level/priority (low, medium, high) KAZAKHSTAN KYRGYZSTAN TAJIKISTANHFA1: Enabling 3.00 2.66 3.01environment &institutionsHFA 2: Risk 2.75 2.44 2.51assessment &early warningHFA 3: Awareness 2.80 2.33 2.23and educationHFA 4: Prevention 3.09 2.02 2.02and mitigationHFA 5: 3.36 2.03 2.20Preparedness &DRR Overview Course – Presentation 02 – Disaster Risk & Development (Block 01) – Slide9/15 – 6 May, 2011
  • 10. Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 1Ensuring Commitment, Enabling Environment and Institutional Development
  • 11. Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 3 Public Awareness and Education
  • 12. Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 4 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation
  • 13. THANK YOU!