International municipal cooperation as a modality for transferring local best practices in disaster risk management: practice, promise and pitfalls
•
1 like•457 views
#1 International Municipal Cooperation (IMC), also known as City-to-City (C2C) cooperation, involves the sharing of best practices between local authorities in different countries to build disaster risk management (DRM) capacities. #2 CITYNET, a network of Asian cities, has utilized C2C cooperation to transfer DRM practices, such as Yokohama helping Bangkok with flood control and Makati assisting Kathmandu with risk-sensitive land use planning. #3 While C2C cooperation shows promise as an effective means of diffusing local DRM solutions, challenges include limited funding and the need to
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Similar to International municipal cooperation as a modality for transferring local best practices in disaster risk management: practice, promise and pitfalls
Similar to International municipal cooperation as a modality for transferring local best practices in disaster risk management: practice, promise and pitfalls (20)
More from Global Risk Forum GRFDavos
More from Global Risk Forum GRFDavos (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
International municipal cooperation as a modality for transferring local best practices in disaster risk management: practice, promise and pitfalls
- 1. Practice, Promise and International Municipal Cooperation Pitfalls as a Modality for Transferring Local Best Practices in Disaster Risk Management Kristoffer B. BERSE Dept. of Urban Engineering, The University of Tokyo
- 2. What is IMC? International Municipal Cooperation - Key Features: An evolving form of international public- public partnership between local 1. Linking structure - authorities in two or more countries, with International or without the support of other actors, 2. Primary actors – where the primary goal is to enhance the Local authorities of capacities of one or both partners cities through the sharing and, where 3. End goal – Best appropriate, adaptation of best practices, practice transfer based on the principles of trust and 4. Guiding principles – equality. Trust and equality 5. External support – Also known in the literature as City-to- Important but not a City Cooperation (C2C) ―sine qua non‖ for cooperation 1. Introduction
- 3. International Linking Modalities Involving Local Authorities C2C cooperation is just one of the many ways by which cities connect with each other internationally. 1. Introduction
- 4. Scales and Modalities of C2C Cooperation Source: Adapted with modifications from CITYNET (1998). 1. Introduction
- 5. A growing, global practice 1990s presen Gaining support from Breakout UNDP, World Bank t decade a decentralized 70% of cities worldwide GFDRR’s South-South Program, JICA, variant of are engaged in UNISDR Making Cities international C2C Resilient campaign, etc development (UCLG 2010) cooperation (Hafteck 2003) 1. Introduction
- 6. What we do not fully know yet… C2C as a mechanism for diffusing local best practices in DRM. 1. Introduction
- 7. What this paper is about A case study of CITYNET’s experience in transferring local best practices in DRM through C2C 2. About the Study
- 8. What this is about exactly Research Questions 1. How does CITYNET, a regional network of local authorities in Asia-Pacific, employ C2C cooperation to meet the DRM needs of its city members? 2. What are the scope, modalities, linking structure and outputs of these partnerships? 3. And learning from CITYNET’s experience, what are the prospects and challenges of C2C cooperation in enhancing the DRM capacities of local authorities? 4. Can it be a complementary mechanism for the advancement of integrative risk management at the local level? 2. About the Study
- 9. Data Sources 1. CITYNET Databases, 1990-2009 • Membership master file • C2C Activities, different files 2. CITYNET Publications • Newsletters: CityVoice, 1993-2009;CityVoices, 2010; Clusters Update, 2006-2010; eNews, 2002-2010 • Annual and Decadal reports • Other documents (e.g. Guidelines for Transferring Effective Practices, 1998; project reports; etc.) 3. Methodology
- 10. Why CITYNET? CITYNET - a Japan-based regional network of local authorities in the Asia- Pacific established in 1987 through the joint efforts of UNDP, UNESCAP, etc. Oldest proponent of C2C as a formal programme in Asia Received the UN-HABITAT Scroll of Honour in 2002 for work on C2C Has the most active membership among Asian city networks for the environment (Nakamura et al. 2010) Accessible- Secretariat is in Yokohama Source: Nakamura et al., 2010 3. Methodology
- 11. CITYNET’s IMC Approach 4. Results Source: Adapted from Tjandradewi & Berse, 2011 11 4. Results
- 12. 4. Results Taking stock 4 Climate 17 Change Total no. of MDG C2C cases: 66 38 Disaster No. of disaster- 10 Infrastructure related cases: Unspecified 10 15 Distribution of C2C Projects by Cluster, 1990-2009 12 Results 4.
- 13. 4. Results C2C Participants 13 Results 4.
- 14. 4. Results C2C Profile (1) Bilateral 14 Results 4.
- 15. 4. Results C2C Profile (2) 4. Results
- 16. 4. Results Cooperation Outputs (1) Outputs Case 1 Yokohama’s flood control method (i.e. use of reservoir and ―retention ponds‖ for rainwater) was adopted to improve Bangkok’s own ―monkey cheek‖ strategy; application handbook and computer programme was developed and distributed nationally Case 2 No reported concrete output Case 3 Development of reconstruction plans for a local market and commemoration park, as well as a detailed plan for an integrated traffic management system, a proposal for the purification of natural water, and technical advice on housing reconstruction; signing of a formal agreement of cooperation between Yokohama and Banda Aceh Case 4 Reconstruction of two multi-purpose community centers and basic utilities (e.e. pumping stations, toilets) distribution of relief 4. Results
- 17. 4. Results Cooperation Outputs (2) Outputs Case 5 Reconstruction of two multi-purpose community Case 6 centers and basic utilities (e.e. pumping stations, toilets); distribution of relief goods Case 7 A set of DRM recommendations presented to Islamabad CDA; Construction of a safe school in Muzzafarabad Case 8 Formulation of Kathmandu’s risk-sensitive land use plan, sectoral profile and sample zoning ordinance; set-up and training of DM unit Case 9 Formulation of DRM-related action plans Case Technical advice on disaster town watching and 10 community-level DRR mainstreaming 4. Results
- 18. Promise of C2C Cooperation C2C cooperation has shown to be an #1 effective, simple and affordable modality for transferring DRM best practices at the local level, be it in the form of a specific knowledge, skills, policy, program or technology. Ex: Yokohama on Bangkok Yokohama on Banda Aceh Makati on Kathmandu
- 19. Promise of C2C Cooperation #2 C2C cooperation has the potential to promote the South-South transfer of local best practices in DRM. Ex: Yokohama, Kuala Lumpur and Penang on Banda Aceh Makati and Kathmandu Mumbai and Khulna Yokohama on Moratuwa and Galle, with HELP-O and SEVANATHA
- 20. Promise of C2C Cooperation C2C cooperation promotes inclusivity in DRM #3 activities; the participation of a ―third wheel‖ in the form of an NGO, municipal association, university or funding organization enriches the partnership Ex: URDI and AIM in Banda Aceh PIEDAR in Islamabad HELP-O in Galle and SEVANATHA in Moratuwa Kobe University and MAS in Kuala Lumpur EMI in Kathmandu JICA in the Yokohama/Kobe training program
- 21. Promise of C2C Cooperation C2C cooperation has shown to be a flexible #4 mechanism for effecting changes at any point in the DRM cycle. Ex: Assistance following the 2005 Pakistan Earthquake, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, and the 2009 Cyclone Aila Makati-Kathmandu on DRR Yokohama and Bangkok
- 22. Pitfalls of C2C Cooperation 1. Predominance of Yokohama as a resource city 2. Limited reach to small- and medium-sized cities that are at risk 3. Limited funding for more meaningful exchanges 4. Difficulties in monitoring and evaluating long- term impacts
- 23. Added Value of C2C Cooperation to Integrative Risk Management 1. Addresses real need: Directly responds to the capacity needs of local authorities in DRM 2. Evidence-based: Concretely shows how— and why—DRM can work at the local level. 3. Empowering: Utilizes local authorities themselves as the sources of learning and tested best practices 4. Inclusive: Encourages partnership with other stakeholders whether as additional beneficiaries or co-resources
- 24. Concluding Remarks CITYNET’s experience has demonstrated the promise of C2C cooperation to foster South- South decentralized development cooperation, including the engagement of those outside the local government apparatus.
- 25. Concluding Remarks Nevertheless, it is not without its own challenges; more work needs to be done, such as in terms of bringing in more cities, especially small and intermediate cities, into what Campbell (2012) called as the ―cloud of trust;‖ augmenting funding at the network and city level; enhancing the cooperation experience; and strengthening monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
- 26. Concluding Remarks In spite these limitations, C2C cooperation remains a viable mechanism that can potentially enrich the practice of integrative risk management, as it addresses the growing DRM concerns of local authorities by taking advantage of the most important resource at their disposal: themselves.
- 27. Thank you for listening! どうもありがとうございます！ For correspondence: kberse@ua.t.u- tokyo.ac.jp, krisberse@gmail.com http://www.facebook.com/kberse
- 28. 4. Results Case 1 Partner Cities Resource: Yokohama; Beneficiary: Bangkok Activities 2 technical advisory services, 1 study visit Hazard / DRM Focus Flood / Mitigation Geopolitical orientation North-South Linking structure Bi-nodal Other participants None Year 1997, 1999, 2001 Results Yokohama’s flood control method (i.e. use of reservoir and ―retention ponds‖ for rainwater) was adopted to improve Bangkok’s own ―monkey cheek‖ strategy; application handbook and computer programme was developed and distributed nationally 28 Results 4.
- 29. 4. Results Case 2 Partner Cities Resource: Yokohama; Beneficiary: Phnom Penh Activities 1 study visit Hazard / DRM Flood / Mitigation Focus Geopolitical North-South orientation Linking structure Bi-nodal Other participants None Year 2004 Results No reported concrete output 29 Results 4.
- 30. 4. Results2 - Yokohama and Banda Aceh Case Case 3 Penang and Kuala Lumpur with Partner Cities Resources: Yokohama, Kuala Lumpur, Penang Beneficiaries: Banda Aceh Activities Technical assistance involving 2 technical advisory services, 3 training with study visits Hazard / DRM focus Tsunami, Earthquake / Relief, Recovery, Preparedness, Mitigation Geopolitical orientation North-South, South-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants URDI, AIM Year 2005-2008 Results Development of reconstruction plans for a local market and commemoration park, as well as a detailed plan for an integrated traffic management system, a proposal for the purification of natural water, and technical advice on housing reconstruction; signing of a formal agreement of cooperation between Yokohama and Banda Aceh 30 30 4. Results
- 31. 4. Results Cases 4 & 5 Partner Cities Resource: Yokohama; Beneficiaries: Moratuwa, Galle Activities 1 material aid Hazard / DRM Focus Tsunami, Earthquake / Relief, Recovery Geopolitical orientation North-South, South-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants SEVANATHA, HELP-O Year 2005-2007 Results Reconstruction of two multi-purpose community centers and basic utilities (e.e. pumping stations, toilets) distribution of relief goods 31 Results 4.
- 32. 4. Results Case 6 Partner Cities Resource: Mumbai Beneficiaries: Khulna Activities 1 material aid Hazard / DRM Cyclone / Relief Focus Geopolitical South-South orientation Linking structure Bi-nodal Other participants None Year 2009 Results Distribution of 2Million water purification 32 Results 4. tablets
- 33. 4. Results Case 7 Partner Cities Resource: Yokohama Beneficiaries: Islamabad, Muzzafarabad Activities 3 technical advisory services, 1 material aid Hazard/DRM focus Earthquake / Recovery, Preparedness Geopolitical orientation North-South, South-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants PIEDAR Year 2006-2009 Results A set of recommendations presented to Islamabad CDA; Construction of 33 33 4. Results elementary school in Muzzafarabad
- 34. 4. Results Case 8 Partner Cities Resource: Makati Beneficiary: Kathmandu Activities 1 technical advisory services, 1 study visit Hazard/DRM focus Earthquake / Preparedness, Mitigation Geopolitical orientation South-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants EMI Year 2008 Results Formulation of Kathmandu’s risk- sensitive land use plan, sectoral profile and sample zoning ordinance; set-up 34 34 and training of DM unit 4. Results
- 35. 4. Results Case 9 Partner Cities Resource: Yokohama, Kobe; Beneficiaries: Mumbai, Gorontalo, Kathmandu, Makati, Colombo Activities 1 training with several study visits Hazard / DRM focus General / Preparedness, Mitigation, Response, Recovery Geopolitical orientation North-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants JICA Year 2003 Results Formulation of DRM-related action plans 35 35 4. Results
- 36. 4. Results Case 10 Partner Cities Resource: Makati Beneficiary: Kuala Lumpur Activities 1 technical advisory services Hazard / DRM focus General / Preparedness Geopolitical orientation South-South Linking structure Multi-nodal Other participants KU, MAS Year 2009 Results Technical advice on disaster town watching and community-level DRR mainstreaming 36 36 4. Results
Editor's Notes
- . For instance, Yokohama’s” retarding and retention basin” strategy to prevent flooding has been instrumental in the improvement of Bangkok’s own “Monkey Cheek” technique, a method of keeping rainwater for a while before allowing it be discharged gradually into the river, at a smaller scale. Yokohama has also worked closely with Banda Aceh in reconstruction planning, as well as in addressing its water-related issues following the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. Makati, on the other hand, has provided significant inputs to the development of Kathmandu’s disaster management structure and risk-sensitive land use plan. In all cases, the flow of knowledge and eventual transfer of best practices did not require as much financial and human resources as when transplanting solutions through traditional modes of international technical assistance.
- It is also interesting to note that seven of the 10 C2C cases actually involved some elements of a South-South transfer. The case of Banda Aceh was unique in that it received assistance from both Southern (Kuala Lumpur and Penang) and Northern (Yokohama) cities. The Kathmandu-Makati C2C project was built on the respective strengths of the two cities, one on land pooling and another on comprehensive land use planning and emergency management. It can also be argued that the structure of the JICA-supported training Program allowed for South-South exchange of ideas among the beneficiary cities from five developing countries. Mumbai, on the other hand, provided material aid to Khulna in the aftermath of Cyclone Aila in 2009. The construction of community centers in Moratuwa and Galle as part of Yokohama’s material aid was also supported principally by two NGOs from within Sri Lanka itself.
- This also goes to show that while most of the partnerships involved only two cities as primary actors, in reality, the cooperative framework has been enriched by the participation of a third wheel in the form of an NGO, municipal association, university or funding organization. These include the URDI and AIM in Banda Aceh, PIEDAR in Islamabad, HELP-O in Galle, SEVANATHA in Moratuwa, Kobe University and MAS in Kuala Lumpur, EMI in Kathmandu, and JICA in the Yokohama/Kobe training program, all of which except for EMI and JICA belong to CITYNET as Associate Members. AIM was particularly helpful in connecting the CITYNET Secretariat and Banda Aceh, as at that time the latter was not yet part of the network. The role of these organizations is critical not only in planning and carrying out the activities, but also in securing political buy-in and ensuring community-wide participation. With the involvement of these external actors, the partnerships became multilateral in structure, allowing for a more extensive interaction among the partners. This is particularly important especially since many of the support organizations were based in the beneficiary city. NGOs such as SEVANATHA and HELP-O helped ensure that actions are followed through once the resource cities return to their respective countries.
- Lastly, C2C partnership has shown to be a flexible mechanism for effecting changes at any point in the DRM cycle. It was utilized to mobilize material transfer in response to disasters that badly hit Asian cities in recent years, such as the 2005 Pakistan Earthquake, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, and the 2009 Cyclone Aila. The initial focus of these C2C cases was therefore on recovery; nonetheless, these later opened an opportunity for the beneficiary cities to build back better through careful planning, capacity building, and awareness-raising, as best exemplified in the case of Banda Aceh. On the other hand, the Makati-Kathmandu partnership has demonstrated that C2C cooperation can be used as a backbone to undergird proactive reduction of risks, such as through risk-sensitive land use planning and disaster management preparedness. The Yokohama-Bangkok case, on the other hand, has illustrated a more targeted approach at finding a technological solution to a perennial and ongoing problem.
- , C2C partnership has shown to be a flexible mechanism for effecting changes at any point in the DRM cycle. It was utilized to mobilize material transfer in response to disasters that badly hit Asian cities in recent years, such as the 2005 Pakistan Earthquake, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, and the 2009 Cyclone Aila. The initial focus of these C2C cases was therefore on recovery; nonetheless, these later opened an opportunity for the beneficiary cities to build back better through careful planning, capacity building, and awareness-raising, as best exemplified in the case of Banda Aceh. On the other hand, the Makati-Kathmandu partnership has demonstrated that C2C cooperation can be used as a backbone to undergird proactive reduction of risks, such as through risk-sensitive land use planning and disaster management preparedness. The Yokohama-Bangkok case, on the other hand, has illustrated a more targeted approach at finding a technological solution to a perennial and ongoing problem.