DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH

Disaster Management Advocacy Strategy
For
Concern Worldwide, Bangladesh
May 2009
By
M. Mokhlesur Rahman
M. Anisul Islam
M. Anowar Hossain

Table of Contents
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background.......................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Goal and Objectives..........................................................................................................................1
2. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................1
3. The Context.........................................................................................................................................4
3.1 Bangladesh and Disasters..................................................................................................................4
3.2 Response to disasters ........................................................................................................................5
4. Gaps in DRR – need for advocacy......................................................................................................6
4.1 Gaps in Understanding DRR.............................................................................................................6
4.2 Disaster preparedness .......................................................................................................................8
4.3 Emergency response ......................................................................................................................10
4.4 Early recovery.................................................................................................................................12
4.5 Rehabilitation..................................................................................................................................13
4.6 Coordination ..................................................................................................................................14
Table
Table 1: Gaps in understanding disaster .................................................................................................7
Table 2: Gaps in disaster preparedness...................................................................................................9
Table 3: Gaps in early warning systems ...............................................................................................10
Table 4: Gaps in emergency response...................................................................................................11
Table 5: Gaps in Early Livelihood recovery.........................................................................................13
Table 6: Gaps in Disaster Rehabilitation ..............................................................................................14
Table 7: Gaps in disaster coordination and monitoring systems...........................................................15
Figure
Figure 1: Steps followed to develop the Disaster Management Advocacy Strategy ..............................3
Figure 2: DRR cycle.................................................................................................................................7
Appendix 1: Key areas of investigation and method ............................................................................15
Annex-1: The Disaster Management Advocacy Strategy.............................................................16

1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Although Bangladesh has made much progress in reducing the disaster risks and protecting its people
from multiplicity of hazards, it appears that more efforts are required to streamline the disaster risk
reduction (DRR) systems to ensure protection of people from damages caused by disasters. To this
end, mainstreaming DRR in the national development framework is a long awaiting demand. The
relevant policies, plans and guidelines have incorporated key DRR issues including setting up of
workable nationwide institutional framework to tackle the disasters risks including building adaptive
capacity. However, people of the country seem yet to realize the benefits of DRR systems through
proper utilization of such policies, plans and institutional arrangements that are in place.
As the DRR systems and institutional structures are in place, proper functioning of them systems with
regard to respond to the need of the vulnerable communities has been the key issue. To this end, it
appears that it is more a governance issue to make the system fully functional and that could be
realized through advocacy activities at its most. Responding to the need, Concern Worldwide (CWW)
has taken up this initiative to develop a disaster management advocacy strategy under its Fourth
DEPECHO Action Plan for South Asia. This strategy is prepared based on a quick review of the
current DRR systems and its functionality with the aim of improving the system that could better
satisfy the demand of the disaster hit communities of Bangladesh. Data and information related to
DRR activities and institutional functions have been gathered from the three hazard prone areas of the
country (viz. chars, haors and coastal zone). Stakeholders‟ workshops have been organized in three
field areas at upazila head quarters level with the participation of government and non government
officials, local government representatives, DMC members, NGOs and communities including
women. The complied field data were then shared with the national levels stakeholders including the
policy makers at the roundtable discussion.
This document is organized in to two broader sections including this short introductory note,
objectives, and methodological aspects as to how we have collected relevant information and data to
develop this advocacy strategy. The first section deals with the supply side focuses on the broader
context of DRR initiatives and issues including gap analysis that necessitates taking actions for
improvement. This section also incorporated the views, experiences and suggestions as expressed by
different stakeholders while interacting with them during the course of developing this strategy
document. The second section focuses on the demand side, comprises the advocacy strategy itself
with objectives, targets, pathways including implementation and evaluation plans as Annex-1.
1.2 Goal and Objectives
The goal of this activity is “to make the disaster management systems of Bangladesh responsive to the
needs and sensitive to the vulnerability of poor and marginal communities in the face of increasing
disaster risks”. However, the specific objectives of this activity are:
 Sensitize relevant stakeholders on the necessity for improving the DRR systems through
widening the understanding of gaps and weaknesses in current approaches (Supply)
 To bring enabling changes in policy and processes in the DRR systems towards achieving
improved and comprehensive disaster risk reduction through advocacy activities (Demand).
2. Methodology
In order to develop this disaster management advocacy strategy, we adopted various methodological
steps and tools. To this end, concerned persons from CWW, CNRS and an independent consultant
engaged by the CWW had several meetings on methods and approaches to be followed including the

2
structure of the strategy document to be prepared. To this end, emphasis was given on documenting
the gaps and weaknesses of current DRR systems including areas where advocacy campaigns to make
the desired changes. Figure1 shows the steps followed in developing this strategy document.
Following are the methods and tools applied:
Review of literatures: As the time and resources available
for accomplishing the task was limited, we had to rely
more on available documents relevant to disaster. To this
end, various reports & documents on DRR including the
policy papers have been reviewed. The notable reviewed
materials included Standing Order on Disaster (SoD),
National Plan for Disaster Management (NPDM), lessons
learned document of the Comprehensive Disaster
Management Program (CDMP) on Sidr, Poverty
Reduction Strategy (PRS), Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) and Hugo Framework of Action (HFA).
Field workshops: To capture the experience and views of
both the disaster managers as well as affected communities
at the ground level, we conducted three field level
workshops with cross sections of DRR stakeholders in
three different hazard prone areas of the country. These
areas include Haor (Sunamgonj district), Char (Jamalpur
district) and Coast (Patuakhali district). The workshops
were attended by the communities, UP, UDMC members,
UzDMC members, NGOs and Government officials
including respective UNOs.
Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): In order to gather DRR information from the ground with focus
on supports & services the communities get form the DRR managers/actors, a number of FGDS were
conducted targeting various stakeholder groups‟ at the very local level viz. UDMCs, men and women
groups using a checklist (Appendix-1).
Key Informants Interview (KII): To get an in depth understanding of the DRR systems and
functionality, gaps and weakness and measures to improve the systems, Key Informant‟s Interviews
(KIIs) were also carried out. KII conducted with some knowledgeable persons both at the local level
as well as at the central level using a pre determined checklist (Appendix-1).
Case studies: A few case studies were carried out on various aspects of DRR activities and
experience of communities in facing the disaster at the ground level.
National Roundtable Discussion: A national roundtable discussion was also organized at the
National Press Club, Dhaka along ith Saptahik 2000 to get feedback and suggestions on the field
findings and strategy development for the DRR from the key DRR actors and planners active at the
national level.
The roundtable was attended by the national level DRR actors, CWW executives and disaster focal
persons, CDMP professionals, DMB personnel, BUET, UNDP, and media professionals including the
current and past Ministers for Food and Disaster Management, Government of Bangladesh and a
Member of Parliament (MP). In addition to above, participants from various organizations and
agencies having DRR activities were also attended the meeting viz. NIRAPAD, Handicap
International, Unnayan Dhara Trust, Manusher Jaynnaya, DSK, Palli Bikas Kendra, North Bengal
Development, DAM, Samadhan, WTU, Bangladesh Projonmo Muktoijoddhya are notable. Finally all
the information and data collected by applying different means and the feedback received from
various stakeholders have been complied for the preparation of this strategy document.

3
3 Field workshops
(Haor, Coast, Chars)
Key Informant Interview
and Case Studies (Field
sites)
Focus Group Discussions
(Field sites)
Sharing of Field Findings at
National Roundtable Discussion
Key Informant Interview
at National Level
Submission of Draft Report
& Strategy
Incorporation of Comments/
Feedback
Submission of Final Report
& Strategy
Compilation of Field
Findings
Government, NGO, UP (local
government), Communities
With government Officials, NGOs,
Communities, UDMCs
With Communities, UDMCs
National level DRR Stakeholders,
Present and Former Ministers Ministry
of Food & Disaster Management
Selected National level DRR
Stakeholders (Govt. & NGOs)
Initial planning/
Development of Methods &
checklists
Conceptualization &
Literature Review
Figure 1: Steps followed to develop the Disaster Management Advocacy Strategy

4
3. The Context
3.1 Bangladesh and Disasters
Bangladesh, due to its geographical location and a flood borne active delta, is highly prone to
multiplicity of natural disasters. As a lower riparian country of the three major river systems of Asia,
it offers a drainage basin of huge rainwater in monsoon from 93% catchments that lie outside the
country1
. The country is sitting at the mouth of the funnel of the Bay of Bengal is highly susceptible to
tropical cyclones and storm surge. Two major cyclones that hit Bangladesh coast in 1970 and 1991
caused deaths of 300,000 and 138,000 people respectively and left several millions homeless2
.
Bounded by the Bay of Bengal at its southern border has increased the risk of being affected by the
Tsunami as well. Between 1991 and 2000, 93 major disasters were recorded in Bangladesh resulting
nearly 200,000 deaths, causing resource damage of 5.9 billion wit huge losses in agriculture and
infrastructure3
. The southwestern zone suffer from multiplicity of hazards resulting from low
upstream freshwater flow in the dry season, subsidence, drainage congestions, salinity intrusion
including cyclone and storm surge. Data shows that about 830,000ha of arable land is affected by
varying degrees of soil salinity4
. Salt water from the Bay of Bengal is reported to have penetrated
100km or more along tributary channels during the dry season5
.
The northwestern part, nearing Himalayan mountain range is prone to severe cold wave almost every
year during winter. While in the central basin high rainfall and consequent over bank flooding of
major rivers has been a common disaster in monsoon. The disastrous floods in 1988 and 1998 caused
6500 and 1100 deaths respectively6
. River bank erosion is a serious problem along the major river
systems. In the decade of 1982-1992, over 106,000 hectares of land has been eroded in three major
rivers (Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna) and displaced about 350,000 people7
. The northern part of
the country has been characterized with whipping drought that accrued from a least or no rainfall
situation that prolonging the summer. About 47% of the country is prone to severe drought and during
1960 to 1991, drought occurred 19 times in Bangladesh8
. During the period 1973-1987, about 2.18
million tons of rice was damaged due to drought and 2.38 million tons due to flooding9
. The vast
northeastern low lying area covering seven districts known as the greater haor basin is subject to early
flashfloods has been a major disaster as it often damages the standing rice crop just before the harvest.
Recent phenomenon of climate variability and change will further aggravate the disaster situation. It is
predicted that for about 45cm rise of sea level may inundate 10-15% of the land by the year 2050 that
would result in 35 million climate refuges from the low lying coastal areas of Bangladesh10
. Sea level
rise of 0.5m over the last 100 years has already eroded 65% of landmass of 250 sq km of Kutubdia,
227 sq km of Bhola and 180 sq km of Sandiwp islands11
.
The rapid urbanization of Dhaka and Chittagong with numbers of high rise buildings without
adequate safety measures increases the risk of disasters associated with fire hazard and earthquake.
Failing to keep pace with population influx in large cities where water and vector borne diseases are
in the rise and often come up as disaster outbreaks.
1
Action aid bangladesh2007
2
Bangladesh Meteorological Department 2007
3
Climate Change Cell, DoE
4
BARC
5
IPCC 4th
assessment report
6
Bangladesh NAPA 2005
7
Khan 2000
8
ADPC and FAO 2007
9
10
Climate Change Cell
11

5
Facing the disasters over the years, there has been much improvement in the overall capacity
development of Bangladesh as a nation, in its efforts to reduce disaster risks and impacts including
protection of lives and livelihood assets. Some major initiatives and improvements in the policy and
institutional aspects of DRR have been made in Bangladesh over a last few years are noteworthy.
3.2 Response to disasters
Bangladesh has made much progress in responding to disaster risks
and is able to reduce losses due to disasters. Several milestones in the
disaster risk reduction (DRR) arena are mentionable in this regard.
Conceptualizing the robustness of disaster and its multiplicity of
impacts on various development sectors especially on food security,
the government has re-structured the relevant Ministry – the top level
policy making institution. In 2003, the government restructured the
“Ministry of Relief and Rehabilitation” as the “Ministry of Food and
Disaster Management”. This has been a major shift in the national
focus from “disaster relief” to comprehensive “disaster risk
reduction”. In other words, it is the indication that the government has
conceptualized the complexity and emphasized on taking proactive
measures to reduce the disaster risks rather taking reactive measures
to provide relief after the disasters had hit.
The government also recognized that the restructuring of the Ministry is not enough to tackle the
robustness of disasters unless there is specified institutional framework at different administrative
tiers of the government system in place. To this end, through issuing Government‟s Standing Order on
Disaster (SoD), Disaster Management Committees (DMCs) have been formed from the national level
down to district, upazila and union parishad (UP) levels with specific terms of reference (ToR) to
address the disaster issues.
Also notable is the recent formulation of National Plan for Disaster Management (NPDM) which is a
government‟s longer-term plan (2008-2015) to tackle the disasters in a comprehensive manner. This
plan incorporates twelve major hazard events that could actually and potentially cause disasters at
different seasons at different areas and at different extents. This national plan document also
incorporates the national and international commitments that Bangladesh has made and must comply
being a signatory.
Recognizing the need for knowledge management and availability of information on disaster, the
government has also established a Disaster Management Information Center (DMIC) that is housed in
Disaster Management Bureau (DMB). The DMIC is the repository of all relevant data and
information on disaster issues. The DMIC is open to public who are interested to receive information
on disasters.
It is an established fact that having an effective early warning system in place, disaster risks can be
substantially reduced, if not avoidable. Over the recent years, there has been mentionable progress in
the areas of information collection, packaging and dissemination of disaster warning messages using
advanced technological facilities.
The comprehensive disaster management program (CDMP) of the Ministry of Food and Disaster
Management (MoFDM), a donor funded project has been supporting the DMB in building its overall
capacity in all aspects of DRR viz. assessment, planning, interventions, knowledge management,
including building the capacity of DMCs, NGOs and communities. CDMP‟s focus is on community
level risk assessment, planning and piloting community-led risk reduction interventions have
generated much information base that opened up conduits for important learning and fine tuning of
appropriateness of the DRR interventions including building relevant capacity at all levels.

6
Apart from the government initiatives, much effort has also been made from the private and NGO
sectors in reducing the disaster risks. Although most of the actors from the private sector are found to
be more visible in emergency response /recovery works, the media has been playing a very crucial
role covering the broader DRR framework ranging from early warning to preparedness, role of
various actors, voices of the affected and so forth. The media is also active in sensitizing and
influencing the relevant policy stakeholders including the DRR actors at different levels. The roles of
local, national and international NGOs in DRR activities in Bangladesh are commendable at all stages
of DRR framework including sensitizing and influencing policy stakeholders. Joining with the
government, NGOs, through their extensive grass roots networks have been effectively serving the
disaster victims at times of grave needs.
However, while the joint action of the government and NGOs have made much progress in DRR, still
there are spaces/scopes for further improvement in the area. In tackling the impacts of the super
cyclone Sidr that had hit Bangladesh in November 2007 it was revealed that still much we need to do,
not only in integrating DRR in national development initiatives but also in improving the DRR sector
itself to make it comprehensive in real sense. Reflecting on Sidr issue, it was observed that there were
problems in dissemination of warning messages, people were confused and could not take right
decisions before the cyclone hit, there were confusion about timing of landfall and path of Sidr with
adequate lead time for the people to take measures. Serious coordination gaps during emergency
response and early recovery activities increased suffering of the affected people. Inappropriate
damage and need assessment also contributed negatively in proper planning of the early recovery
programs. Most of the UDMCs in Sidr area expressed frustration due to their partial engagement in
response and recovery activities.
The lessons from cyclone Sidr management revealed that the presence of rules, policies, plans and
institutions are not enough unless all these are effectively & timely connected and served in a
coordinated and synergistic approach, mainstreaming DRR in national development programs would
remain as a far reaching dream. Based on the experience and reflection, it is understood that there are
gaps in our DRR systems and unless we are able to identify those gaps and address properly, our all
out development efforts will remain unattended or partially realized.
4. Gaps in DRR – need for advocacy
This gap analysis effort focused on issues that cause barriers for the people who manage disaster risks
(disaster managers/actors) as well as the issues that increase the suffering of the affected communities
from disasters (victims). However, the key aim of this exercise is to find the gaps/ weakness that
ultimately impair proper functioning of the DRR systems which lead to increased suffering of the
victims.
4.1 Gaps in Understanding DRR
Despite making much progress in DRR measures in Bangladesh, still it seems that there are spaces
left for further works of improvement to meet the emerging challenges to reduce the impact of
multiplicity of disasters, which is now being exacerbated by the recent phenomenon of climate
variability and change. It is felt that there is need for consistent and synergistic growth of “policy and
plans” along with the “processes, institutions and capacities” for tackling the disaster risks in an
inclusive manner. While there is very comprehensive DRR plans in place but the processes and
institutional arrangements that facilitate translating the policy & plans in to reality is found impaired
due to lack of clarity of the Concept regarding DRR, Capacity to handle and Collective Action to
address disaster management.
When the matter of concept is considered, we need to look back to its beginning – how did we
conceptualize the disaster from the traditional perspective to recent complexities that arose
additionally from climate change factors. We also need to see from the conceptualization of disasters

7
standpoint to the way do we respond to disaster risk reductions. The NPDM document incorporates 12
different hazard phenomena (flood, cyclone& storm surge, tornado, river bank erosion, earthquake,
drought, arsenic contamination, salinity intrusion, tsunami, fire, infrastructure collapse and landslides)
that can potentially cause disaster and impede in achieving our development objectives including
reduction of loss of lives and livelihood assets. However, the overall understanding of the mass on
such hazard events is still found very slim. Traditionally, we still consider, emphasize and make
priority actions targeting flooding and cyclonic events as the key disasters in our every day life.
Apart from the 12 identified hazard events in the NPDM, other events have potential risks to cause
disasters are often ignored. These include wave erosion in haor, drainage congestions in some areas,
frequent rough sea weather conditions in the cost, road/transport accident, bird flu, HIV/AIDS, vector
borne diseases, cholera epidemics, all these have potential to cause disaster in our lives.
Thus currently, people have narrow understanding in conceptualizing the holistic array of potential
hazard phenomena and their disaster extents and consequent damage to our lives and livelihoods. This
poor conceptualization/understanding of broader disaster scenario is visible among all spheres of
current disaster risk reduction arena seems impeding having an effective DRR systems in place.
It may be wise to bear in mind that the disaster is not the issue of “DRR professionals” who claimed
to be the DRR experts rather than of the victims. It is imperative that the disaster, by all means, should
be considered as the issue of the mass who are the “victims of disasters” on the ground. Unless, these
vast majorities living at the “disaster hotspots” who are often treated as “disaster clients/
beneficiaries” by the so called disaster experts get aware and conceptualize the whole issues of
disaster management and act accordingly, it is
practically impossible to ensure DRR at the desired
level.
It is not only the issue of bringing in all the hazards
events under the disaster policy and plans including
widening the understanding of broader disaster
definitions, it is also important in conceptualizing the
every broader steps of DRR cycle for sustained
growth in the face of increasing disaster events that
impair in achieving the development goals (Figure 2).
However, in the efforts of enhancing the knowledge
base of the mass across sectors and conceptualizing
the whole issues of disaster is achieved, the question
of capacity issue comes as an important driver of DRR
initiatives.
Achieving required capacity to assess, plan and implement disaster risk reduction interventions
following the DRR cycle is an important milestone for effective DRR system. Unfortunately, there are
much gaps in the concept and capacity in having comprehensiveness in DRR planning and actions in
place. Although national policy and plans focused on comprehensive disaster management, our
current DRR interventions still focus more on response and relief activities with limited actions on
preparedness, recovery and rehabilitation. However, recent disaster caused due to super cyclone Sidr
that engaged government, donors and NGOs to go beyond the response action.
Table 1: Gaps in understanding disaster
DRR stages Gaps and weaknesses
Understanding of
disaster
-People are not aware of all types of hazards events (floods and cyclones are commonly
understood as disasters)
-General understanding about disaster is around relief and response than of the
comprehensive DRR
Early Warning
Emergency Response
Early Recovery
Rehabilitation
Preparedness
Mitigation
Figure 2: DRR cycle

8
-Disaster is considered as seasonal activity rather year round jobs
-Disaster is seen as an isolated event and activity rather part of development processes
-Disaster understanding concentrate more around natural hazards while putting less
emphasis on man induced hazards
-Disaster and poverty link get less priority in our development planning
4.2 Disaster preparedness
If preparedness is the best way to reduce the disaster risks then deepening our effort in this aspect
should be treated as the key approach. Much focus is required to take up robust measures as opposed
to what is now being done sporadically that fail to ensure adequate preparedness for tackling the
disaster impacts. Even after more than one year of the cyclone Sidr that had hit in November 2007,
preparedness measure are seen to be overshadowed by the „very late‟ early recovery activities, which
should have been completed at least before the first anniversary of the cyclone Sidr. Making late in
rounding up of disaster risk reduction measures could be a suicidal one.
It seems that we have either missed in conceptualizing or misinterpreted the disaster preparedness
issue. In general, preparedness measures undertaken are mostly structural interventions or biased to
hard ware (infrastructure) while ignoring the potential of software measures (community
participation, knowledge and capacity development and so forth). Building resilience among the
communities and relevant stakeholders is one of the key preparedness measures are often found
undermined in our national DRR focus. Therefore, the local communities are often appeared as
indifferent to take care of structural facilities (viz. flood protection /crop protection embankments)
that are constructed as part of preparedness measures.
The key issue here is the non-engagement of communities in preparedness measures. Although
BWDB has guideline for community participation in water management infrastructures but practically
is hardly in place to practice. Hardly is there any example of sustainable community managed flood
protection embankment built under relevant government departments. People consulted at haor basin
said:
“The submergible dykes are made by the BWDB contractors who want to make money
out of this contract do not thus pay attention to crop protection issue; we thus demand
for community involvement so that we make our own dykes in a way that could better fit
for ensuring safety of our crops - our food security.”
The disaster preparedness activities should have focus on location specific disaster pattern and
sensitivity. For example, repair and maintenance of flood protection embankments in the country has
strong temporal sensitivity with differential time specificity based on spatial consideration. Repair &
maintenance of submergible dykes in northeastern haor basin which is subject to early flashflood
hazard needs to be undertaken much earlier than other parts of the country (where monsoon flooding
is a problem). BWDB is mandated to take care of all flood protection dykes in the country. The
government sanction for the O&M works of dykes usually
follows a generic timeframe ignoring the time sensitivity of
specific areas where the works should have been undertaken
much earlier as in the case of haor basin. Flashfloods that
damage the standing boro rice in early/mid April each year thus
the submergible dykes construction needs to be completed by
the end of February /early March so that the dykes get well
compacted and become stronger to withstand the hit of the
violent flashfloods. In doing so the BWDB should get required
funds from the government by December each year to initiate
their work in January.

9
The preparedness measures primarily focuses on structural measures viz. flood/crop protection
embankments in the inland flood prone areas while that for cyclone/coastal protection in the coastal
areas. In both cases community engagement and ownership issue is largely ignored and thus
embankments remains mere as physical structures and communities felt indifferent to take any
measure for O&M as well as multipurpose use of such structures that community may benefit.
BWDB‟s embankment construction and maintenance projects/activities are not shared or planned with
other relevant govt. agencies /respective DMCs who could contribute additionally in designing,
functioning and sustainability of embankments – it appears that embankments are isolated activity of
BWDB not a disaster risk reduction measure where other parties find any role to play.
In most cases the maintenance of embankments does not get priority even after being severely
damaged due to flooding and cyclonic events. For example, after the super cyclone Sidr, many parts
of the breached embankments are not properly taken for action as yet. Some of the breached parts still
remained unattended thus have put the communities at higher risk if we expect another cyclone at any
time of the year.
Some of the coastal areas remain exposed having no coastal protection dykes have been made subject
to regular inundation during spring tide in monsoon causing damage to assets and crops. For example,
spring tide in mid September 2008 caused inundation of vast areas of Bagerhat, Pirojpur, Barguna and
Patuakhali areas and damaged aman crop, fish and shrimp ponds – but the issue was not taken in to
consideration by the government and donors.
Table 2: Gaps in disaster preparedness
Preparedness - Inadequate fire safety and fire fighting equipments and practices
-Earthquake preparedness issues and measures are not open to public
-Mostly infrastructural measures ignoring the viability of social and institutional issues
-Inadequate cyclone shelters, less facilities for water, sanitation, no facilities for cattle
-Cyclone shelters have no separate provision for women, disabled, patients
-Lack of arrangements for required medical care facilities in preparedness measures
-Inadequate rescue and evacuation facilities, resources and adequate mock drills on DRR issues
-Shortage of manpower in disaster hotspots impede proper planning and preparedness
Submergible dyke construction in flashflood prone haor areas of the northeast region has some
lacking that demand urgent attention. Late sanction or release of funds to BWDB causes delay in
starting the work which in turn delaying in completion of the work. By the time the dykes are nearing
to completion or need some more time to get it completed, flashflood comes and washed away some
risk points cause damage to crop. One breach point in a large haor basin could cause damage of crop
to several hundreds of hectares in couple of days. The key issues behind the scenario that include:
- late start of the work, poor quality and design
- non engagement of communities in dyke construction leaving the dykes to be done by
contractors who instead of making the dyke stronger to saving the crops rather chasing for
profit making
- non functional water management structures cause drainage congestion leaving huge area
non cultivable
Early warning systems
Early warning system is recognized as one of the key preparedness measures that have potential in
reducing the disaster risks in terms of loss of lives and assets, if it is made fully operational with
effective coverage, clear messages and in appropriate time reaching the target audiences.
However, the current early warning systems pay major focus on cyclonic events and it is biased to
maritime issue. Alert signals are given for ports, water vessels and fishing boats. Information on wind

10
speed within the epicenter of cyclone and its location in the sea is disseminated but the movement and
speed of cyclone itself and timing of landfall with specific locations and paths are rather unclear.
Therefore, people on the ground become confused to take corrective actions/ preparedness, the DMCs
and volunteers failed to disseminate reliable messages to the targeted communities.
The greater haor basin in the northeastern part of the country that stretches over 7 districts covers
nearly 16% of the country is subject early flashfloods and consequent crop damage. Ironically, there is
no early warning system in place for making the people aware of the disaster caused due to
flashfloods. Even there is no DRR volunteer in the haor area although it is disaster prone area. The
haor people claimed:
“Radio, TV and newspapers talk about cyclone and floods but there is nothing about
early flashfloods and crop damage in the haor basin as a measure to warn the haor
communities beforehand. However, media talk about crop damage but that is after the
damage caused by the flashfloods when we have nothing to do”.
One key aspect of early warning system is to ensure reaching the messages to the affected people
(people in impact area) in time. The people need adequate lead time to take necessary preparations to
take care of their stuff and prepare for evacuation or move to shelter house /places. It most cases,
people lamented that they hardly get reasonable lead time after the receiving the reliable early
warning messages anticipating a disaster event.
Table 3: Gaps in early warning systems
Early
warning
-Current warning system is biased to cyclone and maritime focused (ports and vessels) hardly
any messages for people on the ground where the cyclone/storm surge hit
-Warning messages are not clear and thus often do not help people much to act accordingly
-Lack of tools/methods for message dissemination in the locality
-Messages do not reach in time to affected communities, women at remote setting, people get
narrow lead time to take preparations for evacuation
-Lack of synergy between the central warning systems with the local DMCs for disseminating
messages and taking preparations
-Poor law & order situation prevents many people to leave homes for shelter places
-No early warning system for haor area
-Flood forecasting system do not help people much as these do not give specific damage
information in specific impact areas
-No community feedback system on effectiveness of warning messages & disseminating
systems
-Disaster volunteers are not updated, no DRR volunteers in many disaster prone areas
The upazila DMC focal point (PIO) mentioned that warning on flooding usually forecasted about a
week before the flood comes. The UP Chairmen are informed first and then they instruct the
Choukidars /Dofadars of UPs to communicate the messages with the villagers. As claimed by the
PIO, Islampur, jamalpur that about 90% households of threatened villages are informed earlier of the
flooding. However, other participating stakeholders in the workshop disagree with this statement of
the PIO. In contrary, the Upazila Coordinator of SAP Bangladesh, Dewangonj said:
“There is no early warning system for flooding in the area, whatever the information
forecasts by the TV/radio are not very specific to a particular locality, therefore it is not
useful and largely ignored by the villagers.”
The local DMCs (UDMCs) mentioned that there is no linkages and synergy between the central
warning centers and UDMCs. The DMCs often become confused as to what to do after receiving the
messages from the central warning systems. Thus dissemination of messages at local level by the
UDMCs remain always incomplete and unreliable and thus failed to sensitize people. The UDMCs

11
claimed that they are somewhat disconnected from the upazila and district level DMCs that are well
linked to central DRR systems. UDMCs usually follow the instructions of UzDMCs rather taking any
proactive measure at the local level by themselves.
4.3 Emergency response
Major drawback in our emergency response activity is the lack of information on damage extents,
reaching the vulnerable households in remote setting, quick and accurate needs assessments. General
mistakes being repeatedly made is reaching with relief materials in the easily reachable areas while
avoiding the most affected remote locations. The victims raised serious grievance of nepotism in
making the list of the affected and needy households by the Union Parishad, as experienced during the
flood response activity in 2007:
“More than 70% households had to drop where unaffected or least affected households were
included by the UP in one of the union of Tahirpur upazila under Sunamgonj district for
relief distribution after field checking. Villagers’ claimed that the criteria for listing have
been relationship or allies rather being affected by the floods.”
Improper need assessment facilitates in designing inappropriate relief packages. If the flood affected
households have no means for cooking, giving rice at that time seems no use for them on emergency;
rather ready food/ dry food would be better for meeting their real demand of the time. One of the key
problems in carrying out emergency response program by the DMCs is the non availability of funds
for transportation of relief materials to the affected locations. Therefore, DMCs, finding no other
alternative, opt to keep those materials disposed in locations close to the warehouse ignoring the
needs of the people in remote areas.
It is often a case that the need of emergency support ceases when people go back their houses from
the shelter house. In many cases, going back own houses does not mean the disaster situation is over.
People tend to go back their houses for various social and personal reasons. When they get back their
houses which have been severely destroyed, having no food, cattle, work and when they are engaged
in re-organizing their houses, they hardly find anyone around them for helping and support. Often,
people become more vulnerable at home for a few days compared to shelter house as they were given
foods support there. Need for emergency assistance should be assessed basing on the context which
vary spatially, temporally and socially. People with poor social and financial capital need extended
support during emergency and early recovery stages.
Quick and appropriate damage and need assessment has been a problem in case of emergency
response and relief operations that often cause dissatisfaction of the victims. To this end, the PIO,
Islampur upazila under Jamalpur district said:
“The main criterion for selecting a household for emergency response in case of flooding has
been “households do not have food”. In 2007 flood, an NGO came up with clothes as relief
support but at that time crisis of food was the key demand for the flood affected people and
we did not allow them to distribute cloth materials unless the food item was given to the
victims”.
Disasters not only affect our material assets, but also equally or even more severely, affect our mental
health. Children, women, disable, sick and elderly persons are the typical victims who suffer from
mental shocks associated with disasters. Women in the shelter are more vulnerable and do not find it a
safe place for them at least in night time when many sexual harassment may tend to happen being
congregated in common place. For them, psychosocial care is equally or even more important in
addition to material relief support during emergency to get relieved from trauma. There is serious gap
in this aspect in our emergency response or recovery packages. Absence of psychosocial care for the
needy would have long term (even life time) impact on the victims which obstruct them to lead a
normal and independent life.

12
Table 4: Gaps in emergency response
Emergency
response
-Inappropriate damage and need assessment leading to poor response planning
-Not reaching the most affected people in remote setting in right time
-Nepotism in listing to the affected communities for relief packages
-In appropriate relief packages
-No funds for DMCs for transportation of relief packages to remote sites
-Lack of transparency and political/kinship bias in listing affected victims for relief support
-No list of vulnerable HHs in disaster hotspots thus take much time in selecting
-Duplication and dumping of relief materials in easy to reach locations
-NGOs are often biased to their credit groups in giving relief materials
-No funds and provision for quick burial of dead animals/livestock
-Donors/INGOs are inclined to their partners NGO for DRR and dump huge money beyond
their capacities that breed corruptions
-Shortage of manpower in operating assessment and relief operations in disaster prone areas
As observed, donors and INGOs show their dependency on their regular development partners for the
DRR activities especially during emergency response and early recovery activities. This heavy
reliance of INGOs facilitates in dumping of funds on the shoulder of PNGOs, even some of them do
not have the capacity to carry out a fraction of the job given – some of them become over burdened
that creates impetus for corruption, malpractice and consequent tensions in the locality. The over
burdened NGOs often dump relief materials to the same communities once after another. The NGOs
often become biased to their credit group members in providing repeated relief support to ensure
realization of credits. Therefore, the humanitarian dimension of disaster response often turns in to a
issue of business dealing which deprives the bulk who suffered from disaster.
4.4 Early recovery
Early recovery is a vital support system that helps the disaster victims to get back to normalcy.
Disasters not only affect the people by causing damage of assets, loss of lives but at the same time
severely disrupt the livelihood opportunities for them. Therefore, immediately after the emergency
response, livelihood recovery activities are treated as essential means to re-start the lives of the
affected to a normalcy by re-building their damaged assets and re-starting their livelihood activities as
they did before the disaster. For example, fish farmers start fish culture in their ponds which were
damaged by the cyclone and storm surge or fishermen who lost their boats and nets due to disaster,
get support to have nets and boats to re-start fishing in rivers and coastal waters.
This activity has thus urgency and should be initiated immediately after the emergency response
phase. However, it is often seen that planning of this activity takes much time than it should need. For
example, in haor area, the livelihood recovery support for the flood victims of 2007 reached in late
2008 instead of late 2007. The activity was delayed by more than a year. The Sidr affected fishers got
hilsha fishing nets as livelihood recovery support in mid-July 2008. While the hilsha fishing season
starts from early June and last for five months viz. ends in October each year. The size of fishing net
given was smaller than what they require for hilsha fishing in the lower estuary or Bay of Bengal. The
fishers after receiving the nets said:
“We have got the long desired nets after 7 weeks of starting the fishing season and we need
another week to mend the nets to be ready for fishing, thus a loss of two months out of total
five month-long hilsha fishing season. Moreover the net we have got is inadequate - less than
50% compared to what we need for fishing. We now need to buy additional nets but we have
lost 40% of effective fishing season for the delayed supply of net from you. It would have been
better joining in mohajons’ boat as fishing laborers than having this incomplete net after
wasting 2 months.

13
Similar experience from the shrimp culture zone in Bagerhat, where the small shrimp farmers said:
“We used to start stocking our ghers with shrimp PL from February, but this year we are
late. We were asked not to stock the ghers with PL from other sources as we have been
selected to get quality PL free of cost from the project. However, we had to wait for long and
finally we stocked our ghers with PL from local sources. Later we got the supply of quality
PLs but our ghers are already stocked. We then dumped the PL in our stocked ponds – later
our ponds got infected with disease and most of the stocked shrimp died.”
The various local occupational groups get less preference to express their needs as recovery support.
In haor area all the selected beneficiaries were given with agriculture seeds along with other supports
to gain quick livelihood recovery. However, the landless fishers said that the seed has hardly any use
for them rather fishing nets would have been the best support for the fishers to recover losses caused
due to flooding.
Table 5: Gaps in Early Livelihood recovery
Early livelihood
recovery
-Planning takes long time, not much helpful at time when people need recovery support
-Inadequate/inaccurate needs assessment
-Need for women, children, elderly and disabled ignored or do not get proper focus
-No provision for psychosocial care
-Needs for different occupational groups are not properly valued
-Package determined as per the choice of donors rather the demand of the people
-More focus on cash for work while ignoring the capacity development aspects
-Inadequate against the needs and packages not appropriate in some cases
-Nepotism in supporting the affected
It is important to consider that different occupational groups in disaster prone areas have
differentiated needs and priorities based on their skills, occupational patterns and availability of local
opportunities. For early livelihood recovery activities, special attention should be paid on gender and
social consideration with focus on vulnerability context. Government‟s social safety net program can
be well integrated with the early recovery activities. For example, government‟s 100-day safety net
program can be integrated with disaster activities (recovery/ rehabilitation or preparedness). Lack of
community consultation, incorporation of local knowledge and specific need assessment by
occupational/ vulnerable groups create such problems and short comings in DRR activities.
4.5 Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation of damaged society and infrastructures after the visit of a disaster is an important
activity to sustain the development efforts. However, like the early recovery, rehabilitation is also
planned very late. Some of the Sidr affected coastal embankments are still lying untouched or
unattended even after a lapse of more than a year. Many parts of the road net work systems in the
cyclone prone coastal areas (Pirojpur, Bhola) are still remaining inaccessible due to lack of
rehabilitation measures that would affect quick response and recovery at the advent of another cyclone
like Sidr.
Theoretically, rehabilitation should have both hardware and soft ware components but in practice only
hard ware activities are visible. Thus communities‟ capacity and resilience building aspects to tackle
the disaster remains always very poor that drive the people to become relief oriented.
Development of rehabilitation plan lacks of participation of affected communities thus communities‟
knowledge and experience is not incorporated in the plan that make the hardware activities as mere a
hardware output with less community association and ownership. People are often not aware when the
rehabilitation activities are planned and implemented. There is also nepotism in selecting beneficiaries

14
in recovery and rehabilitation activities. Robia Begum, a women community member of Bakshiganj
upazila of Jamalpur district said:
“We have experienced some households who were not affected by flooding received relief
from NGOs and government. In case of post disaster rehabilitation, most affected people
hardly receive any support rather the households having links and connections received the
support.”
Rehabilitation plan should pay focus on the extent of disaster risk and damage attributes rather than
on the number of people living in the area. This plan should not be treated as a generic per capita basis
rather per capita disaster damage basis. This should be linked to disaster risk and vulnerability maps
(equity basis not equality - not by mere number of population rather by population at actual or
potential disaster risks). There should be standard and accepted time frame for completion of
rehabilitation activities, which is not in place.
Table 6: Gaps in Disaster Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation -Often late or ignored the need for rehabilitation or not done properly
-Infrastructure biased, less focus on capacity/resilience building
-Rehabilitation plan should consider damage and risk factors rather number of people in a
given area
-No or less community engagement in rehabilitation work
In most cases the maintenance of embankments does not get priority even after being severely
damaged due to flooding and cyclonic events. For example, after the super cyclone Sidr, many parts
of the breached embankments are not properly fixed as yet. Some of the breached parts still remained
unattended thus putting the communities exposed at higher risk of being affected if another cyclone
visit at any time of the year.
4.6 Coordination
DMCs at all tiers (from the central down to the union level) are the key entities in ensuring
coordination of all parties in DRR activities whether it is preparedness, response, recovery or
rehabilitation. The irony is that the DMCs are very poor in its institutional capacity and functions.
They have funds and no plans except the committee and standing orders on disaster (SoD)
management. Despite having an elaborate government‟s standing order on disaster management, the
functional aspect of the coin is rather frustrating. District, upazila and union level DMCs appear as
disjointed with unclear roles and suffer from identity crisis. The Upazila Agriculture Officer of
Melandaha upazila under Jamalpur district said:
“Major problem in disaster management is the lack of coordination among the agencies
/NGOs, lack of regular monitoring of the disaster preparedness-emergency response and post
emergency activities, and there is no provision for post-intervention evaluation and learning
system.”
No DMC is functional year round. The DMCs surface when disaster knocks at the door. The case
should have been the opposite - DMCs being alert all the time to tackle the disaster when it would
surface with more focus on pre disaster preparedness activities. In the disaster calendar there is no
normal period though (although SoD mentioned a normal period). In fact, all year round there are
possibilities of visits of different types of hazard events. Since most disaster hit at the field areas, thus
active DMCs are needed at union, upazila and district levels for ensuring better coordination in all
stages of DRR activities. The upazila agriculture officer of Melandaha, Jamalpur said:

15
“People are not aware about the ToR of the disaster management committees, where should
they communicate during disaster. Disaster management activities, particularly, the
emergency response activity is found one way effort from government/ NGO to communities.
Affected people do not have any role in the decision making and implementation process.”
Table 7: Gaps in disaster coordination and monitoring systems
Coordination -Lack of coordination between alls DRR entities
-DMCs are inactive and not aware of their jobs
-DMCs are reactive rather proactive - become active during disaster while ignoring the
importance of activities during pre and post disaster
Monitoring and
feedback
-Lack of effective monitoring systems to assess effectiveness of DRR activities
-Inadequate sharing and reflection on DRR issues based on monitoring results
-Inadequacy in internalization of lessons in DRR systems
Unless the DMCs are supported with capacity, adequate logistics, information facilities, clear identity
& mandate and fund provisions, it may be impossible for making them functional for ensuring
effective coordination among DRR actors (GO-GO, GO-NGO, NGO-NGO, GO-Donors). Advocacy
strategy should pay more attention in these institutional aspects of functionality and coordination
through strengthening DMCs and that should be more at the ground levels.

16
Appendix 1: Key areas of investigation and methods
Key areas of investigation Key data Methods/tools
Types, effects and scale of
disasters by spatiotemporal
dimensions
-Disaster types by different geographical locations
-Timing of disasters and area affected and extent of
damage caused by specific disastrous events
- Temporal data of disaster events for last 10 years
-Literature review
-Local stakeholders workshops
-KII and FGD
Players and actors in disaster
management activities in
different contexts and scale
-Agencies, institutions, individuals involved in DRR
at local/national levels
-Role & responsibilities of different actors in DRR
- Efficiency of the agencies/ actors in emergency
disaster response, what are the gaps they had
experienced reasons for the gaps and recommended
solutions (lead time).
- Coordination among the agencies/ key players (need
of coordination, area of coordination viz. overlapping)
-Literature review
-Stakeholders‟ workshops(local
/national)
-KII and FGD
Scale and adequacy of
communities‟ DRR activities
-What the communities do in DRR (different types of
disasters) and the extent (preparedness, early warning,
response, recovery and rehabilitation)
-Stakeholders workshops
(local)
-KII
Scale and adequacy of other
entities‟ DRR activities
- What other agencies do in DRR (different types of
disasters) and the extent (early warning, response,
recovery and rehabilitation)
-Literature review
-Stakeholders‟ workshops
(local/national)
-KII and FGD
Gaps and weaknesses of current
DM activities
-Gaps between the ground realities/necessities and
practical response in the broader area of DRR
including the policy and processes at the different
level viz. local level- affected communities, union,
upazila and district, national level- govt. agencies,
donors, civil society
-Literature review
(local/national)
-KII and FGD
Ways & means to overcome the
gaps and weaknesses
- Barriers and challenges of overcoming the gaps by
levels (local)
-Possible conduits for minimizing the gaps
-Stakeholders‟ perceptions and suggested measures to
minimize the gaps & weaknesses
-Literature review
(local/national)
-KII and FGD
Strategy and actions to influence
intended change
- Steps and actions to influence policy and process
-Possible methods and actors of change
-Short, medium and long term actions
-KII
Communication and
dissemination
- Key players to be communicated
- Means of communication at different level
- KII
- Stakeholders workshop

17
Annex-1: The Disaster Management Advocacy Strategy

18
Table of Contents
1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................19
2. Goal and Objectives..........................................................................................................................20
2.1 Influencing policy stakeholders ......................................................................................................20
2.2 Wider learning and sensitization.....................................................................................................20
2.3 Internal learning and reflection.......................................................................................................20
3. Scope of the strategy.........................................................................................................................20
4. Summary of the findings...................................................................................................................20
5. Strategy principles / approaches .......................................................................................................21
6. The advocacy allies...........................................................................................................................22
7. Target audience.................................................................................................................................22
8. Advocacy issues................................................................................................................................23
9. Implementation plans........................................................................................................................26
10. Evaluation and improvement of the strategy ..................................................................................26
Table
Table 1: Advocacy and communication plans .....................................................................................27

19
1. Introduction
Recognizing the vulnerability of Bangladesh to multiplicity of disasters, recent efforts of the
government and donors in making a shift from disaster response to disaster risk reduction is in line of
the long awaiting demand for having a comprehensive disaster management system. The
government‟s standing order on disaster (SoD) management and formation of disaster management
committees at all levels starting from the central level down to the union level have created an
institutional framework for tackling the disaster and reducing the associated risks and impacts.
CDMP, a project of the DMB has been working developing capacity of BDM and relevant
stakeholders and communities in DRR. The early warning systems though have some weaknesses,
helping the communities to take preparedness measures to reduce disaster risks as was observed
during the last cyclonic event - the Sidr.
Information and databases are now more available and open to public through creation of disaster
management information centers (DMICs) at central and district levels under the DMB is a
commendable effort. The cyclone preparedness program (CPP) and construction of multipurpose
cyclone shelter in large quantities is a reflection of the government‟s effort to reduce the risks
associated with cyclones along the coastal belt of the country. Bilateral donors including the UN
bodies are keen to support Bangladesh to improve the disaster risk reduction effort of the government
including building capacity all levels. The drafting of disaster act, preparation of national plan for
disaster management (NPDM) and implementation of HFA have been the expressions of the
government‟s commitment to comply with the international agreements on DRR is praiseworthy.
However, while all DRR paraphernalia are in place and disaster management committees are at every
tier of the government systems, then why the systems do not function as expected remains as a vital
question. It seems there are gaps and weaknesses that hinder fuller realization of benefits that should
have been drawn from the DRR systems in place.
Activation of the DRR systems, making it effectively functional to address the disaster risk reduction
in a comprehensive manner can be considered as more of a “governance” issue than a “technical”
problem. The disaster risk reduction can also be considered as a rights issue. Giving protection of the
citizens from all types of disasters is the responsibility of the government. People have the right to get
protection from disasters by the state. Most importantly the poor, marginalized, vulnerable and ethnic
groups should get the priority in every disaster risk reduction effort of the government and other
relevant entities.
Under this disaster advocacy strategy development initiative, gaps and weaknesses of current DRR
systems have been identified. To this end, review of relevant literatures, organization of field level
workshops, FGDs, key informants interview and national level round table discussions were held. The
feedback received from DMCs and communities from three different hazard contexts of Bangladesh
viz. coast, haors and riverine chars have also been incorporated in this document. The gaps and
weaknesses on current DRR systems as documented formed the basis for this strategy development is
presented in the previous section of the document.
Feedback received from workshops (field and central levels) and FGDs expressing dissatisfaction on
the current DRR systems and urged for improving the systems through bridging the gaps and
overcoming the weaknesses. Improving the DRR systems, as expressed by many participants, is the
process issue. The key issue here is the change of attitude and commitments of the DRR planners and
implementers and thus emphasis should be given on improving the processes and systems.
Sensitization, citizens‟ awareness and policy influencing can bring about the much desired changes in
the current DRR system as so opined by the respondents /stakeholders during the course of field work.
It is recognized that rights are often not automatically fulfilled rather to be realized through
influencing, claiming and putting pressures. With this backdrop, it is felt that in realizing the DRR
needs and outcomes, presence of an effective advocacy strategy and actions may have much role to

20
play. To this end, Concern Worldwide through its partner CNRS and Shaptahik 2000, strived to
document the current gaps and weaknesses in DRR systems and then developed this draft advocacy
strategy aiming to reduce the vulnerability of the exposed communities to all types of hazards.
2. Goal and Objectives
The goal of this advocacy strategy is to bring enabling changes in policy and processes towards
making the disaster management systems more responsive to local needs and ground realities.
However, the specific objectives are as follows:
2.1 Influencing policy stakeholders: to influence the relevant policy and process stakeholders to
make changes in the current disaster management systems through internalizing priority issues. This
is a demand side push. In doing so, citizens, media and disaster networking bodies and organizations
will be sensitized and brought under a common platform for creating pressures on the relevant policy
and process stakeholders to shape up the DRR systems addressing the current gaps and weaknesses.
2.2 Wider learning and sensitization: to develop a systems for documentation and dissemination of
relevant information and data to wider audience for building broader understanding of DRR issues as
well as sensitizing citizens to claim rights to get protection from hazards by the state through
advocacy campaigns.
2.3 Internal learning and reflection: to reflect on the processes, media & tools applied to influence
stakeholders and effectiveness of advocacy strategy plans /actions against outcomes in order to gain
knowledge and understanding for further improvement of plans and actions for changing awareness
and attitude of the stakeholders towards having an effective DRR system in place.
3. Scope of the strategy
This strategy covers the wide range of issues under the disaster risk reduction arena following the
standard risk reduction cycles or stages viz. risk mitigation, preparedness, response and rehabilitation.
The strategy is banked on the current gaps and weaknesses identified during the course of strategy
development activities gathered through adoption of range of data gathering methods and tools.
Sensitization and awareness building among all the stakeholders as well as policy influencing have
been the key focuses of this advocacy strategy. Therefore, communications and advocacy campaign
are the two vital activities of this strategy.
The strategy recognizes the role and contributions of the government, private sector, NGOs, civil
society organizations and donors in DRR arena and thus targeted all these stakeholders under the
communications and advocacy activities. The strategy recognizes the need for developing a common
platform with all relevant DRR actors so that all speak with one voice. Different DRR platforms with
different interests may dilute the focus that would cripple the achievement of the campaign for
making desired changes. Therefore, making allies with others should be the key focus in
operationalizing the strategy. The timeframe of this strategy is considered for five years and therefore
targets and activities are to be set accordingly.
4. Summary of the findings
The details of the gaps and weaknesses of current DRR systems have been presented in the previous
section of this strategy document. However, the information gathered from field workshops, FGDs,
interviews and case studies on DRR systems can be summarized in to following broad areas:
Poor understanding of disaster - Poor understanding among all stakeholders on broader aspects of
disaster and disaster risk reduction issues. Practically, communities and most DRR stakeholders

21
largely consider floods and cyclones as disasters while ignoring various other hazards events that have
potential to cause disasters.
Lack of focus on comprehensiveness - The mindset of the stakeholders and communities revolve
around response & relief activities rather encompassing the comprehensive risk reduction measures.
Disaster is largely considered as an isolated and seasonal activity rather part of the national
development plans and programs which have year round activities through incorporation of various
DRR stages like mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery/rehabilitation.
Weak institutional capacity and responses – DMCs are weak and remain non functional except
occurrence of disasters. Poor coordination among different entities/actors involved in DRR and it is
more acute during the response and recovery phases when coordination is most needed. Absence of
approved disaster management act further impedes the DRR measure to be fully functional and
accountable.
Inadequate information flow – DMICs are not fully equipped and functional. There is lack of
information and resource materials available at the ground level (UDMC). The current public
awareness building activities on overall DRR issues is highly inadequate and thus failed to sensitize
communities around DRR activities.
5. Strategy principles / approaches
This disaster management advocacy strategy should adopt and stir the advocacy and communication
campaigns based on the following key principles:
 This disaster management advocacy strategy should not be considered as static rather to be
treated as a dynamic document. It should thus incorporate emerging issues relevant to disaster
risk reduction that may come up from time to time during the course of implementing this
strategy.
 The advocacy activities and campaign to be planned and executed in association with other
entities having similar goals, objectives and expertise. Advocacy is not the job of a particular
individual or group rather it can be best implemented by a multi-stakeholders‟ platform or
through a collective entity having common goal. Therefore, the very first task to be
considered under this strategy is to form the allies with like-minded entities to create a
collective platform which is required to influence changes.
 Often there is a tendency to form new groups /bodies for achieving certain activities rather
strengthening existing bodies. Under this strategy, effort should be made on strengthening or
restructuring the existing DRR entities or net working bodies rather creating a new structure
that would rather dilute the collective effort and create divergence instead of desired
convergence.
 The advocacy campaign should not be treated as seasonal activity rather to be considered as
year round activities focusing on various DRR issues viz. monitoring, observation of DRR
activities to ensure policy compliance, participation, governance at all steps of DRR cycle
/stages. Informing and influencing policy stakeholders for having an effective DRR with
evidence based documents (briefing notes, case studies, observation notes) have been the core
of advocacy tasks and a full time year round activity.
 The advocacy activities should prioritize issues that need urgent or immediate actions. The
messages to be communicated should to be clear, concise and concrete for influencing the
policy stakeholders. The priority issues to be selected should be screened based on their

22
achievability. It may be wise to prioritize issues that can be easily achievable to build
confidence and to create a niche.
 Advocacy program should comprise a research component under which regular studies should
be carried out to generate and update information and databases on DRR issues. A clear
mechanism for collecting, collating, updating and communicating the findings targeting all
relevant audiences.
 The strategy should be flexible and elastic enough to accommodate emerging issues that are
deemed necessary for inclusion for advocacy campaign. This strategy should also be open to
include new allies in the platform to make the platform a knowledge society with diversity.
 The focus and modus operandi of the strategy should not be policing the activities of DRR
actors rather assisting them in executing the activities the way it should be done. One of the
key areas of the advocacy strategy should be to support the DMB on issues that need to be
addressed on an urgent basis.
6. The advocacy allies
It is not practical (may be impossible) for a single entity to carry out advocacy activity to influence
national policy and bring desired changes on any issue. Therefore, it is suggested to form a common
platform bringing in other likeminded groups and individuals who have experience and expertise in
DRR and are willing to make changes through advocacy. To this send, a survey should be carried out
to map the different DRR actors active in the country. A collective platform formed by the allies can
better plan and exert joint actions to communicate the DRR issues to the wider audience and exert
pressure targeting audience who can make the changes happened.
7. Target audience
The strategy should seek to identify target audiences mainly for two purposes. Firstly, to build wider
awareness of the issues among the DRR stakeholders and a part of which could be the allies in
advocacy activities. Secondly, the audiences to be targeted who have the power to make desired
changes in the DRR policies and processes. To this end, the strategy should map out the different
audiences at different levels (viz. national, district and local levels) relevant to DRR and then finalize
the key target audience.
For the purpose of policy influencing, the strategy may target the DMB and MoFDM as the key
policy and process stakeholders for making change in the policy and processes towards having an
enabling and effective DRR systems in the country that should facilitate having desired DRR
outcomes. Besides, national level disaster management committees/institutions can also be targeted
for policy influencing. Such national level DRR institutions include NDMC (National Disaster
Management Council) and IMDMC (Inter-ministerial Disaster Management Committee) and
NDMAC (National Disaster Management Advisory Committee). In addition, parliamentary standing
committee on disaster management can be specially targeted for inaction of the disaster management
act, which is of urgent need of the time.
Therefore all disaster advocacy campaigns/activities should be primarily targeted to these government
agencies and institutions as they are mandated to formulate policies, making plans, develop programs,
coordinate activities and implement activities relevant to DRR in the country. In addition to
government institutions, donors and IGNOs involved in DRR activities should also targeted for the
advocacy and awareness building including inclusion of them in the advocacy platform.

23
8. Advocacy issues
Based on the findings on gaps and weaknesses in the current DRR systems, it is envisaged that there
are lots of issues that need to be addressed on an urgent basis to have an enabling and functional DRR
system that would be effective in reducing the vulnerability of the citizen from the risks of all hazard
events. However, it is important to prioritize the issues to be taken up for the advocacy campaign ba
sed on urgency and needs. It is also to consider the achievability of the advocacy outcomes at the first
hand to gain confidence and effectiveness of the advocacy campaign. However, the broader disaster
advocacy issues that should be taken care of by this strategy include:
 Need for widening the understanding of the broader aspects of disaster and enhancing
capacity of DRR planners and actors to assess, plan and address the disaster risk reduction in
a comprehensive manner. Examples of sub issues could be:
o All hazards events have potential to cause disasters are incorporated in national DRR
pans and programs
o Specific DRR plans and interventions are developed by types of hazards specific to
certain regions of the country viz. monsoon flooding, river bank erosion (riverine
chars), flashfloods and wave erosion (haors), cyclones, storm surge and salinity
(coastal zone), drought (barind) and so forth
o Approved disaster management act is in place and the DRR plans and program are
bounded by law
 Need for linking DRR with national development planning processes including with the
poverty reduction strategies with a view to internalize disaster as developmental issue rather
isolated and seasonal events. Examples of sub-issues could be:
o Relevant government agencies have trained DRR focal points with specific ToR
o All agencies‟ programs and projects incorporated DRR components with budgetary
provisions
o Government‟s safety net programs are linked to DRR activities
 Need for shifting focus from relief & response to comprehensive disaster risk management
with key focus on pre and post disaster activities with the understanding that “prevention is
better than cure”. Examples of sub-issues could be:
o Presence of trained DRR volunteers in all hazard prone areas with adequate
preparedness/warning equipments
o Early warning systems are active and timely disseminate messages to all hazards
prone areas with clear messages, impact zones, timing of landfall/inundation, possible
extent of damages/risks and possible preparedness actions
o Adequate health services /facilities are ensured in all the key hazard prone areas
 Need for strengthening DRR capacities at all levels with more focus on local level DMCs,
particularly at union level (UDMCs) keeping in mind that the disaster hit on the ground and
local capacity is the most needed. Examples of sub-issues could be:
o DMCs are active year round and putting more emphasis on risk reduction and
mitigation than relief and response with explicit plans and ToR
o DMCs effectively coordinating all DRR activities at all levels
o UDMCs have risk and resource maps with contingency plans
 Need for making all related information and data available to the relevant audience active in
DRR activities with the understanding that information is power and have potential to

24
facilitate taking up risk management and risk reduction measures. Examples of sub-issues
could be:
o Clear communication and awareness building plans in place for disseminating DRR
information, data, materials to wider audience using all possible media and tools
o DRR information and resource materials area available at all levels with special focus
on union level
o Active web site on DRR with regular updates with focus on daily/hourly updating
during disaster period is accessible to all with printable materials
To this end, it is wise to carry out a mapping exercise with the active participation of advocacy allies
and prioritize the issues to be picked up for advocacy at the first place. In doing so, it is
recommended, for the first round campaign, to select an issue that can be easily achievable and can
demonstrate change.
Advocacy campaign to address the “flashflood” issue in the haor basin could be a priority. The timing
of flashfloods and the extent of crop damage is known disaster event. It is imperative that taking
preparedness actions can reduce the risks and damage. Submergible dyke has been the solution
(preparedness measure) to reduce the flashflood risks for long. But it has some lacking at the process
level that needs attention. Late sanction/ release of funds from the central government to BWDB
cause delay in starting the work and thus delayed its completion. By the time the dykes are nearing to
completion, flashflood comes and washed away some risk points and damages the crops. Late
starting, poor quality of the work, non engagement of communities in dyke construction has been key
issues that contribute to dyke failure and consequent crop loss. The contractors engaged in dyke
constriction do not emphasize on making stronger dykes to ensure crop saving rather they chase for
maximizing profits.
The advocacy issue here can be to pursue the government for early release of funds (by December) so
that the BWDB can start work in January and complete by early March. The other associated issue is
to involve the local communities in dyke construction work instead of engaging contractors so that
community participation is ensured in DRR.
The strategy should communicate messages to the audience not only to influence and claim changes
but also to aware them to have greater understanding of the issues. Following are some example of
issues to be communicated for building awareness of the DRR and development issues.
Multiplicity of disasters
One of the key thrusts should be to enhance the understanding of the comprehensiveness of disaster
and associated risks among all concerned including the communities exposed to disasters. In doing so,
there is need for development of data and information base on various hazard phenomena by
geographical locations, seasonality (where possible and predictable) and their potentials to cause
disasters including the possible damage extents. It is to be assessed whether or not all potential hazard
events are included in the national DRR policy and plan documents and efforts to be taken to ensure
that the missing hazard events are evaluated and included. For example, wave erosion of village
mounds in haor area is not included in the NPDM (2008-2015). Although it is localized but important
in the context of entire haor basin that comprises 7 districts of the country in the northeast (covers
25,000 sq. km – around 16% of the country). Once all the hazard phenomena are considered and
incorporated in the national policy and plan document then it is to be ensured that awareness is built
among the mass on the issue. To this end, DMB and other actors should have clear and effective plans
and actions including having required budgetary provisions.
Disaster is a development issue
Disaster risk reduction is more of a development issue than meeting the emergency at the advent of
any hazard/ disaster event. The risk reduction aspect thus needs to be pre-planned and integrated in
the national development planning processes. It is thus imperative that all concerned stakeholders

25
including the ministries should be involved in high level disaster management policy and planning
entities viz. National Disaster Management Council (NDMC), Inter-Ministerial Disaster Management
Coordination Committee (IMDMCC). While most of the ministries are members of these two high
level DRR committees but the Ministry of Land (MoL) is not there. It is worth mentioning that the
MoL has a great role to play in DRR especially in the coastal zone. Few examples of disaster and
development linkages are cites for clarity.
 Mangrove and cyclone: As tropical cyclone & storm surge has been the key disaster that hit
Bangladesh almost every year. The importance of coastal mangrove as “natural defense”
against the cyclone-induced risks is globally recognized. The victims of cyclone Sidr have the
same experience where costal mangrove reduced the risks of cyclone and storm surge. Except
the presence of Sundarbans mangrove forest in the southwest coast, the entire coastal zone
remains exposed except few patches of planted mangroves (done by the Forest Department).
However, in doing so the MoL allows the FD for planting mangroves in the newly accreted
lands in the coast for 20-25 years. Ironically, when the mangroves are full grown by 25 years,
the planted land is taken back by the MoL and distributed among the landless and then the
landless (?) immediately cleared the forest for settlements or making croplands. Therefore, the
importance of mangrove as „coastal defense‟ against disaster risks cannot be realized. For
example, a big patch of coastal forest of Charbata at Noakhali coast was taken back by the
district administration and then cleared some years ago.
As a development issue, the mangrove or coastal plantation should be protected not only for
sustained ecological and socioeconomic outcomes but also to realize the disaster prevention
outcome. The policy support is needed here to maintain the coastal forest (mangrove or mixed
forest) for acting as sustained coastal defense against the disaster caused due to cyclone and
storm surge. Therefore, the government should make arrangements so that MoL handover the
newly accreted land suitable for mangrove plantation to the FD for longer term for sustained
coastal defense. However, FD must also ensure community participation not only as
plantation laborers but also in taking ownership of the forest following the wise use principle.
 School holiday schedule in haor area: For long this has been an issue that holiday schedule
should be adjusted with the rice harvesting period for the entire haor basin of the northeast
(seven districts). As the farmers get a very narrow window of time to harvest the boro rice
(the only crop) that are highly vulnerable to damage by the early flashfloods before harvesting
(April). Often people cannot harvest in full due to shortage of laborers. If holiday schedule of
the schools (educational institutions) is adjusted with rice harvesting time that would help
farmers to have safe harvest without disrupting education of their children.
 Cropping pattern change: Government‟s policies on grow more food focuses on HYV rice
production. This is not suitable for every ecological setting prone to different kinds of
disasters. For example, haor basin is a mono cropped area (mostly boro or winter rice) and is
affected by the early flashfloods that damage the crop. Massive extension of BR29 as the high
yielding variety that requires longest cultivation period/time (165 days) makes the rice more
at risk of damage before harvesting. While BR45 with a slight low yields but can be harvested
2/3 weeks earlier than BR29 thus risk of damage by the flashflood can be avoided or reduced.
Besides, practice of alternative crops (vegetables, oil seeds, and spice crops) has high
potential in haor area with higher economic return could help farmers having safe harvest
could be initiated through DAE. So the preparedness measures can be handled in various
ways rather relying on only infrastructural solutions that often give false security as
embankment failure is a common phenomenon all over the country.
 Linking social protection measures with DRR: Disaster prone area should get high priority
of government‟s safety net programs. For example, government‟s 100 days program for the
ultra poor could have well linked with DRR activities. People in haor workshop said that 100-

26
days program money could have been better utilized in rehabilitation of submergible dykes
than making composts which is not much useful in the haor area. It is noted that soil fertility
in haor is better due to flooding and thus requirement of fertilizer is less compared to other
areas of the country. Likewise other social safety programs of the government (viz. VGF,
VGD) can be well linked with disaster recovery and rehabilitation activities targeting the most
vulnerable groups to cope with loss caused due to disasters.
 Zoning and Risk mapping: As a preparedness measure, disaster risk zoning is important.
Although there is macro level disaster risk zoning and maps somewhat useful, there is need
for micro level zoning and mapping of risk areas. For example, all river sections of Ganges,
Brahamaputra/ Jamua and Meghna are not equally vulnerable to river bank erosion – the
extent varies by locations for various reasons. Some sections suffer the most from erosion
than others. It is important to identify and map these differentiated erosion risk areas for
pragmatic micro level planning and designing DRR interventions. Likewise all the locations
of the greater haor basin are not equally susceptible to flashfloods. It is needed raw risk
mapping of the entire haor basin with explicit marking on differentiated risk areas by damage
potentials so that specific DRR activities can be targeted to the most risk areas/zones.
While the critical risk zoning is done, then the focus should on the social vulnerability. This
can be attributed by listing of vulnerable households (poor, disable, women headed) and
mapping out their locations within the most physically/geographically vulnerable areas. For
example, Kharchar Haor is one of the most vulnerable haor of Sunamgonj due to its
geographical locations and physical factors. Once it is mapped as most vulnerable area, the
next step is to identify villages that are more vulnerable within the Kharchar haor basin and
then of the people who are very poor /disadvantaged/marginalized and thus vulnerable due to
their socioeconomic classes. If this list is available and updated on reasonable intervals, this
would help during disaster to reach the vulnerable communities for emergency support within
the shortest possible time.
9. Implementation plans
The strategy and plans is planned for the timeframe of five years. Therefore, activities to be carried
under the strategy should be targeted to complete with achievements in five years period starting from
2010. For the implementation of communication and advocacy activities as planned and presented in
the matrix form should not be taken up at a time rather should pick up the issues on priority basis
(Table 1). Attaining all activities as presented in Appendix-1at a time would be costly and thus the
priority should be made based on the availability of funds, urgency of the need as well as technical
capacity of the alliance. This strategy document should therefore be considered as flexible guidance to
keep going the advocacy actions.
10. Evaluation and improvement of the strategy
The strategy and action plans should be evaluated from time to time to judge its effectiveness in terms
of communicating the messages, tools and media and achieving the desired outcomes. To this end, a
monitoring and feedback system should be developed and incorporated in the program soon after
initiation of the advocacy and communication activities. Based on the monitoring outcomes, the
required changes are to be in the communications and advocacy strategy and plans including methods,
Tools and media.

27
Table 1: Advocacy and communication plans
Key issues/ Current
status
Key focus/ actions areas Advocacy &
awareness tools
/media
Target audience Actors
/Allies
Expected out puts
Conceptualization and
Institutional aspects of
DRR
Narrow understanding
of disaster risk
reduction aspects
-Build awareness among all concerned on wider
perspective and array of hazards and disaster
events
-Sensitize stakeholders on comprehensive DRR
cycle
-Establish disaster as development issue and
ensure inclusion of DRR issue in every
development project/initiative
-Policy briefing
-Round tables
-Newspaper articles
-All DRR actors
including MoFD
and DMB
-All DMCs
-Communities
-INGOs
-Media
-DRR
networks
-All relevant people have clear
understanding of disaster perspective and
multiplicity of hazard events and disaster
risks
-All development project have explicit
DRR focus
Major focus of current
DRR is on response &
relief activities rather
on comprehensive DRR
-Make a shift from response & relief to
comprehensive DRR at all DRR actors at all
levels including the communities
-Policy briefings
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles/
serial stories
-TV serials
-NDMC
-MoFD
-DMB
-CDMP
-INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
relevant
networks
-A balanced focus is on overall DRR
aspects
DMCs are not properly
functioning (do not hold
meetings, not aware of
their roles, no funds for
meeting emergency)
-Influence DMB to build capacity of DMCs
-Influence DMB/MoFD to allocate emergency
funds for DMCs
-Influence UP‟s to include DRR in its plans
with budgetary provisions
-Influence DMB to include 20% women in each
DMC
-DMCs at all levels develop annual plan of
action
-Policy briefing based
on detailed review of
DMCs
-Round tables
-Social audits to
document functions of
DMCs particularly at
local levels
-Posters and Bill boards
-DMB and MoFD
for policy inclusion
and budgetary
provision
-CDMP for
technical assistance
-Parliamentary
committee on DRR
to pressurize MoFD
- INGOs,
-Media
- DRR and
relevant
networks
-Fully functional DMCs at all levels and
work as focal entities for tackling DRR
issues including better coordination
No clear institutional
arrangements for
integrating climate
change issues in DRR
framework
-Sensitize and influence MoFD and MoEF to
develop workable institutional framework for
integration of climate change and disaster issues
-Build capacity of DRR actors and institutions
on climate change issues and its links with
disaster
-Policy dialogue
-Round tables
-News paper articles
-MoEF and MoFD
-DoE, DMB and
CDMP
-NDMC
-IMDMCC
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR
networks
-Institutional framework for integration
of climate change and DRR is developed
and put in place
-Confusion on CC and DRR issues
resolved
Inadequate monitoring,
feedback and
internalization of
learning of DRR
activities within the
-Establish and adopt functional monitoring and
learning systems based on DRR activities and
issues
-Policy briefings
-Policy dialogue /
lobbying
-Social audits to
document and share the
-MoFD
-DMB, CDMP
- INGOs
- DRR and
other relevant
networks
DMCs made improvements through
internalizing lessons from monitoring
outcomes

28
Key issues/ Current
status
awareness tools
/media
/Allies
Expected out puts
DMCs monitoring and learning
systems
Weak institutional
coordination in DRR
activities
-Influence DMB and relevant DRR committees
for ensuring effective coordination and synergy
among GO-GO, GO-NGO, NGO-NGO and
donors
-Capacitate DMCs with mandate in playing
coordination role at all levels
-Policy briefings
-Roundtables
-Social audits
-MoFD
-DoE, DMB
-CDMP
-NDMC
-IMDMCC
-DRR donors
- INGOs
-CDMP
- DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Effective framework for coordination
among multiple DRR actors in all stages
of Disaster management activities
The disaster act is not
approved yet
-Influence government to approve the DRR acts -Roundtables
-Media (newspaper
articles and TV spots)
-MoFD
-Parliamentary
standing committee
on disaster
- INGOs -
Media
-DRR acts is approved in parliament and
put in place with specific authority
Lack of research and
development (R&D) on
DRR
-Establish provision for research and
development (R&D) on various aspects of DRR
(social, technical, institutional) and incorporate
findings in improving DRR efforts
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles
-Policy briefings
-MoFD and DMB
-CDMP
-NDMC
-Donor
- INGOs
-CDMP
-Media
- DRR
networks
-Overall improvement of DRR systems
through regular incorporation of research
findings
Disaster preparedness
There is no risk and
resource maps on all
disaster hotspots of the
country and absence of
DRR contingency
planning
-Influence authorities to develop risk maps
covering all disaster hotspots (haor, chars,
coastal zone) and make available to DRR
stakeholders/DMCs
-Also develop contingency and disaster
preparedness plans (micro level) for all disaster
hotspots and make available to DMCs and
public
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles
-DMB
-DMCs
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Contingency plans based on localized
risks and resources would help tackling
disaster at local levels
Non availability of list
of vulnerable
communities in disaster
hotspots
-Establish provision for making list of
vulnerable communities living in disaster
hotspots (haors, chars, coastal zone) with
regular updating at reasonable intervals
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles
-DMB
-DMCs
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-List of vulnerable communities in all
disaster hotspots are available that help
facilitate quick response activities
Higher emphasis on
structural measures
while ignoring the
social and institutional
aspects including
capacity and resilience
building
-Establish processes and provisions for social
and institutional capacity building for rick
reduction as preparedness measures
-Mandated DMCs to take lead or act s focal
point in planning, executing and supervising
both hardware and software preparedness
measures
-Policy briefings
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles
-NDMC
-IMDMC
-DMB
-CDMP
-Donors
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Improved DRR due to balanced focus on
both infrastructural and social &
institutional capacity building aspects
relevant to DRR
Inadequate/faulty early -Establish a people centered early warning -Policy briefings -NDMC - INGOs Effective people centered and workable

29
Key issues/ Current
status
awareness tools
/media
/Allies
Expected out puts
warning systems systems covering all hazard events (flashfloods,
monsoon floods, cyclones, drought, etc.)
-Warning messages should be clear, concise and
understandable to the recipient communities
-Incorporate communities views and concerns
in warning messages
-Messages should mention the impact zones,
timing of hitting and likely risks and impacts
-Roundtables
-Newspaper articles
-TV spots/talk show
-IMDMC
-DMB
-CDMP
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
early warning system developed and put
in place
No disaster volunteers
in many disaster prone
areas and volunteers
where present (coast)
are not well trained
-Make provision for developing DRR
volunteers for all hazard prone areas with
provision for building capacity of volunteers on
regular intervals
-Ensure availability of required message
dissemination tools & materials at all hazard
prone UDMCs
-Newspaper articles
and TV shows
-MoFD
-DMB
-CDMP
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-DRR volunteers at all hazard prone areas
and trained in DRR aspects
Emergency Response
Inadequate and
improper damage and
needs assessment
-Establish a system/approach quick and correct
damage and needs assessment at UDMC level
-Ensure provisions for building DMCs‟ capacity
to organize/guide quick damage & needs
assessment
- Newspaper articles
-Rallies at all levels
-Policy dialogue
-DMB
-CDMP
-Donors
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Quick damage and needs assessment
mechanism under DMCs guidance
Dumping relief in easy
to reach locations while
ignoring the victims in
remote areas
-Establish mechanism to ensure reaching the
hard hit poor/ vulnerable communities in remote
areas within shortest possible time by DRR
actors
-Newspaper articles
-Rallies at local levels
-Social audits
-DMB
-CDMP
-DMCs
-DRR actors
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Poor and excluded groups are served
during and pre and post disaster
situations
Lack of transparency in
relief operations
-Establish provision for DRR actors to inform
their packages, allocations and entitlements to
the DMCs and communities
-Mechanism to make the DRR actors
accountable to relevant DMCs on their overall
DRR activities relevant to relief & response
-Newspaper articles
-Rallies at local levels
-Dialogue with
UZDMCs and UDMCs
-DMP
-Donors
-INGOs
- INGOs
-Media
-DRR and
other relevant
networks
-Accountable and transparent response
activities by the DMCs and DRR actors
Shortage of manpower
during emergency in
disaster prone/ remote
areas
-Convince relevant government agencies to
ensure posting of allocated manpower in remote
disaster prone areas
-Establish provisions for training of
Government and NGO staff posted in disaster
prone areas on DRR
-Newspaper articles
-TV serial on DRR
-Relevant
government
agencies
-DMB
-Media
-DMB
-Better management of DRR with
required manpower
DMCs lack of funds for -Convince Government to allocate funds or -Newspaper articles -DMB - INGOs -DMCs have funds for transportation of

DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH

DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH

Similar to DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH (20)

More from M. Anowar Hossain

More from M. Anowar Hossain (11)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

DISASTER MANAGEMENT ADVOCACY STRATEGY FOR CONCERN WORLDWIDE BANGLADESH