1. Basic Concepts
• Hazard
• Disaster
• Vulnerability
• Risk and Resilience
32 se diff case studies
56 se canun,Mexico wala
2. Hazard
• Natural or human made events that threatens to adversely affect human
life, property or activities to the extent of causing a disaster
• Difference between a hazard and disaster: When does a hazard become
disaster?
• Types of hazard: Hydrological, Meteorological, Geophysical, Climatological
Biological etc.
• Classification based on other aspects: Slow onset/ diffused etc.
4. Disaster
• A serious disruption of functioning of the society, causing widespread
human, material or environmental losses which exceed the ability of
affected society to cope using its own resources
• Life and Material losses- Quantification
• Natural and Human made - Nature of Impact
• Coping capacity- ability, strategies etc. to withstand/reduce the
impact of a hazard
6. Mitigation
• Mitigation: Measures aimed at reducing the risk, impact and effect of
a disaster or threatening disaster situation (Disaster Management
Act, 2005)
• Structural mitigation: Cyclone shelters, Coastal belt plantation,
Earthquake resistant houses, Early Warning System etc.
• Non Structural mitigation: Coastal Zone Management Policies,
Insurance cover etc.
• Conceptual overlap with ‘disaster preparedness’
7. Disaster Preparedness
• DM Act defines preparedness as “the state of readiness to deal with
a threatening disaster situation or disasters and the effects thereof’
• To minimize the adverse effects of a hazard through effective
precautionary actions
• To ensure timely, appropriate, and efficient organization and delivery
of relief and recovery
• Preparedness measures: emergency provision, mock drills, plans etc.
8. Disaster Response
• Emergency and response: Imminent threat to human life, properties,
environment etc.
• Actions and functions undertaken to face the hazard when it occurs.
• For example, early warning dissemination, evacuation, search and
rescue (SAR), relief, psycho social care, damage assessment,
restoration of key infrastructure etc.
• A quick and effective response requires adequate planning and
preparedness
9. Recovery and Reconstruction
• Conceptual difference between ‘recovery’ and ‘reconstruction’
• These include long term measures e.g. houses, livelihoods,
infrastructures etc.
• It is capital intensive and needs careful planning, participation
• Often seen as opportunity to plan developmental activities which are
more robust and resilient
10. Disaster Risk Management
• Hazard paradigm: Technocratic approach and development of scientific and
engineering disciplines
• Emergence of vulnerability, for example seismic risk to seismic hazard-
Social studies of disaster risk- subjective
• Disaster risk management: Risk analysis, risk reduction, risk identification,
Risk transfer, disaster management
• Risk in terms of a distinction between reality and possibility- Uncertainty,
consequence, context, performative
11. Vulnerability
• Vulnerability is propensity of exposed elements such as human, livelihoods,
assets etc. to suffer adverse impacts from hazards
• It relates to predisposition, susceptibility, fragilities, weaknesses etc.
• It has two sides: external and internal: External side refers to natural hazard and
its characteristics (severity, frequency). Internal side refers to resilience; the
community’s capacity to resist and recover from the adverse impact of a disaster
• Convolution or mutual conditioning; one cannot be vulnerable unless threatened
and threatened unless one is vulnerable
Natural tendency
12. Vulnerability Features
• Physical hazard is an essential dimension
• Conceptually different from poverty; non-poor are vulnerable too.
However vulnerability can push the people into poverty
• Vulnerability arises from factors such as income, class, race, caste,
gender, age and is reduced by access to resources and assets
• Vulnerability a complex issue: difficult to develop common
measures or indicators of vulnerability
13. Vulnerability
• Vulnerability of people and not system: modernization
• Spatial scale for example national, regional etc.:
• Traditional knowledge not evenly distributed: house building
• Permanent emergency
14. Forms of Vulnerability (Wilches-Chaux, 1989)
Physical
Economic
Social
Political
Technical
Ideological
Cultural
Educational
Ecological
Institutional
15. Capacity and vulnerability
• Coping capacity: the ability of people, organizations, and systems, using
available skills and resources, to face and manage adverse conditions,
emergencies, or disasters
• Coping and Adaptive Capacity: Ex-post action and ex-ante action
• Relationship: Capacity to cope and capacity to adapt
• Two ways to understand vulnerability and capacity: Vulnerability due to
lack of capacity or as its opposite
16. Disaster: Conceptual background
• Colonialization during 17th to 19th century and tropicality: temperature,
humidity, disease and western medicine
• Development paradigm during post war period: developed and developing
countries, poverty in place of disease
• Criticism include idea of development as much older, existence of
undeveloped world for the developed etc.
• Disasters from a hazard perspective requiring technocratic solution:
vulnerability paradigm and relief
17. Different Capacity Needs
• Capacity to anticipate risk: Land use, urban planning, river basin
management, diversification of income sources etc.
• Capacity to respond: ex post and ex ante
• Capacity to recover and change: physical and social impact
• Resilience: Capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed
to hazards, to resist, adapt, accommodate to or recover from the effect in a
timely and efficient manner including preservation and maintenance of an
acceptable level of functioning and structure (UNISDR 2005)
18. Resilience
• Engineering perspective: Recovery and constancy
• Ecological and social resilience: persistence
• Integrated social ecological: adaptive capacity, transformability, learning
and innovation
• Vulnerability mapping to resilience building
19. Differences between Vulnerability and Resilience
(Manyena, 2006)
Vulnerability
• Resistance
• Force Bound
• Safety
• Mitigation
• Engineering
• Risk assessment
• Outcome
Resilience
• Recovery
• Time bound
• Bounce back
• Adaptation
• Community based
• Vulnerability/ capacity
• Process
20. Development and Disasters
• Development- economic prosperity, modern amenities, poverty
reduction, education, technological advancement, freedom, equality
• In relation to disaster, goals are in opposite directions?
• Sustainable development
• Impact on development- Japan earthquake 2011 cost $ 200 bn.
Which is 3% of its GDP
21. Linking Disaster with Development
• The cause and effect relationship between disasters and development
has been ignored
• Disasters were seen in the context of emergency response
• Development programs were not assessed in the context of disasters
• Communities under disaster stress were seen as too turbulent for
development initiatives
23. Disaster and Development
• Disaster risk because of decisions in the past
• Decisions we make in the present time
• Development processes modify hazards
• Everyday life is made of hazards- limits to coping capacity
24. Disasters rooted in development failure
• Inequality in growth- weak economic growth, financial instability,
falling wages, income poverty etc.
• Political instability- disruption of governance system
• Policies and plans unmindful of potential disaster risk- global to local
• Land use, infrastructures, poor planning- false sense of safety
25. Disaster Risk Reduction-Sustainable
Development
• Disaster reduction- Disaster risk management
• Social and economic development- developmental management
• Sympathetic environmental management- environmental
management
• International Initiatives
26. Development and DRR: Haiyan or Yolanda
• Haiyan struck in Nov. 2013- 6300 people lost their lives
• Typhoon (tropical cyclone) in Philippines
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UJW84Fqhgw
• Trade off within multiple stakeholders- decisions involving losing one
quality in exchange of another
• Trade off typology- aggregation, equity, risk, balancing goals and
distribution of power
Disaster risk reduction
27. Trade off dimensions: Aggregation
• Aggregation- Gains and losses of DRR and development decision making
and action and benefits outweigh losses
• Cost of living, housing process, livelihood opportunities: decision to live in
a particular area; Attachment to a place/community, familiarity
• Investment decision: Who bears the risk/cost and who bears benefits
• DRR initiatives are seen as opposed to growth: Deficiencies of cost/benefit
analytical approach
28. Trade off: Risk
• Risk-inter related and level of uncertainty
• Risk prioritization and their impact on DRR: Development decisions,
severity and frequency, varied social groups
• Reducing for one social group may mean increasing it for others
• Prioritization based on context: Knowledge validity for example local
knowledge
29. Trade off: Equity
• Equity and equality
• Resource allocation, cultural context
• Insurance industries: incentives and disincentives for DRR
• Subsidizing insurance premium
30. Trade off dimensions: Time
• Time- balancing current and future opportunities, threat, needs, risk
• Low frequency hazards are discounted
• Efficient and effective- Political commitment, Requirement of time
• Public sector regulations are relaxed for speedy recovery
31. Participation
• Identification of shared values among different stakeholders:
cooperation versus competition
• Participation- degree and nature of involvement in decision making
• Efficient and effective
• Power and participation
32. Impact on Tacloban
• On 8 November 2013, “super” typhoon Yolanda (international name,
Haiyan), one of the strongest and deadliest tropical cyclones recorded,
struck the Philippines. Eastern Visayas had 31% affected people and 43%
damaged houses
• 6000 died and more than 30,000 houses destroyed
• Government and UN Habitat led plan- TRRP
• It envisioned build back better : Tacloban as a global resilient city within
nine years
33. Tacloban Recovery and Rehabilitation (TRRP)
• City Disaster Risk Reduction Plan was approved in 2016-Multi hazard
• Five sectoral plans- Shelter, social service, economic, physical and
environment
• Six months consultative process by Tacloban Recovery and
Sustainable Development Group (TRSDG) to define recovery goals
• Relocation of 40% population most of whom were informal
settlement close to coast to North Tacloban region
34. Tacloban: time
• Short term plan- houses in disaster risk free/less areas within a year,
township within three years, restoration/revitalization of economy
• Long terms plan- Economic growth and competitiveness in 4-9 years
• Integration with Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Comprehensive
Development Plan
• Construction of houses for 40% city residents living mostly on north
35.
36.
37. Tacloban
• Construction of thousands of houses- lack of piped water, limited sewerage
and lack of solid waste management leading to flooding
• By 2016, 1500 families had relocated and after President order by 2017,
10000 families relocated- pace of construction, relocation
• Loss of social cohesion and social network- social and economic risk
• Coastal storm surge risk reduction became the overriding goal and
recovery from Yolanda became the primary focus- Household and
community level risk assessment
38. Tacloban: Economic and Development
• Development of Large tract of agricultural land for housing project
which was earlier earmarked for Eatern Visayas Agri-Industrial Growth
Centre (EVAIG)
• Farming livelihood affected and concerns over food security
• Relocation meant carrier to those engaged in fishing occupation
• Training of skills did not lead to occupation for example carpentry-
alternate livelihood were seen ineffective and unsustainable
39. Risk assessment
• Multi-hazard risk assessment approach: Typhoon, earthquake,
drought etc., biological, technological, climatic change etc.
• Geological hazard risk in the site initially
• Flood and landslide risk in relocation site minimized through hard
measures
• Focus on immediate hazards led to oversight of new hazards such as
livelihood losses, social fragmentation
40. Risk assessment
• Risk assessment prioritization
• High impact or recurrent hazard, intensive or extensive hazard risk
• Individual and household level risk assessment may not be same as
city level assessment
• Role of societal norms and values, trusts, uncertainties
41. Tacloban: Gains and losses
• Informal settler and urban poor were prioritized: Single headed
households, disabilities, pregnant women, children etc.
• Political patronage
• Equity based approach
• Distinction between informal settlers and others
42. Participation
• Wide consultation: 150 participants
• Plan was presented to diverse groups
• Perception of external agency such as UN Habitat
• Selected organization with greater influencing authorities
43. Salt Lake: City Planning
• BC Roy, 1949: East of the city on wetland
• Dobrivoje Toskovic: 400,000 lower and middle class, inclusive growth,
modern township
• Humane and health environment, Garden City: Chandigarh, Brasilia,
Rawalpindi
• Nehruvian vision: modern, secular, casteless
44. Evolution of Salt Lake
• 4 Sq. miles. Wetland: Elevated with silt from Hooghly
• Reclamations in 1962 and first home occupied in 1970
• Population 10,000 in 1981 to 276,000 in 2011: 5lakh by 2030
• Flood risk mitigated through investment: Limited to planned township
45. Exclusion: Healthy Atmosphere
• Re-imagination during its development: Healthy atmosphere and evict
unplanned uses
• Housing poor and low income will have implication for real estate and
potential investment
• Original master plan had a ratio of 70: 30 for Houses for middle class multi-
family apartments to single family houses which is reversed
• CM residence in 1980’s started a new trend of land as political currency
47. Exclusion
• Planned and unplanned area: Dattabad slum
• Mini Operation Sunshine in 2007 (2000 shanties) by BMC: Eviction for
middle class appeasement
• Demolition of 200 shanties in 2009: Tech park
• Green space taken over: Illegal lease ship legalized
48. Exclusion
• Economic interdependence: Labor force comprising hawkers,
vendors, maids, services etc.
• Income or jobs: Choice of habitation
• Spatial and social distance
• Distancing and dependence
49. Roots of risk: Peri Urban areas
• Low-lying land in the periphery of Kolkata once seen to be unproductive
now a valuable commodity
• Salt Lake envisioned as an inclusive community has become an elite sub-
urban area
• The shifting focus from low income to middle-upper has brought a change
in the desired use of urban space
• The separation of low income to outer periphery however is superficial as
the dependence ensures their existence and relationship
50. Roots
• Commodification of hazardous land: Globalized urban development,
Real estate, FI, State etc., Growth for example Rajarhat
• Lack of housing provision for example, requirement of 70,000 new
house units per year for Kolkata: settlement on periphery
• Interdependence of spatially separated groups
• Exclusion of poor
51.
52. The Disaster Management Act, 2005
• The Disaster Management Act, 2005 was enacted on 23rd December,2005. The Act
provides for establishment of
• NDMA (National Disaster Management Authority)
• SDMA (State Disaster Management Authority)
• DDMA (District Disaster Management Authority)
• Act provides for constitution of Disaster Response Fund and Disaster Mitigation
Fund at National, State and District level.
• Establishment of NIDM and NDRF.
• Provides penalties for obstruction, false claims, misappropriation etc.
• There shall be no discrimination on the ground of sex, caste, community, descent or
religion in providing compensation and relief.
53. Nodal Ministries responsible
• Natural Disaster (Flood, Tsunami, Cyclone, Earthquake
etc.)- Ministry of Home Affairs
• Drought-Ministry of Agriculture
• Biological Disasters-Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare
• Chemical Disasters-Ministry of Environment & Forests
• Nuclear Disasters-Ministry of Atomic Energy
• Air Accidents-Ministry of Civil Aviation
• Railway Accidents-Ministry of Railways….
54. DM Act 2005
• National Plan shall inter alia include measures to be taken for prevention/mitigation
of disasters and integration of mitigation measures in development plans
• State Plan inter alia provides for inclusion of vulnerability assessment, measures for
prevention and mitigation of disasters and the manner in which mitigation measures
shall be integrated with development plans and projects
• State Governments shall take measures for prevention and mitigation of disasters in
accordance with guidelines of NDMA, ensure appropriate preparedness measures for
integrating DM into development plans and projects and allocate funds for disaster
prevention, mitigation, preparedness and capacity building
55. National Policy 2009
• NDMA will ensure mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction in the
developmental agenda of all existing and new developmental
programs and projects which shall incorporate disaster resilient
specifications in design and construction.
• Planning Commission will give due weightage to these factors while
allocating resources.
56. Cancun reconstruction
• Originally fishing village, Radisson terminated its hotel plan to start a new
venture 300 room ‘Hotel Carribean Village Cancun’- renovated in 1995
• After ‘Wilma’ struck the city in 2005- Investors reconstructed the hotel as
resort ‘Occidental Caribbean Village’ and reopened it in 2007
• The reconstruction deficit led to sale of the property to Marriott Vacation
Worldwide Corporation – demolition in 2008 and redeveloped as Mariott
time share condominium
• Time share property comprised two 14 story and two 13 story towers
57. Enclosure within enclosure
• Cancun Project or City Master plan 1970-95 was initiated by Government
and Bank of Mexico- Tourism as vehicle of growth and slogan, ‘Sea Sand
and Sun’
• 12,700 ha of common land (ejidos) was spatially divided into two zones-
Hotel zone and City area to provide good and services
• Enclosed space allowed the targeted growth, a fortified enclave and one
that lays golden eggs
• The city zone in contrast is overlooked and site of potential threat
58. Hurricane Gilbert 1988
• Hurricane of Category five ‘Gilbert’ hit Cancun in Sep. 1988
• Severely impacted with 200 deaths in Mexico and an estimated losses
of $300 million. Tourism alone suffering approx. $87 million
• Sixty percent of Cancun’s 200,000 people who lived in Colonias; their
houses were either destroyed or severely damaged
• The beach front severely eroded and 4000 Hotel rooms damaged
59. Gilbert reconstruction
• Reforming of laws and policies to attract foreign investment- Public
land sold off, First city in Mexico to privatize water and electricity
services
• Recovery priority was hotel zone, lifeline for tourism- By Dec. 1988
eighty percent hotel rooms were back in service
• Hotel room number increased from 12,000 in 1988 to 27,000 by
2005-
• Low density tourist to all inclusive resorts model
60. Development and vulnerability
• Resorts were over larger areas and focused on amenities within- 85
percent remain inside their resorts
• A spatial enclosure within the hotel zone- guided tours
• Linkage of Hotel Zone to International market and global supply
chain: deepening the separation
• Physical and immaterial barriers- walls, profiling, surveillance
61. Hurricane Wilma in 2005
• In October 2005 it struck, 300,000 lost homes, 80 percent of hotel rooms
were structurally damaged- tourism sector suffered losses of $2.9 billion
• Hotel zone made secure by military, forces to protect wall mart etc. at a
time when city was looted
• President declared an immediate $2 billion, half of which for hotels and
other half for livelihood of tourism workers
• 80 percent of Hotels opened in five months and in three years, 21,300 new
rooms were added- a new model comprising villas and towers, addition
through use of recreational land
62. Time share condominium
• Resorts carried high insurance premium and un-sustainable- payout
provides the capital for new model
• Risk and responsibilities distributed to individual property owners
• Tax, jobs are not generated as owners mostly rent out
• Political process- negotiating dissent and creating assent
63. Enclosure within enclosures
• Enclosure within enclosure- commodification of land, resources and
infrastructures within already enclosed spaces
• Philosophy of seclusion- further separates and so also the new form of
enclosure such as high rise condominium
• Creative destruction or disaster provides scope for creative abilities of
government to reorganize and re-demarcate
• Space continually redefined- Cities must recreate themselves as
commodities
64. DRR integration with Development
• Land use
• Infrastructure
• Education
• Finance
65. Mainstreaming DRR into Development
• Idea of mainstreaming emerged since 1980’s- Gender, disability,
human rights, environment, DRR etc.
• Its purpose- to secure development from future disaster risk and
• Consciously not create or add to disaster risk
• DRR mainstreaming is seen as complex process
66. Tools of Mainstreaming DRR
• Policy, strategy, budget etc.- For example, education; advocacy,
culture of safety
• Physical planning for example, land use, national plan, integrated
flood management system etc.- Economic for example diversification
• Technical implementation- for example VRCA, monitoring and
evaluation
• Engineering and construction measures
67. Mainstreaming as sequence of steps
• Awareness raising- hazard mapping, loss data, cost benefit analysis
• Enabling environment- legislation, institutional arrangement,
strategies, integration into developmental plan, budget etc.
• Change in operational practice
• Measuring progress, Learning and experience sharing
68. Urban growth and DRR
• 54% world’s population in 2014 lived in urban areas- 66% in 2050
• Cities are responsible for 70% of global GDP
• 100 resilient cities network, Making cities resilient
• Measure of Cities resilience
69. Resilient City Framework: Ten essentials
• Governance for disaster resilience- Identify understand risk for current and
future scenarios
• Strengthen Financial Capacity for Resilience- Resilience Urban
Development and Design, Natural buffers for Protection to ecosystem
• Strengthen Institutional Capacity and Societal capacity- Infrastructure
Resilience
• Ensure effective disaster response- Expedite disaster recovery and Build
Back Better
70. Case study- Hong Kong
• Hong Kong a special administrative region China from 1997- located in
‘Pearl River Delta Region’ in Southern part of China
• Population in 2016 was 7.34 million and known for Free trade, low
taxation, minimum government intervention: World’s 8th largest trading
economy, labor force 3.9 million
• Highest natural disaster risk in Asia- Hazards such as Heavy rainfall and
floods, storm surges, landslides etc.
• Low incidence of disaster- Last major disaster was typhoon Wanda in 1962
that killed 183 people
71. Hong Kong Emergency Management
• Six contingent plans: natural disaster, aircraft crash, salvage of aircraft crash, maritime
and aeronautical Search and rescue, emergency at nuclear power station, coordination of
response operations
• Three tier emergency declaration-Tier one to three in ascending order of severity, Tier
one Police force and Fire Department, Tier two working under government Department
and third tier for serious and wide spread threat
• Three phase emergency response-Rescue, recovery and restoration
• Ten essential scales: Zero no risk, One- risk factors not considered in the SP, two- risk
factors on agenda, three- risk factors in the process of being identified, four-identified
and included in some detail, five-present and future risk factors are fully considered.
72.
73. Mainstreaming DRR: Hong Kong
• Infrastructure development and Urban design solution: Steel structure
code derived from London Byelaws BS449, revised in 1987, 2005, 2011
• Protection of natural ecosystem: Harbor ordinance barring reclamation
projects, country park ordinance, country park special area regulation etc.
• Social capacity for resilience: culture of mutual help, public donation,
educational institutions
• Emergency response plan and EWS: Contingency plans, SAR Pandemic Plan
74.
75.
76. Mainstreaming DRR: Hong Kong
• Infrastructure development and Urban design solution: Steel structure
code derived from London Byelaws BS449, 1987 own code
• Code of Practice for structural use of Steel 2005 revised in 2011
• Protection of natural ecosystem: Harbor ordinance barring reclamation
projects
• Country park ordinance, country park special area regulation etc.: 24
Country Parks and 22 special areas
77. Societal capacity/Infrastructure Resilience
• Significant public donation: Wenchuan Earthquake 2008 (US$180 million),
Yushu 2010 Earthquake (16 million) China, 2011 Fukushima and 2013 (21
million);Typhoon Haiyan (0.6 million)
• Educational institutes: Oxford, Chinese university of Hong Kong etc.,
International NGO: community training
• Critical Infrastructure Security Coordination Centre, 2011: Coordination
among various agencies
• Consults Transport and Housing Bureau to classify a premise dangerous
78. Financial Resources for DRR
• Annual budget for disaster prevention and preparedness- 165 million
in 2016-17 to Civil engineering Department for landslide
• 129 million in 2015-16 to Geotechnical Engineering Office for
landslide prevention and mitigation program
• Hong Kong observatory for education and awareness- 35 million
• Maintainaces of conservation and country parks- 86 million
79.
80. Disaster Governance
• Disaster risk factors remain on agenda but not incorporated into city
vision for future development
• Resource allocated based on hazard severity- responsive in nature
• Limited disaster risk identification- hazard maps are partial in
coverage, not disseminated well, multi hazard map not available
• Hazard risk not integrated to long term planning such as land use
