DMP6 For Web 2.pdf

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building safer and

ilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc

mmunities in Asia and t

Contents

Abbreviations & Acronyms
Foreword

Page

1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction to the Practitioners Workshop on DRR

3. Strengthening linkage between CBDRR and development

3.1 Linking CBDRR in Development Planning & Programs; An overview from the region

3.2 CBDRR in National and Sub-National Development Policy

3.3

Decentralized

CBDRR

4. Implementing national programs on CBDRR

4.1 Implementing National Programs on CBDRR in High Risk Communities;

An overview from the region

4.2 National CBDRR Program in Vietnam

4.3 Partnership between CBOs/RCRC & local authorities for implementing CBDRR Programs

4.4 Summary and Recommendations from Group Discussions on:

4.4.1 Linking CBDRR in National Development Policy, Plans and Programs

4.4.2 Scaling up the CBDRR Programs – Challenges and recommendations

4.4.3 Local Budgeting and Finance in CBDRR – Challenges and recommendations
4.4.4 Strengthening partnerships with local authorities – Lessons learned
4.4.5 Integrating CBDRR into local planning process

4.5 DRR; an EU Perspective focusing on Asia and the Paciﬁc

5. IFRC Framework for Community Safety and Resilience

5.1 RCRC Global Framework for Community Safety and Resilience

5.2 Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction

5.3 South East Asia DRR Framework and linkages to national framework

6. Partnerships for CBDRR

6.1 Disaster Preparedness Network (DP-Net), Nepal

6.2 Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction Network-Cambodia

6.3 Joint Advocacy Network Initiative (JANI) Vietnam

6.4 Indonesian Society for Disaster Management (MPBI), Indonesia

6.5 Disaster Management Working Group, Vietnam

7. Innovative approaches for implementing CBDRR

7.1 Social Inclusion and CBDRR

7.2 Linking CBDRR, Environment and Natural Resource Management

7.3 DRR and Climate Change Adaptation

7.4 Summary and Recommendations from Group Discussions on:

7.4.1 Child focused CBDRR

7.4.2 School Safety and CBDRR
7.4.3 Gender and CBDRR
7.4.4 Strengthening role of community in end to end early warning systems

8. Skills Building Sessions

8.1 Tools for Community Risk Assessment

8.2 Advocacy for CBDRR in to local development planning process

8.3 CBDRR in the Urban Context

9. Feedback from Participants and Closing Remarks

10. Annexures

Annexure 1 - Agenda
Annexure 2 - List of Participants

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building safer and more resilient communities in A

Asia and the Paciﬁc”

Building safer and more resilient commu

er and more resilie

Abbreviations & Acronyms

ASEAN

Association of South East Asian Nations

AADMER

ASEAN Action Plan for Disaster Management and Emergency Response

BDRC

Building Disaster Resilient Communities (a Christian Aid Programme supported by DfID)

BAPPENAS

Badan Perencanaan dan Pembangunan Nasional (the Indonesian National

Development

Planning

Agency)

BNPB

National Agency for Disaster Management Indonesia

CBDRR

Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction

CBDRM

Community Based Disaster Risk Management

CBOs

Community Based Organizations

CCA

Climate

Change

Adaptation

CCFSC

Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control, Viet Nam

CDMP

Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (Bangladesh)

CDMC

Community Disaster Management Councils

CRED

Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters

CSOs

Civil Society Organizations

CVTL

Cruz Vermelha de Timor-Leste (East Timor Red Cross)

CwD

Children with Disabilities

DDMFC

Department of Dyke Management and Flood Control, Viet Nam

DEWGA

Disaster Environment Working Group for Asia

DILG

Department of Interior and Local Government in the Philippines

DIPECHO

European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department’s Disaster Preparedness

Programme
ECHO

European Commission Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid

European

Union

EDF

European Development Fund

GADRR

Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction

GFDRR

Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery of the World Bank

HFA

Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015

ICDPP

Integrated Community based Disaster Preparedness Program Philippines

IEC

Information, Education and Communication

KLAP

Kuala Lumpur Regional Action Plan

MAPDRR

Myanmar Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction

MARD

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Viet Nam

MDG

Millennium Development Goal

MRCS

Myanmar Red Cross Society

NEDA

National Economic Development Authority of the Philippines

NDMO

National Disaster Management Organizations

NGIS

National Geographical Information Systems – Philippines

NGOs

Non-Governmental

Organizations

PACCOM

The People’s Aid Coordinating Committee, Viet Nam

PAGASA Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration
PMI

Palang Merah Indonesia (Indonesian National Red Cross)

PwD

Persons with Disabilities

READY

Project on Hazard Mapping and Assessment for Effective Community-Based Disaster

Risk Management in the Philippines

RCC

Regional Consultative Committee on Disaster Management

RCRC

Red Cross and Red Crescent

RCNS

Red Cross National Societies

UNFCC

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNISDR

United Nations Strategy for Disaster Reduction

VCA

Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

WHO

World Health Organization

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building safer and

ilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc

mmunities in Asia and t

Foreword

It is an honor and privilege for the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) and the International Fed-
eration of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) to jointly present to you the proceedings of the
Practitioners’ Workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction on the theme of “Building safer and more resilient
communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc” held from September 15

to 17

, 2009 in Phuket, Thailand. The

proceedings contain the summary and the outcomes of the workshop. With the participation of over 180
practitioner colleagues from more than 24 countries in the Asia and Paciﬁc region, the workshop has
been a great venue for exchange of information on community based disaster risk reduction (CBDRR) in
the region.

More than 200 million people are affected by disaster every year globally and people from local com-
munities are always the ﬁrst to respond. As a result, by linking CBDRR with development policies, we can
achieve our goal while improving their livelihoods to ensure maximum beneﬁts to the communities.

Apart from implementing CBDRR programmes, both ADPC and IFRC have been pioneers in advocating the
mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction into development and developing participatory vulnerability
assessment tools and frameworks in the region. We are very happy to have shared our collective experi-
ences with our fellow practitioners during this workshop.

During the three-day workshop, innovative ideas were exchanged and discussions addressed new and
emerging ﬁelds such as incorporating Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) into the existing DRR activities
and the utilization of climate information for CBDRR. This workshop also served to strengthen the part-
nership between IFRC, ADPC and various other regional partners. It was also a great opportunity for the
stakeholders at the international, regional, national and local levels to discuss best practices and the
future of CBDRR in Asia and the Paciﬁc region.

Finally, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to national governments, the Province of
Phuket, partner institutions, numerous UN organizations and other international organizations for their
collaboration and support to make this event a success. We also want to thank ECHO for their continuing
support of this event since 1999 and last but not the least the practitioners for their rich contributions in
making this workshop a success.

Mr.

Alan

Bradbury

Dr.Bhichit

Rattakul

Head of Regional Ofﬁce,

Executive Director

South East Asia

Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre

International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

1. Executive Summary

isaster Risk Reduction (DRR)

offers a major contribution to the building of safer, resilient

communities. Central to this is the focus on communities and speciﬁcally communities that are
at risk from regular and new disaster impacts. The world is becoming increasingly unsafe as
a result of changing climate and an eroded natural resource base coupled with an expanding

population, it is therefore important that we try to build on the foundations of previous work and do
more of what works and is effective.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (the International
Federation)

is a leading humanitarian organization, which has been working to prevent and alleviate

human suffering for over 85 years. Through its core areas of work in disaster management, health,
organizational development and the promotion of humanitarian values, the International Federation’s
187 member National Societies are making a signiﬁcant contribution to reducing the vulnerability of
people living in some of the most hazard-prone areas of the world.

The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)

is a regional resource centre committed

to reduce the impact of disasters on communities and Countries in Asia and the Paciﬁc region. ADPC
works to achieve this by raising awareness, helping to establish and strengthen sustainable institutional
mechanisms, enhance knowledge and skills and facilitate exchange of information, experience and
expertise through training and technical assistance, networking, partnerships and regional programmes.

The South East Asia Regional Ofﬁce (SEARO) of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies in collaboration with the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, both based in Bangkok,
collaborated to conduct the Practitioner’s Workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction with the theme
“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc” in Phuket, Thailand from the
15 -17

September 2009.

This is the 6

workshop in a series of such workshops held annually since 1999 in the South East Asian

region. The ﬁrst workshop was held in Viet Nam in 1999, the 2

also in Viet Nam in 2001, the 3

in 2004

in Bangkok, 4

also in Bangkok in 2006 and the 5

Workshop in Cambodia in the year 2008.

Over 190 participants from 26 countries representing National Societies, Partner National Societies and
IFRC from Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan in South Asia, 10 RCNS and delegations from Cambodia,
China, Lao PDR, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam in East and
South East Asia, 8 National Societies from the Cook Islands, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Tonga, Timor-Leste and Vanuatu from the Paciﬁc. A further 18 participants represented NGOs,
CBOS international organizations having formed national level alliances in the countries of Cambodia,
Nepal, Indonesia and Viet Nam. A representative of a regional network of organizations, collectively
named, Duryog Nivaran, consisting of Government agencies, NGOs, CBOs and international organizations
working at the regional level in South Asia also attended the workshop.

They shared their experiences, challenges, reviewed lessons learnt, identiﬁed emerging trends and
strategies, developed and enhanced partnership elements among each other and got the opportunity to
visit villages in Phang Nga where the worst hit areas during the Indian Ocean tsunami in late 2004, where
successful disaster preparedness initiatives have taken place or are currently on-going.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

This is the ﬁrst Practitioners Workshop in the series attended by participants from the Paciﬁc Countries.

The objectives of scaling up DRR efforts during the Workshop were to:

• Equip disaster risk reduction practitioners with knowledge on how to build community safety and

resilience

• Expose practitioners to innovative initiatives on undertaking community based disaster risk

reduction measures and strengthening community preparedness for response.

• Provide an avenue for strengthening networks, and promoting regional cooperation through cross

regional knowledge sharing.

• Sharing of their experiences with the vulnerable communities through ﬁeld visits

The workshop was conducted in 5 sessions based on the 5 themes selected for this
year.

Theme 1:

Strengthening linkage between CBDRR and Development

Theme 2:

Implementing National Programs on CBDRR

Theme 3:

IFRC Framework for Community Safety and Resilience

Theme 4:

Partnerships for CBDRR

Theme 5:

Innovative approaches for implementing CBDRR

Ten group discussions also took place under the following themes:

GD1:

Recommendations for linking CBDRR in National Development Policy, Plans and Programs

GD2:

Scaling up the CBDRR Programs – Challenges and recommendations

GD3:

Local Budgeting and Finance in CBDRR – Challenges and recommendations

GD4:

Strengthening partnerships with local authorities – Lessons learned

GD5:

Integrating CBDRR into local planning process

GD6:

Children Focused CBDRR

GD7:

School Safety and CBDRR

GD8:

Gender and CBDRR

GD9 & GD10: Strengthening roles of community in end to end EWSs

Presentations were made based on thematic sessions, concluding with a plenary session where participants
were invited to seek clariﬁcations and make suggestions to the presenters.

Presentations under Theme 1: Strengthening linkage between CBDRR and Development included a
regional overview of linking CBDRR in to development planning and programs, emphasis of CBDRR in
national and sub-national development policy in Indonesia and the Philippines and decentralized CBDRR
through the experiences of the Duryog Nivaran network in South Asia.

Theme 1: Strengthening linkage between CBDRR and development

Key Lessons

1. Involve government authorities from the very start of the programme and seek their support in

technical aspects and design of local construction works in community infrastructure projects

2. Provide opportunity for local government staff to participate in training together with

community members and leaders

3. National government agencies in the Philippines have mainstreamed DRR in to their areas of

specialization take the leadership role in various DRR initiatives i.e Department of Public Works
and Highways takes the lead in engineering measures to build disaster resilient infrastructures
(roads and bridges). Alongside with this program is the implementation of the “Be Better, Build
Better Program”.

4. Elevate the CBDM concept and practice into rights based, community led, disaster risk reduction

actions

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Participants and community members interacted during the ﬁeld visits organized by the Thai Red Cross
in Phang Nga Province and had the opportunity to share extensive knowledge and experiences in terms
of dealing with disasters and building safer and more resilient communities in the region. The following
is a summary of what practitioners presented as their learning and suggestions for strengthening DRR
activities in the communities.

What did we learnt from the community

• The community was well organized and had a knowledge of the risks and vulnerabilities they face

through conducting VCA

• The community were conﬁdent in their resilience to future disasters and united, while expressing

that together they were stronger than working alone

• Volunteer groups were assigned to different roles and responsibilities, such as First Aid, evacuation,

communication, administration etc

• Project was well linked with the concepts of CBDRR projects and was sustainable due to the

activities under the project being linked to the local development plan for the community

• Women were heavily involved in project activities and leading teams such as the ﬁrst aid volunteer

group. This model of participatory assessment to mobilize and strengthen the capacity of the
community on other issues such as climate change adaptation activities, prevent economic crisis
in the area

How can the community further strengthen their DRR programmes

• The basic community early warning system where the information received by the community leader

passes it on to others through text messages via mobile phone should also take in to consideration
how they would inform those that do not have mobile phones.

• Focus should be on multi hazards and not only tsunamis as they were also affected by storms,

ﬂoods and crop failures etc. annually.

• The community should reach stakeholders beyond the realms of Red Cross and link with the

Environmental Technical ofﬁcers and the DDPM.

On day 2 of the Workshop, under Theme 2: Implementing National Programs on CBDRR, a regional
overview of implementing national Programmes on CBDRR in high risk communities was presented
followed by the CBDRR programme in Vietnam at the national level. The importance of partnering CBOs/
RCRC and local authorities for implementing CBDRR programmes in the Philippines and Myanmar was
shared subsequently.

Participants engaged in discussions and deliberations and made recommendations on linking CBDRR in
national development policy, plans and programs, scaling up the CBDRR Programs, local budgeting and
ﬁnance in CBDRR, strengthening partnerships with local authorities and integrating CBDRR into local
planning process.

A presentation was made on the European Commission’s perspective of DRR by the EC Directorate General
of Humanitarian Aid (ECHO), Southeast Asia Regional Ofﬁce, covering Asia and the Paciﬁc, and highlighted
EU’s strategy for supporting DRR in developing countries, scope, coverage and implementation priorities
for the year 2010. It also stressed on ECHOs support for CBDRR activities and provided suggestions on
advocacy and communication.

Theme 2: Implementing national programs on CBDRR

Key Lessons

1. Establish clear policy framework for support by national governments and partnerships

between local government and CBOs and set up appropriate/suitable institutional mechanisms
to implement activities

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

2. Establish schemes for recognition of good practices in CBDRR and utilizing experiences of

CBDRR award scheme in member countries to motivate practitioners in the local government
and community

3. Encourage and promote the involvement of private sector in DRR
4. Use climate change adaptation opportunities to advocate and create a link between national

and community development work

5. Use livelihood as an entry point for linking CBDRR and development programs
6. Develop a cluster approach for DRR and formulate multi-stakeholder action plans
7. Advocate with donor agencies and assist them to design their strategies and programs to

promote linkages with development programs that have CBDRR components

8. Forge formal agreements with stakeholders e.g MOUs with the government – including

counterparts for ﬁnancial sustainability

9. Synchronize DRR planning and budgeting cycles with government processes
10. Consideration of disability and senior citizens related issues in DRR planning process
11. Develop capacities of vulnerable groups such as the disabled so that they get involved in the

local planning process

12. Address donor or technical working groups with brief and ‘to the point’ messages
13. Conduct joint advocacy initiatives: one voice (eg JANI in Vietnam)
14. Document approaches, integrate lessons learned (what worked and why and what did not work)

On the same day, under Theme 3: IFRC Framework for Community Safety and Resilience, elaborated
on IFRC Global Framework for Community Safety and Resilience, the Global Alliance on DRR, and the
Southeast Asia DRR framework and linkages to national frameworks. Experiences of National Society
priorities for scaling up CBDRR were shared through a panel discussion in which National Societies of
Cambodia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal, Tonga and the Cook Islands who also spoke of the beneﬁts of
joining IFRC’s Global Alliance on DRR. The framework highlights the needs of wider (Local to global) and
committed partnership to achieve its objectives in building safer and resilience communities.

Theme 3: IFRC Framework for Community Safety and Resilience

The framework highlights the needs of wider (Local to global) and committed partnership to achieve its
objectives in building safer and more resilient communities.

1.  Core elements of the framework include;
-  Risk-informed humanitarian response
-  Country –Speciﬁc mitigation, prevention and adaptation
-  Sector-based programming to build across the disaster management spectrum
-  Core Red Cross Red Crescent cross-cutting components
2.  Recognizing the necessity of partnership and a growing need for scaling up disaster risk reduction

activities in both QUALITY and QUANTITY, the RCRC launched the Global Alliance on Disaster Risk
Reduction (GADRR) in 2008. Partnerships are key both in countries where the RCRC has enjoyed
a long presence such as Nepal and Bangladesh, but also in newer DRR countries such as Syria and
Morocco.

3. National Societies should be in driving seat for the whole process to ensure the ownership

National level networks and partnerships were represented in Theme 4: Partnerships for CBDRR where,
Disaster Preparedness Network (DP-Net) of Nepal, partnership for CBDRR in Cambodia, Joint Advocacy
Network Initiative (JANI) of Viet Nam, Indonesian Society for Disaster Management (MPBI) and the Disaster
Management Working Group of Viet Nam highlighted the work carried out by their respective networks,
their experiences and challenges.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Theme 4: Partnerships for CBDRR

1.  Clarify roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder at the outset
2.  Build on existing structures and initiatives
3.  Promote a DRR platform at local to national level for cross sharing and learning.

The ﬁnal day of the workshop began with a presentation on Social inclusion and CBDRR under Theme
5: Innovative approaches for implementing CBDRR, which stressed on the importance and beneﬁts of
involving older people and persons with disabilities in CBDRR activities. A presentation was also made by
the Disaster Environment Working Group (DEWGA) of Asia on linking CBDRR with environment and natural
resource management. A presentation on DRR and climate change adaptation (CCA) focusing on linking both
areas of work in CBDRR, and activities being undertaken by National Societies to link CCA and DRR.

Recommendations from group discussions on topics including Child focused CBDRR, school safety and
CBDRR, gender and CBDRR and strengthening the role communities in end to end early warning systems
were presented subsequently with solid and workable suggestions being presented by each of the
groups.

Theme 5: Innovative approaches for implementing CBDRR

Key Lessons

1. Include disaggregated data of older people particularly of their health,

livelihoods and shelter conditions in all surveys and analysis provides a more overall picture of
the community

2. Enhance DRR with emphasis on preparedness plans that include older people at household and

community levels

3. Conduct evacuation drills with Children with Disabilities, their families and neighbors to get

familiarized with speciﬁc procedures

4. Comprehensive risk mapping should be done with CCA components in PRA and VCA
5. Build the capacity of the community and promote continuous and diversiﬁed livelihoods and

facilitate community ﬁnancial preparedness

6. Mainstreaming CCA into DRR will ensure that the community does not view CCA as product of

a scientiﬁc study but rather a part of the disaster preparedness, response and mitigation

7. Establish minimum standards for the involvement of children in DRR activities to reduce their

overexposure and use as tokens

8. During and after emergency periods children should be with parents where possible and not

segregated in to orphanages or care homes as a means of psychosocial support for them

9. Use a single discussion platform for all stakeholders working towards school safety such as

school administration, teaching and non-teaching staff, parents and children in Parent-teacher-
children associations.

10. Conducting gender sensitive risk assessments will address the speciﬁc issues of women and

men in DRR i.e VCAs can be customized to include gender aspects

11. Conducting regular simulation and drills in the community is the key to preparedness and

heightened awareness of its residents

12. Early warning should not be a standalone activity in community but try to link it to other

aspects of risk reduction and national systems.

13. Exchange tools and techniques that have been successful

The afternoon session was the eagerly awaited skills building mini-workshops where sessions were held
on developing skills on using risk assessment tools in the community, how to do advocate for CBDRR issues
and conducting CBDRR programmes in an urban context. This session particularly helped to sharpen skills
and knowledge in implementing CBDRR programmes.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Throughout the workshop, exhibition boards and display panels set up outside the meeting room showcased
information, education and communication materials with regard to DRR projects implemented in
geographical areas represented by various organizations and networks represented at the workshop. The
IEC materials included posters, leaﬂets, brochures and photographs.

The concluding session of the workshop was an interactive session where participants shared their
suggestions and comments in the open forum.

Practitioners were requested to write down their responses and a few were invited to share them in the
open forum.

A majority of the participants appreciated the knowledge shared on climate change adaptation and the
speciﬁc activities under adaptation which contributes to disaster risk reduction. Many were previously
not able to connect the 2 topics which has been the centre of discussion at the regional and global
level for some time. Participants appreciated sharing of speciﬁc small scale community level climate
change adaptation activities such as solid waste management, diverting excess water from agricultural
plots through drainage systems, introduction of seedlings resistant to water logging, training youth on
techniques of rescue from ﬂood (swimming), ﬁnancial preparedness for loss of harvest and other income
generating activities and resilience through micro-credit programmes.

Participants also highlighted child focused DRR and school safety, mainstreaming of gender and the
involvement of excluded groups such as persons with disabilities and older people in the village took an
inclusive and holistic approach to CBDRR which ensured all stakeholders in the community were informed
and involved in DRR activities. First-hand experiences were also shared on how communities engages in
early warning activities during the ﬁeld visit, through capacity building, traditional and non-traditional
methods such as use of signage, ﬂags, sirens and text messaging through mobile phones respectively,
which participants appreciated immensely.

Through the IFRC session on DRR frameworks and many other presentations from National Societies,
participants were able to see the value of volunteerism in the National Societies, speciﬁc activities
being implemented by the National Societies and how they link to regional and global DRR frameworks.
All RCRC Societies have a good working relationship with national and sub-national governments and
the establishment of partnerships with communities, NGOs and the civil society in general is seen as an
important element in ensuring CBDRR progarmmes are effective and sustainable at all levels.

As in the 5

Practitioners workshop on DRR held in 2008 in Cambodia, the skills building sessions were

highlighted as being the most useful and interactive and was very popular among all the participants.
Many appreciated the skills they developed to use community based risk and vulnerability assessment
tools such as VCA. The session on what advocacy was, how to engage in advocacy, what to keep in mind
when developing and advocacy strategy etc helped to ensure that ‘advocacy’ no longer remained just a
buzz word but a term that practitioners understood well.

Several participants also pointed out that their learning was not limited to issues and topics under DRR
alone. They had learnt how large scale events were managed and also where Fiji, Tonga and the Cook
Islands were on the world Map.

Participants also noted issues and topics that were not addressed in the 6th Practitioners workshop which
were recommended to be included in the next workshop of the series.

Monitoring and evaluation methodologies, techniques and mechanisms were seen as important to
measure the effectiveness of the programme not only for the practitioners but for communities to also
understand and measure the progress they are collectively achieving. While participants acknowledged
the involvement of children in CBDRR and children with disabilities being addressed, they requested that
safety of physical structures in the education system should be addressed in the future.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Despite DRR being in the mainstream of preparedness discussion for over 10 years, most governments
still concentrate on response and recovery activities as a priority with the intention of saving lives
and minimizing damage to property. DRR measures can be mainstreamed into such relief and recovery
activities in a post disaster situation and goes hand in hand with ensuring the rights of communities and
individuals affected by disasters, such as social, political and civil rights, are upheld. Many participants
requested that sharing of successful case studies by rights based organizations should be included in
subsequent Practitioners Workshops.

Many practitioners shared success stories of CBDRR projects, which had important points for learning,
however some felt that failed projects also should be shared in order to see how things could go wrong
and what can be done to prevent such situations. One participant expressed interest to hear from projects
implemented 5 years ago by either the community or the local government authority in terms of the
sustainability of the initiatives, what worked well and what didn’t.

The lack of examples of Cost Beneﬁt Analysis and how the cost of response far out-weighs the investment
in DRR was also pointed out. The ﬁndings from cost beneﬁt analysis were important in many of the
advocacy campaigns as only hard facts and ﬁgures will convince, local, district and provincial authorities
to invest more in DRR activities.

New innovations such as risk transfer, community insurance and micro credit programmes for DRR etc
have to be presented in a pragmatic way. Many practitioners and communities are new to such tools and
innovations in the risk reduction sector and it is therefore required that regional programmes highlight
their use to ensure communities are more resilient in terms of ﬁnances.

Finally, it was also noted that most practitioners shared their challenges which almost all practitioners
were facing in their own geographical locations, however the discussion on ﬁnding solutions to the
challenges were limited.

With a view towards the 7

Workshop of the series, participants recommended that the workshop should

allow more space for open forum discussions and skills building sessions. Networking was a major objective
of conducting the series of Practitioners Workshops hence it was essential that more interactive sessions
using innovative tools and methodologies should be used. The mass media was a notable absentee in the
discussions and deliberations, and were identiﬁed as a group who can facilitate and inﬂuence community
awareness and disseminate the beneﬁts of DRR to a wider audience and were requested to be invited to
the next workshop.

The participants from the Paciﬁc island expressed their gratitude to the workshop organizers for giving
them the opportunity to learn from south and south east asia regarding community based DRR initiatives
and called for the facilitation of greater representation from the paciﬁc in future workshops.

A further recommendation was to develop a list of resource personnel having speciﬁc skills in different
sectors of DRR who are willing to share their experiences and knowledge among those who may need it.
Participants also requested that tools and techniques that have been tried and tested to be successful
be shared more widely.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

2. Introduction to the Practitioners’
Workshops on Disaster Risk Reduction

meeting of regional DRR Working Group members and DIPECHO partners in October 1999
hosted in Hanoi by APS Viet Nam, recommended a mechanism that would ensure information
on disaster reduction is current and accessible to the wider development community, including
donors and Governments of DIPECHO target countries. The theme of this ﬁrst meeting was

‘Sharing Experiences: A Networking Approach to Disaster Preparedness’ and its objective was to establish
a regional network among disaster management practitioners in Southeast Asia.

The 2nd workshop of its nature was held in November 2001 in Da Nang, Viet Nam and was conducted by
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) in Viet Nam, with technical
support from the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre and funding from the European Commission’s
Humanitarian Aid Ofﬁce (ECHO) in collaboration with the Viet Nam Red Cross. The objective was to
share information and experiences and strengthen linkages between organizations working in the ﬁeld
of disaster preparedness. Participants appreciated the efforts to bring in all stakeholders together and
strongly expressed the need to have annual meetings or workshops to establish and strengthen national
and regional networks.

Subsequent workshops were held with funding support from DIPECHO as a component under the
Partnerships for Disaster Reduction – South East Asia (PDRSEA) Project. The 3rd Practitioners workshop
was held in Bangkok, Thailand from the 10-13

May 2004 under the theme ‘Institutionalizing Community

Based Disaster Risk Management in Government Policy Making, Planning and Program Activities’. The 4

workshop from 8-10

March 2006 also in Bangkok, Thailand under the theme ‘Learning from Community

based practices: Strengthening Policy and Partnership’. The 5

Disaster Management Practitioners

Workshop was held from the 2-4

of April 2008 in Phnom Penh, Cambodia under the theme ‘Sustaining

Partnerships: Meeting the challenges of scaling up CBDRM Programmes’ and was the ﬁrst workshop to
introduce skills building sessions to enhance practitioners speciﬁc skills under selected topics.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

Excerpts from the Inauguration of the Workshop

▶ Dr. Bhichit Rattakul

Executive Director, Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre

This is an important time for coordination and cooperation among NGO, INGO national and sub-national
agencies. 2 key things will be accomplished at this workshop; sharing of knowledge and strengthening
networks. This will not only strengthen the partnership between IFRC and ADPC which began 3 years ago
but also between all stakeholders. My appreciation to ECHO for providing all the facilities to carry out
these programmes.

ADPC has a mechanism to work with 26 countries which meet each year and those national Governments
will hear our collective voices of concern and recommendation from this workshop.

I would like to urge everyone to pay attention to climate change adaptation and CBDRR along with national
resource management, livelihood development and local investment in risk reduction. Integrating climate
change adaptation and DRR in our development plans remains a great challenge to all of us.

▶ Mr. Alan Bradbury

Head of South East Asia Regional Ofﬁce, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent

Societies

It is my pleasure to welcome you on behalf of the Southeast Asia Regional Ofﬁce of the IFRC. A special
thank you to ECHO for funding this workshop and ADPC for co-hosting this event.

The number and variety of participants at this workshop is a testimony to the intense interest in DRR in
Asia Paciﬁc and a clear reﬂection of the level of concern about our changing world and the increasing
risks that we face. The recent economic crisis coupled with the increase in disasters has meant that there
is reduced expenditure on infrastructure demanding more from all of us. We need to do more of what
works and what is effective and be systematic to ensure basics of safety and resilience is addressed.

I wish you all the best and urge you to take something away from this workshop to make a practical
difference to the lives of vulnerable people.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

▶ Ms. Cecile Pichon

Disaster Risk Reduction Coordinator, European Commission for Humanitarian Aid, South East Asia
Regional Ofﬁce.

The workshop has become a regular DRR sharing of lessons learnt and skills building event rather than a
project component of a programme between UNESCAP and ADPC which is how it started. It is good to see
that it is a much wider event, which ECHO is very happy about.

One novelty this year is that the workshop is being held jointly with RCRC and almost half of the participants
are from the RCRC movement. It will bring an interesting side to the exchange of experiences. I see much
more genuine coordination on the ground between government and NGO actors and also happy to see
government personal here today.

Some excellent models on effective DRR has been developed and they are recognized by Governments,
so we can share those experiences with participants from countries where this has not happened yet.

I thank the implementing agencies in helping communities and people, thank you to ADPC and IFRC for
organizing this event, thank you to the Thai Red Cross and Governor of Phuket for hosting all of us. My
best wishes for the next 3 days.

▶ Mr. Sawanit Kongsiri

Assistant Secretary General, Thai Red Cross Society

On behalf of Thai Red Cross allow me to extend a warm welcome to you all to Thailand, to Phuket and
this workshop.

It is always a pleasure to work with ECHO. We have had a close working relationship with ECHO and IFRC
in helping with the Cyclone Nargis at the Tri-partite working group.

The Thai RC is happy to be the local host of this workshop and I would like to thank the Phuket Chapter
for the logistic support and arrangements.

The theme of this year’s workshop is very timely, especially with the upcoming UN conference on climate
change and the threats that we are facing in the disaster mitigation and recovery areas.

Best wishes from the Thai Red Cross.

▶ Mr. Wichai Phraisa-ngob

Governor of Phuket

On behalf of Phuket and Thailand, welcome to Phuket, the biggest island in Thailand with beautiful
beaches, interesting places and culture. I do hope that you will be comfortable, happy, impressed and
come back to visit us again.

I’m honored and proud to be a part of this great Workshop. These people are from government and
private organizations, national institutions and Red Cross and are here with one unique aim, to share
experiences, knowledge and ideas on how to develop our communities to be safer and more resilient.

In Thailand, various initiatives focusing on Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction has been initiated
under the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM), Royal Government of Thailand.
We are thankful to ADPC, Thai Red Cross and IFRC for their contributions to Thailand with innovative
approaches in CBDRR.

On behalf of the Phuket Province as well as the communities at risk, I thank to IFRC, ADPC and ECHO for
their ardent efforts and generous support to bring this extra ordinary DRR practitioners from Asia, Paciﬁc
and outside this region to Phuket. I am sure you will leave a memorable remark through the discussions
in the coming three days and enjoy the beauty and serenity of Phuket.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Memories from the Past and Orientation
to the Workshop theme; “Building safer
and more resilient communities in Asia
and the Paciﬁc”

The inaugural presentation made by ADPC’S Deputy Executive Director, Aloysius Rego
stressed on the need for DRR practitioners to “get down to business” and walked
participants through the themes and objectives of previous disaster management
practitioners workshops held to date. Mr. Rego has had the unique opportunity to
participate in all 5 of the previous Practitioners Workshops in this series.

Recent developments and events in the DRR sector has framed the context for the 6th
Practitioners workshop on DRR and also in selecting its theme. These include the theme
‘Community led Disaster Risk Reduction’ of the 7

Meeting of the Regional Consultative

Committee on Disaster Management in Colombo in May 2008, the theme of one of the
technical sessions at 3

Asian Ministerial Conference on DRR held in Kuala Lumpur in

December 2008 along with the Kuala Lumpur Declaration adopted by the 48 participating
governments and their representatives having 2 thematic areas directly linked to
communities and DRR at the local level, Decentralized DRR: Empowerment of Local
Government and Civil Society in DRR and Public Education, Awareness and Engaging
the Media in DRR. The ASEAN Committee on Disaster Management Work Programme and
also thematic sessions under the 2

Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, held in

Geneva, Switzerland in June 2009.
Having stated the objectives of the 6th Practitioners Workshop and the 5 themes of the
workshop, Mr. Rego proceeded to share the speciﬁc topics that would be detailed under
each of the thematic sessions and the ﬁnal session on skills building.

In conclusion, as the best and key learning takes place informally, Mr. Rego encouraged
participants to share amongst themselves their rich experiences in the sidelines of the
workshop as much as during the sessions and to continue to contribute to a ﬂourishing
network in the region and beyond.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

3.Strengthening Linkage between

CBDRR and Development

Introduction to the Theme

The most serious impacts of disasters are almost always felt by local communities. Disasters
affect their immediate environment by disrupting their daily life, has negative impacts on
their livelihoods and damages assets affecting the poorest of the poor the most and slowing
down the development process. In order to make development at the local level resilience to
disasters it is important to ensure DRR measures take place in a participatory manner, involving
all stakeholders including community members and local government ofﬁcers. The integration
of CBDRR is an ideal strategy to ensure communities are aware of the hazards present in
their localities and improve their capacity to be resilient to disasters. CBDRR also has to be
institutionalized at the sub-national and national levels in order to be effective at the local
level. This session looks at ways to strengthen linkages between development processes and
CBDRR at all levels by looking at speciﬁc experiences from countries and sub-regions while also
sharing some of the challenges faced by practitioners.

3.1 Linking CBDRR in Development Planning and Programs:
An overview from Asia and the Paciﬁc region by

Mr. Michael Annear, IFRC

Partnerships are the key to success in linking the CBDRR and
development sectors and can exist between communities,
governments, civil society, private sector and should maintain
impartiality in order to be successful. Particularly partnerships
with municipal and provincial governments, help to root the
preparedness concept in local planning, and to gain technical
and ﬁnancial support from local authorities for mitigation
measures to ensure long-term sustainability.

The Integrated Community based Disaster Preparedness Program
(ICDPP) of the Philippines Red Cross Society shares a step by
step process on how partnerships can be developed at the local level which has been tried and tested
for several years.

Step 1

▶

Establish and maintain partnerships with local and provincial authorities

Step 2

▶

Form community disaster action teams and mobilize them through providing

training in VCA, disaster management and information dissemination.

Step 3

▶

Conduct risk and resource mapping using VCA with community members, which

helps to identify the local hazards, who and what may be at risk, and which

mitigation measures are the most appropriate for the community. An additional

advantage is that the maps can be used as a land use planning tool by local

government

units.

Step 4

▶

Implement prioritised community mitigation measures based on disaster

action plans. These can be construction of physical structures such as seawalls,

evacuation centres and health related measures clean water supply or non

physical activities such as drawing up land use plans or preparing evacuation

plans and conducting drills.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Communities must advocate for the incorporation of recommendations from community disaster action
plans into Local Government land use planning and annual budgeting, encouraging long-term impact of
the program.

The two most important elements of ICDPP are the empowerment of local communities and the advocacy
for disaster preparedness in local planning.

Suggestions on engaging the Local Government in CBDRR:

1.  Request to provide transport and equipment for the construction work
2.  Seek their support for construction design and technical supervision
3.  Incorporate actions into local planning mechanisms
4.  Provide opportunity for local government staff to participate in training together with community

members and leaders

The ICDPP in the Philippines was partly achieved by incorporating elements from the Community Disaster
Action Plans into local government development plans, recognizing that community safety and resilience
is effectively enhanced through integrated actions. The Chinese Red Cross has adopted a similar process
which includes participatory risk analysis, identiﬁcation of livelihood actions appropriate or practiced
by the community, skills development of local leaders and volunteers, communal infrastructure upgrade
and joint resource allocation.

The Chinese Red Cross, through a community vulnerability reduction programme to assist ﬂood-prone
and ﬂood-affected villages, improved the community access to safe water supply, improved sanitation
and hygiene education, provided access to resources and knowledge to support sustainability of the
improvements and supported communities to develop locally appropriate
strategies to mitigate the impact of disasters and reduce their vulnerability.

A key success of the program is the way in which the Chinese Red Cross has
leveraged its close working relationship with the Government at the prefecture,
county and village levels and contributed to the programme implementation
in multiple ways and ensured encouragement of stakeholders, commitment
of resources and sustainability.

For further information contact: michael.annear@ifrc.org

3.2 CBDRR in National and Sub-National Development Policy

Mr. Moris Nuaimi, BAPPENAS, Indonesia and Imelda M. Acosta, Ofﬁce of Civil Defense, the Philippines

This segment presents experiences from government stakeholders in Indonesia and the Philippines
demonstrate how CBDRR can be integrated into national and sub-national development policy.

The Indonesian presentation highlights how important it is to ﬁrst understand the geographical and
geophysical conditions of a country when thinking of DRR.

The momentum for integrating CBDRR into national and sub-nation development policy came with the
increase in collective understanding that most of Indonesia is extremely vulnerable to disasters and
reducing disaster risks is not only a Government responsibility, but it is every ones business.
The legal and policy framework for promoting CBDRR at national level:

• National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction of 2006-2009
• Disaster Management Law No.24/2007

The Institutional system for DRR was established by setting up the National Agency for Disaster Management
(BNPB) who are engaged in formulating the National Plan for Disaster Management. Provincial and District/
City Agencies for disaster management have also been established in 24 Provinces and 22 District/Cities.

Despite such high risks there still remains many challenges such as lack of understanding in DRR,
institutional performance, planning and programming for DRR as well as not incorporating risk mitigation
into spatial plans.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

There are also many setbacks to DRR work in Indonesia, such as the delay in management of emergency
response, lack of coordination in planning and programming for post-disaster recovery and building back
better, the institutional framework being more focused on emergency response, rather than risk reduction
or mitigation and post-disaster recovery and funding emphasizing more on emergency response.

Indonesia’s National Strategy and Programme for CBDRR has been developed with the objective of
encouraging the community to reduce disaster risks within their own communities.

In Indonesia CBDRR pilot projects implemented by Government
and NGOs at various levels (rural, urban) address different types
of hazards such as Village Preparedness Programme (Desa Sehat) by
Ministry of Home Affairs, Healthy Village Programme (Desa Sehat)
by Ministry of Health, Youth Preparedness for Disaster (Taruna Siaga
Bencana/Tagana) by Ministry of Home Affairs and Resilience Village
Programme (Desa Tangguh), a pilot project by National Agency for
Disaster Management.

For further information contact: moris@bappenas.go.id

The Philippines uses the 5 HFA priorities areas for action as a guideline to implement programs and
projects, giving priority to the most vulnerable areas with the view of building disaster resilient

communities. DRR concepts and activities have been integrated into various sectors such as governance,
basic and secondary school curriculum, technical engineering measures on construction of roads, bridges
and school building to ensure they are disaster resilient, CBDRR programs and sharing of best practices,
multi hazard mapping and early warning systems.

National government agencies in the Philippines use their areas of specialization and take the leadership
role in various initiatives, examples include the National Economic and Development Authority
mainstreaming DRR in development plans particularly on land use and physical framework planning and
risk transfer mechanism aimed at sharing the cost of risk through insurance compensation implemented
by the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation for crops, livestock and other assets of farmers.

Information on the vulnerability of areas to various types of geological and natural hazards serve as
available information to the Local Government Unions responsible for developing physical frameworks
such as land use plans, land use classiﬁcation and allocations.

Under the Hazards Mapping and Assessment for Effective Community-Based Disaster Risk Management
(READY) project, Community Based Flood Early Warning Systems have been installed in 18 Municipalities
in the Province of Ilocos Sur, Region 1, Northern Philippines, these include 19 rain gauges, 11 water level
gauges, 4 tide gauges.

Further examples of CBDRR initiatives at national and sub-national levels include the North Luzon DRR
Network and Covenant signing and the Disaster Risk Management Bill which is expected to be passed by
the Senate to further strengthen CBDRR activities at national level.

For further information contact: personnel@ndcc.gov.ph

3.3 Decentralized CBDRR

Mr. Buddika Hapuarachchi, Duryog Nivaran

Decentralized development planning is being adopted in several developing countries of the region, it
is therefore essential to adopt a similar decentralized approach towards CBDRR which would ensure
effective support from the local governments to implement DRR at local levels. This presentation captures
approaches adopted in South Asian Countries on decentralized CBDRR, challenges and lessons learned.

Duryog Nivaran, which in Sanskrit means ‘disaster mitigation’ was established in 1995 to build a platform
for regional dialogue and interaction in the sphere of disaster mitigation and experience sharing in the
South Asian region. The network is a forum to share information, facilitate effective regional cooperation,
build a concerned media, conduct research and implement grass root community actions and launched
its ‘Alternative Perspective’ in 1996.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

The ‘Alternative Perspective’ sees disasters as a pending issue, an unresolved problem of development and
governance. The concept derives its insights from the learning of CBDRM concept and practice spreading
over last ten years in South Asia. Disaster risk management requires that that local level government
institutions are actively engaged in risk reduction and decentralised government institutions, chieﬂy
local authorities, should have the mandate and capacity to address local development and risk reduction
activities.

Local authorities are best placed to integrate disaster risk into
local level development planning and current development trends
across South Asia call for more decentralized decision-making, good
governance and more control over natural resources and services
at local levels. Both the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction 2009 and the ‘Views from the frontline’ survey which is an
independent survey on the progress of the HFA at local level, have
identiﬁed the importance of local governments in risk reduction.
The global survey has also highlighted that sophisticated plans at
national level, have had a limited effect on the local level. It has
highlighted that the micro level is weak and is not provided with
enough capacity development and resources. “We must think one step higher than the community to
ensure CBDRM is decentralized”

“Communities are ﬁrst respondents by default, whereas the responsibility of DRR in governance structures
is by design”

There are many entry points for decentralized disaster risk management; such as Human Resource
Development by equipping local government ofﬁcials with an understanding of prevalent hazards,
vulnerabilities and capacities in their local area and the necessary risk assessment skills and knowledge
of risk management approaches.

Institutional Development through the improvement of management structures to strengthen
capacity of local government facilitate the co-ordination between organizations and communities
and encourage and support information dissemination by local authorities for increased disaster
awareness among communities. Legislature Development by making legal and regulatory changes
to enable local governments to enhance their capacities and mandate the allocation of ﬁnancial
resources for disaster management, develop disaster management plans, integrate mitigation
strategies into the development processes and involve business community, CBOs, builders and the
media in risk reduction planning.

Challenges

•  Local Government is considered weak, with little capacity for development initiatives
•  Poor management within local institutions
•  New disaster management agencies and systems being set up in parallel, rather than integrating

change into the existing decentralized governance systems

• Building an enabling environment needed for protection, strengthening and diversifying of

disaster-resistant sustainable livelihoods cannot be the only aspects mainstreaming DRR

• Limited resource allocation to local levels

Example from Sri Lanka

Incorporation of disaster risk into local level development planning
in 20 Grama Niladhari Divisions in a project located in Wanduruppa,
Hambantota District, southern Sri Lanka. Hazards were identiﬁed
and guidelines were developed at the local level. The implementing
agencies were Urban Development Authority, District Secretariat,
Disaster Management Centre and Practical Action.

For further information contact:
Buddika.Hapuarachchi@practicalaction.org.lk

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Plenary Discussion

Questions raised and responses given by the panel of presenters at the plenary session are
documented below.

1. How successful has involving the private sector in the Philippines been? And how is the private

sector involved in CBDRR in Indonesia? Private organizations only look at proﬁt making, in this
scenario can the donor initiate more participation?

The IFRC experience was that private sector involvement is mainly in disaster response and little
success has been achieved in involving the private sector in DRR. Private sector organizations such
as Tesco Lotus and McDonalds assisted in transporting food and essential items to tsunami affected
communities in Phuket soon after the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami. In terms of funding, IFRC
receives funds from European national societies, personal donations and local level partnerships.
The most successful private sector partnership for IFRC is with Zurich Financial Services who
makes an annual contribution while supporting IFRC in technical support in the ﬁnance sector such
as conducting cost beneﬁt analysis (planned in the Philippines) and ﬁnancial risk assessment.

In Indonesia, the national disaster management platform, MPBI has had meetings with private
organizations and universities.

2. Unless we proved that DRR contributes to development, how can we convince local governments

to mainstream it into local development planning?

The DRR community needs to sell their message better, using cost beneﬁt analysis can be
one way. Disasters affects development achievements, for example damaged schools disrupts
education, destroyed hospitals effects provision of health services and the local economy slows
down due to destroyed roads and livelihoods. By risk prooﬁng infrastructure the government
reduces risks and maintains development gains within communities. DRR does not only protect
from disaster hazards but also protects existing investments in development. The DRR community
has to effectively justify the arguments by providing facts.

UNDP has attempted to install a community-based sharing platform, sharing experiences on
resilience and assets exchange. The ﬁrst such platform was held in January 2008 in India and
the next is scheduled to be held in Southeast Asia.

Disasters need to be seen as a development issue and not just an isolated event, and until such
time it will continue to remain a low priority with local authorities.

Key points to keep in mind:

• Capacities of local authorities should be built up without trying to bi-pass them while reaching

the community

• While DRR practitioners workshops should be attended by more community leaders as people

from communities need the opportunity for exchange, community leaders, INGOS and NGOs must
facilitate in-country consultations and also join various sub-national and national forums such as
community learning circles in the Philippines and the Joint Advocacy Network in Viet Nam.

• Cooperation at province and district level and linkage to disaster management plans is proof of

progress however we need to move away from pilots and build on partnerships and look at all
issues in communities which is the true risk reduction approach, not just health or disasters,
as practitioners we need to be consistent. We must question ourselves, our own programmes
and this will encourage further innovation in the sector. Success of DRR lies in involvement of
government and NGOs with the community including faith-based and religious organizations in
mainstreaming DRR at the community level.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

4.Implementing National

Programs on CBDRR

Introduction to the Theme

CBDRR implemented at the local level need to be strengthened by and institutionalized at
the national level in order to remain sustainable and effective. This requires a scaling up of
the activities at local level by programming and by programming CBDRR at the national level
countries would be able to ﬁnd sustained source of funding and build strong partnership between
stakeholders. Many countries in South and Southeast Asia have begun this process by developing
strategic frameworks, action plans and policies to ensure CBDRR is supported from the national
level down. This session presents experiences from countries of the region in implementing
national programs on CBDRR, how partnerships have strengthened the implementation and
what challenges were faced when upscaling CBDRR programmes. The session also gives a donors
perspective of how their funding frameworks are now encouraging countries to implement
national level CBDRR programmes and sustain them through institutionalization at the national
level. In the second segment of the session participants get into groups to discussions, ﬁnd
solutions and provide recommendations on how to address some speciﬁc challenges faced in
implementation of national programs on CBDRR.

4.1 Implementing National Programs on CBDRR in High Risk
Communities: An overview from the region by

Mr. Aloysius J. Rego, ADPC

Country experiences of implementing national CBDRR
programmes are drawn from the Regional Consultative
Committee on Disaster Management (RCC) meeting in
2008 where several countries presented their progress
on implementing CBDRR. The presentation showed how
countries are at different stages of implementing CBDRR,
where countries are developing policy frameworks while a
few are slow in their implementation yet others are well
into implementation at local levels with national support.

The 7th Meeting of the Regional Consultative Committee
on Disaster Management (RCC) was held in Colombo,
Sri Lanka in May 2008 under the theme of ‘Rights-based
community-led Disaster Risk Reduction’ which highlighted
the need for NDMOs to implement and support CBDRR
at the national level. 28 delegates from 19 RCC member
countries participated in a group discussion on ‘Meeting
the challenges to institutionalize and upscale CBDRR’ and
based on the discussions a Working Paper on ‘Implementing
national programs on CBDRR in high risk communities;
lessons learned, challenges and way ahead’ was developed
as a reference document for the 3

Asian Ministerial

Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, in December 2008
in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.

The RCC Working Paper on ‘Implementing national programs on CBDRR in high risk communities;
lessons learned, challenges and way ahead’, November 2008.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

How has CBDRR been prioritized in National Policies and Frameworks on DRR in
countries of the Asian region:

India

The National Disaster Management Framework mandates the preparation of

community based mitigation, community preparedness and response plans

Lao PDR

The National Strategic Plan for Disaster

Management 2010 to 2020, and Action Plan of 2005 recognizes the importance

of involving the community in dealing with disaster risk and the necessity to build t

heir

capacity.

Malaysia

The National Security Council Directive No. 20 (NSC No. 20) attaches priority to CBDRR

in the education sector through educational programmes, drills or exercises.

Mongolia

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management Framework for Action

2006-2015 identiﬁes CBDRM as a priority for supporting vulnerable population

in hazard prone areas.

Pakistan

Identiﬁes CBDRM as one (Priority No.6) out of nine priorities of the National Disaster

Management

Framework.

Sri Lanka

The National Disaster Management Plan 2008-2012 and National Disaster Management

Policy emphasize the importance of community engagement in disaster management

Countries have speciﬁcally identiﬁed CBDRR as a priority component in their national
DRR plans.

Bangladesh The National Plan for Disaster Management (2007-2015) recognizes community

empowerment which is operationalized by CBDRR as one of the six key result areas

Indonesia

National Action Plan for DRR (2006-2009), prioritizing implementation of CBDRR and

integrating it with the local development master plan

Sri Lanka

The ‘Road Map for Safer Sri Lanka (2006-2015)’ prioritizing CBDRR as one of its seven

program components

Examples of CBDRR included in National and Local Development Planning.

Cambodia The Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP) on DRR (2008-2013), in its implementation

plan of the ﬁrst two years includes Integrating DRR into the formal commune

development planning process

Maldives

CBDRR activities are led by the Island Development Committees. Local authorities

are members of the Island development committees and they act as the link between

the regional head ofﬁce and the Ministry of Atolls Development and the National

Disaster Management Center

Philippines Integrated CBDRM into national and sub-national development plans such as the

Philippines Medium Term Development Plan

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Tools that countries were using in order to integrate CBDRR:

• Bangladesh’s Community Risk Assessments (CRA) and Risk Reduction Action Plans (RRAP) and

the ongoing initiative to produce multi-hazard maps under the project on Hazard Mapping and
Assessment for Effective Community-based Disaster Risk Management

• READY project in the Philippines has three main components: multi-hazard identiﬁcation and

assessment, community-based disaster preparedness and mainstreaming risk reduction into the
local development planning process.

Countries have also demonstrated commitment towards CBDRR at national level by allocating speciﬁc
budgets for the activities. In Bangladesh a minimum of 25% of the total Local Disaster Risk Reduction
Funding Guidelines (LDRRF), is earmarked for community proposals drawn from the Community Risk
Assessment (CRA) and Risk Reduction Action Plan (RRAP) processes. Sri Lanka has identiﬁed priority
projects and budget estimates for program component six on CBDRR in their Road Map. Total budget
estimates for CBDRR is more than USD 28 million, phased over a 10-year period.

Thailand’s Cabinet has approved a central budget for CBDRR in 2007—USD 2.6 million for evacuation drills
in provinces and districts and USD377,000 for One Tambon One Search and Rescue (OTOP) project.

Institutionalizing capacity building programmes for CBDRR is also a way to commit to CBDRM at the national
level. The Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP) of the Government of Bangladesh has
identiﬁed capacity building as one of priorities and are carry out programmes to build capacities of government
ofﬁcials. The National Disaster Management Authority of Pakistan has developed training manuals targeted at
communities and district authorities. It is also in the process of establishing the National Institute of Disaster
Management (NIDM) that will offer courses for CBO, NGOs, local authorities on CBDRR.

Some RCC Member Countries have established forums and mechanisms to share knowledge and coordinate
on CBDRR programmes at the national level. The Cambodian Disaster Risk Reduction Forum (CDRR
Forum), the Indonesian Society for Disaster Management (MPBI), the Disaster Preparedness Network
(DP-Net) in Nepal, the Corporate Network for Disaster Response (CNDR) in the Philippines and the Disaster
Management Working Group (DMWG) in Viet Nam are some of the examples.

Challenges to implement CBDRR at the national level

•  The limited conceptual understanding of CBDRR
•  Communities largely dependent upon relief and support
•  Limitations in linking with local development planning
•  Most development partners tend to by-pass local government mechanisms when implementing

DRR projects at the community and this limits cooperation by local level authorities and the
sustainability of the projects.

• Difﬁculty in creating ownership by the communities and integrating women and other

marginalized groups in CBDRR

• Linking local disaster management plans to relevant and marketable livelihood training, micro

ﬁnance and disaster risk insurance

The RCC have made recommendations to Countries to improve CBDRR implementation at the national
level, especially scaling up implementation. Some of these include, development of a policy agenda for
CBDRR and commissioning Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, ensuring funding for CBDRR by allocating
budgets at the beginning of the ﬁnancial year, increasing and encouraging partnerships between NGOs
and Government for implementation of programmes and capacity building of national, sub-nationals and
local ofﬁcials, ensuring institutional capacity and commitment and the delegation of authorities.

Governments at national and sub-national levels can also take steps to support sustained implementation
of CBDRR by community organizations by establishing clear policy framework for support by national
governments and partnerships between local government and CBOs

• Setting up /adapting appropriate and suitable institutional mechanisms to accommodate CBDRR
• Establish scheme for recognition of good practices in CBDRR and utilizing experiences of CBDRR

award scheme in member countries such as Gawad Kalasag in the Philippines.

• Mobilize more resources from national to local governments

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Steps to increase the linkage of CBDRR programs to the development planning process and role of the
planning agencies were also discussed as such:

• strengthen partnerships between NDMO and the national decision making body
• Increase linkages of CBDRR in sectoral planning ie. development of school curriculum and training of

teachers in the education sector

• Capacity building of technical people in the planning and sectoral agencies on CBDRR.
• Adoption of appropriate legislations

How can UN Agencies, partner organizations and donors address some of the issues and challenges in
implementing and upscaling CBDRR programmes? The answers lie in a series of suggestion which RCC has
made which include:

1.  Appreciate and promote CBDRR as a window of opportunity for community empowerment
2.  Link CBDRR to development planning and implementation
3.  Support CBDRR backed-up by local authorities and integrate local/traditional knowledge with science

and technology

4. Serve as a bridge among communities, governments, donors, and other stakeholders
5. Encourage and promote the involvement of private sector in DRR
6. Support formulation of national policies, plans or strategy papers on CBDRR as part of DRR

framework

7.  Prioritize high-risk communities
8.  Support capacity development of ofﬁcials, communities and NGOs
9.  Support and disseminate research and documentation of good/bad practices
10. Revise own agency policies and frameworks
11. Resource mobilization for CBDRR
12. Set up and maintain an environment for transparency and accountability to communities

The Kuala Lumpur Regional Action Plan prepared to guide Countries and Regional Organizations in
accelerating implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 had suggested several
national actions on the involvement of communities in implementing DRR. These are Component 2 on
Decentralized DRR: Empowerment of Local Government and Civil Society in DRR and Component 6
on Public Education, Awareness and Engaging the Media in DRR. The Action Plan has been presented at
the 2

Global Platform on Disaster Risk Reduction in Geneva and is currently being ﬁnalized by UNISDR

and under the guidance of the Government of Malaysia.

For further information contact: ajrego@adpc.net

4.2 National CBDRR Program in Viet Nam

Dr. Le Minh Nhat, DDMFC, MARD, Viet Nam

This segment explores the rationale and background for setting up the national CBDRR programme in Viet
Nam together with its objectives and expected outputs, stakeholders/partners and beneﬁciaries, the
timeframe and implementation plan in 2010.

The Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control (CCFSC) in Viet Nam, is the expert agency in disaster
management under the Vietnamese Government. Its members consist of ofﬁcials from all Ministries
and it is chaired by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD). The Department of Dyke
Management and Flood Control (DDMFC) is the standing ofﬁce of CCFSC.

The rationale to set up the programme has signiﬁcance at all levels. At the International level the
Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015, the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency
Response at the sub-regional level, Vietnam’s National Strategy for Disaster Response, Prevention and
Management at the national level and safety needs of the community at local level.

The 1

CBDRR programme was initiated in the year 2000 and by 2003, CBDRR programmes were being

implemented in 9 Provinces throughout Viet Nam. This has further expanded to 23 Provinces in 2008
with 17 international and non-governmental organizations participating including Save the Children UK,
Oxfam, UNDP, ADPC, UNISDR and CARE International.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Programme Objectives:

1. Improve community awareness and apply effective models CBDRR at all levels and in all sectors,

especially in the administration

2. Restrict deterioration of natural resources, the environment and cultural heritages caused by

natural disasters

3. Contribute to ensuring national sustainable development, defense and security.
4. Mainstream mechanisms and policies on community based management of natural disaster risks

from central to provincial level and improve capacity of local administration ofﬁcials in charge
of disaster prevention and control.

The target of the Government is to ensure 100% of the ofﬁcials are
trained on CBDRR by 2020. Developing disaster management plans,
information and communication systems, building core forces, and
volunteers to guide and assist people in natural disaster prevention
and mitigation, where it is targeted that 70% population in the
vulnerable areas will be provided with information and knowledge
on DRR and the topic of disaster management is included in school’s
curricula.

CBDRR should also be integrated into stakeholder/community needs, with consideration in all sectors and
should balance competing issues while harmonizing socio-economic plans at the local levels.

The key stakeholders and beneﬁciaries:

• Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
• Ministry of Planning and Investment, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education and Training and other

line Ministries

•  Provincial People’s Committees,
•  Social/political organizations, businesses and community people.
•  Local and international NGOs, bilateral and multi lateral organizations, donors and UN agencies.

Many advantages and challenges have been identiﬁed in this process. The advantages are the full support
from international, Government and community, in responding to community needs and the community’s
involvement in preparation of plans. However challenges identiﬁed include difﬁculty in implementing
programmes in varying geographical conditions, limited understanding of concepts by communities
limited ﬁnancial human resource (number, experience in CBDRR) and challenge of integrating gender,
children and disabled people in the CBDRR plans.

For further information contact: minhnhat@ccfsc.org.vn

4.3 Partnership between CBOs/RCRC and local authorities for
implementation of CBDRR Program

Mayor Evelyn S. Yu, Municipality of Calabanga, the Philippines,

Ms. Marieta Lupig-Alcid, ACCORD,

CNDR, the Philippines & Ms. Aye Aye Thant, Myanmar Red Cross Society

The presentations made in this segment demonstrates the importance of partnerships for implementing
CBDRR programs. The experiences challenges and lessons from the ACCORD project in the Philippines in
collaboration with the Calabanga Municipality is followed by a brief description of how the Myanmar Red
Cross Society established a partnership with the local authority to implement a CBDRR programme.

The ACCORD project in the Philippines is a CBDRR project being implemented in the Municipality of
Calabanga and four other municipalities by the Local Government Unions (LGUs) in partnership with CARE
Netherlands, the Corporate Network for Disaster Response and Agri-Aqua Development Coalition, with
funding from ECHO.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

The San Miguel Bay in Calabanga, empties to the Paciﬁc Ocean and causes ﬂoods and storm surges which
are experienced 3-5 times a year by means of strong typhoons. The area is also prone to liquefaction in
earthquake incidents because of its proximity to the Philippine Trench. The municipal area is also prone
to landslides as it lies at the foot of Mount Isarog. Apart from natural hazards the 74% of the population
in Calabanga live below poverty line and it is the 5

most nutritionally-depressed municipality in the

country as per data in 2002.

Prior to strong typhoons in 2004 and 2006, Calabanga depended
mainly on relief and rehabilitation programmes. However in 2007
programmes moved from response focused to CBDRR with support
from Gawad Kalinga, CARE, ABS-CBN Foundation, Shell Foundation,
Ateneo de Manila, Ateneo de Naga, Embassy of Japan, Grassroots
Development Program, World Bank Small Grants Program, Save
the Children UK, 700 Club Foundation and DIPECHO through the
ACCORD Project.

The following activities took place:

• Capacity building of disaster coordinating councils at the village and municipal levels 25% of

training participants were community

• Leaders and 75% of them were from the poorest households in Calabanga.
• Application of scientiﬁc studies to complement indigenous knowledge, such as conducting risk

assessments and contingency planning

• Conducting natural resource management activities as small-scale mitigation measures such

as mangrove reforestation along the Bay and its tributaries. To complement ACCORD’s and
Smart’s support for mangrove reforestation, the LGU extended food for work to participating
households.

• In the area of knowledge and education, the project in partnership with the teachers’ training

institute of the Department of Education, curriculum integration of basic DRR messages from
elementary grade to secondary level, art contests, quiz bee, school contingency planning and
school drills were also conducted.

To ensure efﬁcient and effective emergency response, the following disaster
preparedness measures were taken.

• Municipal-wide community based ﬂood early warning system,
• Village and municipal contingency planning
• community

drills

Public information activities were done to ensure that the general
public, especially the most vulnerable are adequately informed
about what needs to be done prior to, during and after disaster
events. Community drills are undertaken to check the effectiveness
of the speciﬁc parts of the village and municipal contingency plans
and how they link. The youngest to the oldest in the community
also participated in these drills.

One of the most difﬁcult evacuation drills was evacuating the Island Barangay of Punta Tarawal to the
mainland. In the past 2 years, an average participation rate of 80% to 90% of the target population was
been achieved.

The lessons learnt were presented by The Mayor of Calabanga Madam Evelyn S. Yu who explains that the
challenge was sustaining the initiatives taken under the ACCORD project.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Concrete measures have also been taken, such as:

•  Creating a permanent disaster management ofﬁce with deﬁned DRR program, personnel and funds
•  Enactment of local legislation to adopt the contingency plans
•  Consolidation of the Environment Ordinances
•  Capacity building programmes such as training of local government staff on Project Cycle

Management

• Linking the LGU to other donors like small grants facilities of Embassies and the private sector such

as Smart Communications, Shell Foundation, etc

To complement the ACCORD Project, the Municipality and the ACCORD project submitted a proposal to
EU’s Food Facility to provide access to safe food and undertake alternative livelihoods during disasters
and consistent with environmental protection as a risk reduction measure and also submitted a solid
waste management project proposal to EU’s Call for proposals of the Strategic Program Facility (SPF).

The project team identify key requirements to sustain and protect DRR gains, which are:

• Multi-sectoral

participation

•  “voice” of the most vulnerable and the poorest
•  Accountability and transparency to whom we serve
•  Advocacy and enabling legislation
•  Most importantly POLITICAL WILL

Winning the 2009 National Winner of the Gawad Kalasag for best practices in DRR was the sweetest
reward and a great motivation to continue developing a resilient community.

For further information contact: mayet.alcid@cndr.org.ph

The importance of identifying the stakeholders at the outset of the programme and ensuring their
involvement throughout the programme was reiterated by Ms. Aye Aye Thant of the Myanmar Red Cross
(MRCS). The stakeholders for the CBDRR project implemented by the MRCS were INGOs working in the
local area, Government Departments such as the Health Dept, Relief and Resettlement Dept, Department
of Social Welfare, Fire Services Dept, Education Dept, Department of Meteorology and Hydrology,
Administration Dept and law enforcement such as the Police Force and national working groups such as
DPRE, engineering groups, local NGOs such as the ﬁre brigade, Myanmar Children & Women Association
and CBOs such as religious groups and youth groups.

MRCS upscaled the CBDRR Programme by providing support through the DRR framework, guidelines,
CBDRR manuals, IEC materials, monitoring and evaluation framework (tools, plans, matrixes) and
capacity building through the ‘learning by doing’ approach.

The key to successful CBDRR activities in Township/Village level was capacity building. This included
both MRCS & Local authority/township RC providing funding support to CBDRR to conduct multiplier
courses, formation of Village Tract Disaster Management Committee (VTDMC) with village authority and
Village Red Cross Volunteers (VRCV), providing planned duties & responsibilities for VTDMCs, organizing
activities to encourage community participation and monitoring by head ofﬁce and townships.

Challenges identiﬁed by MRCS

•  Local authorities and partners were overloaded with tasks
•  Limited funds available for activities
•  not achieving full participation of the local authorities
•  differing expectation on the part of local authority staff

MRCS also shared possible solutions including,

•  conduct advocacy programmes,
•  implement fund raising & livelihood/income generating activities,
•  conduct regular follow-up visits,
•  mobilization through social activities on signiﬁcant days eg.Int; Disaster Risk Reduction Day) and

providing tools and equipment such as radios, stretchers, First Aid kits and hand held loudspeakers
etc.

For further information contact:dm2@myanmarredcross.org.mm

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

4.4 Summary and Recommendations from Group Discussions

4.4.1 Recommendations for linking CBDRR in National Development Policy,
Plans and Programs

Moderator: Ms. Ronilda Co and Rapporteur: Mr. Sisira Kumara

Challenges in implementing national programmes on CBDRR highlighted in the plenary sessions were used
as a starting point for discussion among the group.

They are as follows:

1. Government approach to disasters is response oriented; disasters are seen as one- time, not within

the conﬁnes of usual development planning

2. Need to build/increase awareness and understanding on the part of government development

actors on the impacts of disasters to ongoing development
- Need to improve the evidence-based argument (e.g. cost-beneﬁt analysis; advantages of

protecting development gains)

- Include climate change considerations

3. Capacity building on how CBDRR could be integrated in national and sub-national development

planning processes

4. Coordination and coherence of roles and mandates among government agencies
5. Budgetary allocations for integrating CBDRR in national development policies, plans, and programs

The group provided recommendation for each of the identiﬁed challenges.

1. Group recommendations on shifting the Governments approach to DRR from disaster response:

1.1 Develop minimum standards for DRR for Government, humanitarian agencies and other actors

to ensure DRR approach is adapted

1.2 Update DRR related legislations as most of the current legislation is outdated and focuses

on response

1.3 Advocate with Government agencies to pass DRR Bills and to ensure corresponding budgetary

allocations/provisions

1.4 Develop an advocacy package with action plans to integrate DRR into national development

policies, plans and program. Eg. Viet Nam under DEPECHO projects

1.5 Develop a sound monitoring mechanism with indicators for all development programs to

ensure that DRR is integrated

1.6 Facilitate a ﬂexible political system where CBOs and other local agencies can get involved

during DRR and response activities

1.7 Reconnect national and community levels and ensure positioning of all humanitarian agencies

at the right place at the right time.

1.8 Use climate change adaptation opportunities to advocate and create a link between national

and community development work

2. To better link CBDRR with development policies and programs, the following was recommended by the

group:

2.1 Develop capacity building programs for all types of stakeholders including the Government
2.2 Enhance knowledge and identify particular linkages between development and CBDRR so that

CBDRR is considered a development activity rather than a separate activity or sector

2.3 CBDRR should be integrated in to livelihood programmes and livelihood can be an entry point

for linking CBDRR and development programs

3. Recommendations to build capacities to integrate CBDRR in the national and sub national development

planning process:

3.1 Build capacities of Government agencies for accountability in DRR and convince them about

their responsibilities in DRR

3.2 Integrate DRR training in regular training programs of the Government. Eg. Myanmar – Annual

DRR training programs for Govt. staff, annual training for volunteers

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

3.3 Integrate DRR into curricular at all training institutes at all levels including higher education

institutions and local training institutes

3.4 Sensitize and build capacities of policy makers and politicians on DRR
3.5 Ensure follow up actions or post-training action plans are in place for all training programmes

and all training organizations are requested to have a session on applying and using the
learning that they gathered during the training.

4. Recommendations to increase coordination and coherence of roles and mandates among the

government agencies:

4.1 Develop a cluster approach for DRR and formulate multi-stakeholder action plans.
4.2 Set up national coordination committees chaired by high powered policy makers such as

the President, Prime Minister, Minister of Interior, Home Affairs as it becomes increasingly
difﬁcult to coordinate line ministries and agencies at same level of authority and mandates.

5. Recommendations for budgetary allocations for integrating CBDRR in national development policies,

plans and programs.

5.1 Include DRR in the cost beneﬁt analysis of development programs, so that DRR impacts are

visible and can be used to convince national governments on the importance of DRR

5.2 Conduct community oriented small scale development projects as pilots and subsequently

to mobilize further resources.

5.3 Engage in public private partnerships for DRR
5.4 Advocate with donor agencies to design their strategies and programs to establish linkages

with development programs having CBDRR components

4.4.2 Scaling up the CBDRR Programs – Challenges and Recommendations

Moderator: Mr. Aloysius James, ActionAid, Cambodia & Rapporteur: Mr. Hussein Macarambon, ADPC

DRR is part of the international agenda making limited but steady headway at the implementation
level and is based on reports such a the Global report ‘views from front line’ and the mandatory HFA
monitoring reports. Some still view DRR as response centered and still an evolving concept for which only
a handful of actors are available.

Many approaches to mainstream DRR have been undertaken such as mobilizing political will and commitment
for DRR, allocation of resources for DRR, human resource and capacity development, resource allocation
for DRR, providing legal frameworks within which stakeholders are made accountable, establishing
institutional support systems and strengthening governance structures and mechanisms. Furthermore,
integrating DRR in development planning, establishing linkages between other sectors such as climate
change, promoting synergy within Governments and among Civil society organizations, customizing tools
and instruments, developing national level multi hazard risk assessments and action plans and utilizing
DRR as an approach to decentralize government activities.

Despite all efforts there still remains challenges in promoting a culture of safety.

The following points were identiﬁed by the group as challenges faced in upscaling CBDRR programmes.

1. Linking with Local Development Planning
2. Increasing capacity and skills at community level to improve livelihoods, food security and reduce

environmental degradation

3.  Creating ownership of projects and programes
4.  Increasing participation and involvement of the sub-national governments
5.  Establishing partnerships (NGOs/Government) for implementation of programmes (Bangladesh, Myanmar,

Viet Nam have programs that are specialized and target thematic areas that are vulnerable)

6. Capacity Building (Viet Nam: best practices are shared among stakeholders but there is a problem

of too many facilitators)

7. Community awareness which is the foundation for building resilience.
8. Sustainability by engagement of community, the speciﬁc challenge in Cambodia is that they face a

huge wave (tsunami) of change with very limited capacity to address it.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Actions and suggestions for ways forward:

1. Increased advocacy and networking and the use of cost-beneﬁt analysis to inﬂuence policy

makers

2. Institutionalization through sustained dialogue between government, NGOs and CBOs and parallel

interaction between international NGOs with local and national levels of government

3. Establish and strengthen coordination and regulatory mechanism between NGOs, CBOs and

government agencies. i.e the Philippines’ Disaster Coordinating Councils that manage relief/
calamity funds.

4. Build capacity of technical personnel in planning and sectoral agencies on CBDRR. Use INGOs

as advisers for project management, development planning, and disaster relief systems, hazard
mapping etc.

5. Adopt appropriate legislation - accountability and policies, i.e. zero casualty policy

In conclusion the group shared thoughts that came across during their discussions.

• We tend to be very ambitious, we must realize that changing minds takes time and need to be

careful when designing DRR programmes and be realistic.

• Structures/institutions, resources, capacity are the building blocks of good DRR

4.4.3 Local Budgeting and Finance in CBDRR – Challenges and recommendations

Moderator: Mr. Sonny Paglinawan, MACEC, Christian Aid, the Philippines
Rapporteur: Ms. Josella Pangilinan, Christian Aid, the Philippines

Experiences from the work of the (Marinduque Council For
Environmental Concerns) MACEC in the Philippines were drawn by
Sonny Paglinawan who shared how local budgets were mobilized to
mainstream DRR in CCA. A presentation was made on ‘Mainstreaming
DRR & CCA in Mandatory Development Planning and Budgeting of
Barangays to begin the group discussion.

Marinduque is a small and vulnerable island and is one of the
poorest provinces located in the typhoon belt of the Philippines
and prone to many disasters. Climate change has already taken
its toll in the island. Bayanihan (carrying of the house to a safer
location) is still practiced, which is a signiﬁcant value system in
harnessing resiliency.

Planning and budgeting integration workshops were introduced to the MACEC Chapter members in 6
Municipal areas. A total of 8 workshops from August to November, 2008 trained 184 Barangays, 465
Barangay Ofﬁcials and 88 MACEC members.

Mainstreaming DRR and CCA in the local development planning process bridged the gap between signing
of international treaties and ordinary people’s right of access to information.

Previously there were more than 26 mandatory local development plans, which has now been reduced to
just one local development and investment plan. There is now an enhanced LGU-NGO participation and
recognition of the importance of multi-stakeholder partnerships.

Barangays were encouraged to seek alternative livelihoods such as Vegetable farming, measures to
protect the farming process from heavy rainfall and drought with the help of line agencies, the local
government and state colleges and universities, promoting butterﬂy culture and releasing a percentage
of the cultured butterﬂy into the wild to contribute to biodiversity conservation.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Mainstreaming DRR/CCA in planning and budgeting mechanisms of priority
barangays and addressing economic vulnerability in Marinduque

In 2007 MACEC, was provided with an opportunity to make critical DRR and CCA interventions. In
June of 2008, NEDA extended the invitation for Sub-National DRR Mainstreaming with CA and its
partners and MACEC took the lead in learning the process that NEDA presented. Seeing its possible
application to local government units, MACEC found policy foundations in various Philippine policies,
including the RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) and developed a tool for the integration
of DRR and CCA in the planning and budgeting processes for the barangays using the very same
tools that DILG requires of the local government units. They were able to prepare a 10-year Local
Development and Investment Plan, 2009 Annual Investment Plan and 2009 Annual Budget with DRR
and CCA provisions. Provincial Development Council and Municipal Development Council’s inclusion
of speciﬁc budget items on DRR and CCA and the appropriation of modest amount therein their
regular budgets for 2009.

1. Adoption of an ordinance by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of MACEC’s proposal to mandate

the use of compressed ﬂuorescent bulbs in all government projects, ediﬁces, buildings, etc.
and the gradual transition on the use of the same by business establishments and households

2. Adoption of an ordinance mandating the participation of all institutions, households and

individuals in the annual provincial coastal clean-up drive

3. Two (2) units of hanging bridges (150 meters ) in 2 barangays of Mogpog were constructed

with MACEC’s representation to enable barangay residents to have access during ﬂooding
and to facilitate their immediate evacuation.

The following challenges in local budgeting and ﬁnance in CBDRR were identiﬁed by the group.

1. DRR is not a priority for many local governments; DRR support often comes from external local and

international organizations

2.  At times government resources are not sufﬁcient to fund or engage in DRR work
3.  The mode of action is still emergency response rather than disaster risk reduction
4.  Limited understanding and capacities of local government and communities to enable them to

engage in DRR;

5. Encouraging community savings for resilience is a challenge due to poverty

Recommendations by the group to encourage local budgeting and to develop ﬁnancial structures to
enable CBDRR.

1. Look for ways on how to maximise existing structures, policies and laws to support DRR work
2. Build DRR awareness of communities and local government to gain support and engage the local

government at the start of the project for sustainability

3. Forge formal agreements with stakeholders e.g MOUs with the government – including counterparts

for ﬁnancial sustainability and synchronize DRR planning and budgeting cycles with government
processes.

4.4.4. Strengthening partnerships with local authorities - Lessons learned

Moderator: Ms. Catherine Marie Martin, PNRC, presented by Ms. Esther Buenaventura,
PNRC & Rapporteur: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Kaﬂey, IFRC

The experience of the engagement and partnerships of the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) with the
local authorities in the Province of Antique was ﬁrst shared by the moderator to provide an example and
initiate discussion.

Antique is a province located in the Western Visayas Region with 18 municipalities and 590 barangays having
a total population of 515,265. Antique is mostly isolated from the rest of the island and is not free of natural
hazards such as tropical cyclones, earthquakes, storm surges, monsoons, ﬂoods and landslides.

The objective of the PNRC project was to prepare the community to respond to disasters through a
Community-Based Disaster Management Training (CBDMT) approach.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Local people are the key to reducing disaster risks in communities through multi-stakeholder participation
and involvement in vulnerability assessment, planning, implementation, identiﬁcation of disaster
mitigation and preparedness measures, decision-making, response, rehabilitation and monitoring and
evaluation.

The local chapter has set a minimum of 4 phases in social preparation and mobilization for communities
in DRR activities, which are preparatory, planning-with-the community, implementation and monitoring
and assessment phase.

The involvement of the community in planning stage will necessitate more contacts with LGU’s and
communities, and exercise improved community skills. A greater degree of delegation of responsibility
has to be considered in order to make ofﬁcials at the decision-making level more sensitive and accessible
to the community.

The Planning-with-the–Community phase involves intensive and detailed LGU-PNRC information exchange
on various aspects of the locally formulated development programs.

The implementation phase is reached when the activities which have been agreed upon, listed and timetabled
during the planning phase swing into operation. During this phase the organizational and technical capabilities
of the community (and PNRC) are put to the test, and when the unexpected will need to be met with a
quick and effective response. The experiences gained from this implementation phase were channeled into
improving and strengthening the communities on-going capacity for partnership in DRR.

In the implementation phase, the PNRC’s local Chapter assists the community through provision of
technical inputs, logistical and other support, continuing to stimulate, support and reinforce the growing
and latent organizational and technical capability of the LGU and community for the implementation of
the DRR programs. Other key activities during the implementation phase are operation and maintenance
of the DRR programs, formal turning-over of facilities to the community (when they satisfy speciﬁcation
in quality, function and output and when the maintenance skills are of a sufﬁciently high standard) and
bringing the monitoring system into full operation and modifying as necessary.

In the Monitoring and Evaluaion Phase, the PNRC Local Chapter assists the community to design, establish
and operate a built-in monitoring system, identify problems (which may hamper smooth operation and
maintenance of facilities and activity) as they are revealed, and promptly respond to these problems,
with action and resources.

Good governance for disaster reduction exists where there is adequate space for the participation of
different stakeholders, including vulnerable communities, state, civil society, volunteers, organizations
and other development partners. Community disaster resilience can be best achieved when we engaged
with the Local Government units and ensure buy-in into the DRR initiatives, promote DRR as important
program in community development.

In the Philippines, the Local Government Unit, besides from the 5% calamity reserved fund, has a
20% development fund that supports poverty reduction and development programs of the barangay,
municipality or province.

The PNRC Antique Chapter was awarded ‘Best in Disaster Management’ and there were Barangays initiated
by the Chapter which were awarded the “Gawad Kalasag”, a national recognition given to LGU’s for best
in disaster management.

The group collectively noted the following points on strengthening partnerships with local authorities:

• Donors and Civil Society Organizations should be part of the process of strengthening partnerships

between communities and local authorities

• Disaster Coordination Councils are seen as the village level apex body for DM issues and must be

included in all discussions and consultations

• DRR is seen as a cross-cutting issue and should be mainstreamed into local development plans
• Objectives of conducting a VCA should be clariﬁed among the community before the exercise

commences

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

4.4.5 Integrating CBDRR into local planning process

Moderator: Mr. Nguyen Hung Ha, IFRC, presented by Mr. Luis Pinto, CVTL and Mr. Te Sokkhoeun, CRC &
Rapporteur: Mr. Kamal Niraula, IFRC

Experiences from East Timor Red Cross (CVTL) and the Cambodian Red Cross (CRC) were shared to
stimulate discussion among the participants. Contributions were also drawn up from other countries e.g.
Philippines, Bangladesh and Nepal.

East Timor is a young Nation established in 2000 and became a Red Cross Movement member in 2005. Its
DRR strategy was introduced in 2008 and in line with the following points.

•  Disaster risk reduction as the main approach
•  Develop capacity of each Ministry to follow a multiple hazards risk reduction approach
•  Develop early warning system for multiple hazards
•  National Disaster Management Department to coordinate with all other line Ministries

CVTL commenced work on DRR in 2006 and was heavily engaged in response to emergency situations
due to internal conﬂict and natural disasters of strong wind and heavy rain in 2006. CBDRR gradually
developed from 2007 with introduction of CBDP, CBRR, livelihood and emergency response components
and currently covers 9 out of 13 districts.

Community sensitization, risk assessment using VCA, village council meetings, building capacities of
community structures, door to door education on risk awareness, drills and the introduction of a small
scale risk mitigation project were some of the activities done. The project promoted the coordination
with Chief of village about ﬂood control methods and conducted training for the community on how to
strengthen their house from strong winds.

Lessons learnt from the risk assessment process using VCA as a major tool

•  Useful in creating awareness in the community
•  Effective to engage community in the risk assessment process
•  Helpful to draw up a simple community action plan together with the community
•  VCA reports was a useful tool to advocate community priorities to other interested partners

including local government

• Major effort is required to bring in other stakeholders for a joint VCA
• VCA identiﬁes many priorities in the community, but implementation process is difﬁcult due to

limited support from different partners

• Government mechanisms are still developing, therefore, difﬁcult to anticipate government

partnership in local projects

Key messages shared by CVTL are:

•  DRR is a collective effort of different programmes to develop community self-resilience
•  Working together with other stakeholders is the key to success of a DRR programme
•  Buy-in from leadership including organization, community, government and donors is a major

requirement

• Meaningful government engagement (NDMD, DDMC) enhances the effectiveness of a DRR

programme

• VCA tools are very important to reﬂect community risks into risk reduction plan and to link up with local

development plans

• Sustainable and ﬂexible funding to fulﬁll community needs is a strong element of a good DRR

programme

In Cambodia, the experience of the Cambodian Red Cross is that
the coordination process between the national authorities and
the NGOs “integrates” DRR concerns into the local development
process. It does not yet “mainstream” DRR. The reason is that the
local development planning process still operates on directives
issued from the local authorities. Hence it would be more of a
consultative, rather than truly participatory at the community
level.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

At present all 27 target villages in 5 communes have DRR measures included in the Royal Government of
Cambodia ’s Commune Development Plans, and a further 24 villages in 7 communes are expected to be
done when the ﬁnalization of the Commune Development Plans for 2009 takes place in November.

The following issues and challenges are experienced:

• limited understanding about DRR by Village Disaster Management Team (VDMT) and Commune

Committee for Disaster Management (CCDM).

• Limited response/support from stakeholders for DRR measures during District Integration

Workshop.

• limitation of communication and coordination in local development process among Branch Red

Cross and Local Development Planners (District & Provincial Levels).

The group presented the following conclusions from this discussion:

•  Consideration of disability and senior citizens related issues in DRR planning process
•  Environmental impacts assessment should be a part of DRR planning process
•  Multi-stakeholders engagement is required to address different community level priorities in a

holistic way and ﬁndings from participatory assessment (e.g. VCA reports) is helpful tool for strong
advocacy.

• Effective implementation of disaster management law in Philippines has created an enabling

environment for DRR

• Natural disasters are the main focus in disaster risk reduction planning, human-induced disasters

should also be considered

• Capacity building of local government institutions on DRR planning process is critically important.

Following thorough planning process with clear steps on using participatory planning tools, NGOs
can contribute in developing this capacity.

• Local level budget allocation by government for DRR is important to ensure sustainability of DRR

efforts.

Plenary Discussion
Participants key messages

“We need to look at opportunities for DRR in regular planning movements”

“The DRR bill in the Philippines is drafted by CSOs and government but is not recognized at
the house of representatives yet. It needs to be followed up with a Presidential Decree and
a legal framework for implementation”

“DRR needs to be integrated into development planning and there are concerns about the
capacity of the lowest level body’s structures and resources. However change takes time
and we cannot expect too much in a short time. DRR is still an evolving concept.”

“Developing capacities of vulnerable groups such as the disabled should also be considered
when integrating DRR in to the local planning process.”

4.5 DRR; an EU Perspective focusing on Asia and the Paciﬁc

Ms. Cecile Pichon & Ms. Claudia Amaral, ECHO

The European Union’s Strategy for supporting DRR in developing countries is based on The Hyogo
Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015 and the strategic work of the EC and EU Member States. The
rationale to support DRR in developing countries is the lack of policy and strategic frameworks to support
DRR, a lack of common voice, limited progress with integration of DRR and limited linking of DRR and
climate change.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

For ECHO, the priorities for DRR implementation are mainly creating a political dialogue on DRR,
preparation of regional Action Plans on DRR, advocating for national level support and integration of DRR
at EU level.

In terms of the implementation and the impacts of ECHOs programmes, the primary focus is to share
responsibilities and tasks to ensure improved coherence between ﬁnancial instruments positioning
towards the HFA, especially reporting on its progress and preparation of action plans.

ECHO will be working through ongoing instruments until 2013 and will conduct a mid-term review
of priorities (2009) on country programming and regional thematic lines. In addition, increased EC
cooperation with ASEAN, including on DRR and the use of new instruments and mechanisms such as the
Global Climate Change Alliance will also be ensured.

Supporting DRR initiatives in the region is still challenging however ECHO is making efforts to improve
the situation. DRR is still seen as very much a response/disaster aftermath issue and a cross-cutting issue
rather than an out right approach. ECHO has made efforts to increase staff awareness on DRR. There is
limited opportunity for direct DRR funding and DRR cost-analysis but funding is available for DRR/CCA.
ECHO has to respect the host country Governments’ policies & priorities and also the priorities of the
implementing actors. There are evolving trends and environments in the countries and many different
cycles and donors must coordinate and interact with and between different programmes despite having
limited number of “DRR focal points”.

The ECHO DRR framework was developed in January 2008, in parallel with the EU’s DRR Communication.
Internal and external consultations were held up to March 2009 and the framework is expected to be
ﬁnalized by end of 2009.

The scope and approach of the framework is that it will support only natural disasters, pilot DRR projects
with demonstrative purposes having clear exit strategies through promotion, replication and scaling-up
mechanisms and also link with larger DRR initiatives in the geographical area or sub-region.

The speciﬁc objectives of the DRR framework which is fully in line with the EU DRR Strategy and the EU
Consensus on Humanitarian Aid is:

• To help communities and support institutions prepare for and reduce the impacts of natural

disasters

• To develop common practices of integrating DRR in humanitarian response in all disaster-prone

countries

• To intensify capacity-building, advocacy and coordination efforts at EC/EU, national and

international levels.

The implementation methodology is mainly focused on an elaborate a longer-term internal vision for
DRR, to promote continuity of funding, establish a priority list of disaster-prone countries and strengthen
dialogue with other EC services, develop elaborate practical guidelines and tools (including on entry/
exit strategies, LRRD/DP, DRR/sectors), develop a set of speciﬁc training tools and programmes including
joint-training initiatives and set up mechanisms for integration and dissemination of lessons learned and
best practices, keeping institutional memory, including through online forums such as Prevention web.

Increased support to DRR by ECHO is reﬂected in the fact that 11.7% of the total budget in 2008 was spent
on disaster preparedness and already 4.3% of the initial budget of 2009 is allocated to DIPECHO.

ECs DRR commitment to Asia and the Paciﬁc is the investments made up to now.

•  € 90 million since 1998 in 16 countries in South East, South and Central Asia,
•  ECHO has spent € 130 million since 2005 on capacity building globally.
•  DRR programmes have been supported in Bangladesh with € 9 million, China with € 6 million,

Indonesia € 200 million as well as in India and Sri Lanka.

• EC also has a research framework programme, which is the European Commission Joint Research

Centre, which conducts assessment studies, various research actions on disasters, especially
climate change impact and DRR.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

• EC has supported the Global Climate Change Alliance with € 60 million
• Set up the EU Natural Disaster Facility for the Global Insurance Fund (ACP) at the cost of € 12

million under 9th European Development Fund (EDF) and € 180 million under 10th EDF

• Supported the ACP with € 25 million

ECHO’s outlook of DRR in Asia include:

• New management of disaster preparedness
• DP mainstreaming in response and early recovery
• Continued

advocacy

•  New potentials for stock-piling and prepositioning, contingency planning
•  Small scale disaster funding decision may also be in the pipeline
•  Review areas of focus for DIPECHO and DP actions: Myanmar, the Paciﬁc, new “ad hoc actions”?

In terms of CBDRR, a few donors have CBDRR strategies or continuous funding instruments, it is important
to do a donor scoping exercise and identify the “DRR-receptive donors” and be opportunistic and not
wait till “DRR” or “CBDRR” is seen in the call for proposals but go ahead and be proactive and propose
speciﬁc CBDRR actions. CBDRR should ideally be seen as part of poverty reduction and development as it
is difﬁcult to separate CBDRR from general socio-economic development issues and CBDRR at some stage
needs to be promoted and scaled-up, often by actors other than NGOs.

Southeast Asia has a vast amount of experience and in many cases DRR is standardized and adapted to local
contexts and there is improved access to various documented methodologies on resource centers such
as Prevention Web, Provention, ADPC, CRID etc. More and more agencies have their own DRR strategies,
in addition to ad-hoc DRR actions and there is little need to re-invent CBDRR pilot programmes. The
current need is to standardize and coordinate approaches, as donors are keen on building on experience
developed, for example the DIPECHO pilot projects that have been taken over by Government or donors
as part of overall strategies. In addition the development of DRR/DP-related indicators are also on the
increase.

Some ideas and recommendations:

•  Joint actions (approach of ASEAN to DRR)
•  Joint advocacy initiatives: one voice (eg JANI in Vietnam )
•  Participate in DRR regional, national, local platforms
•  Involve Government and donors but also media, universities (information vectors, private sector

etc.

• Seek new and innovative ﬁnancial tools i.e Microcredit programme through Agency for Technical

Cooperation and Development (ACTED)

• Report on impact of CBDRR measures as often as possible (requires pre-deﬁned system during/

after disasters; people’s stories.

• Document approaches, integrate lessons learned (what worked and why and what
did not work)

Some points to keep in mind when developing advocacy and communication materials:

• Address donor or technical working groups with brief and ‘to the point’ messages
• Participate in reviews and evaluations of programmes (eg EC mid-term review 2009), development

of DRR strategies (eg EU, AusAID)

• Participate in advocacy/lobby groups (eg VOICE)
• Identify donor focal/receptive persons; involve donors in CBDRR-related events; identify

interlocutors who will be paid attention by donors

• Review donor’s strategy, instrument and potentials in order to ensure accurate targeting

For further information contact:drra@echo-bangkok.org

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Plenary Discussion

China had requested for assistance for emergency response but ECHO encouraged a DRR
programme more than response. This happened in the Paciﬁc as well. Good chance that that
the 2 programmes will be fully ﬂedged DRR programmes in the 2 areas shortly.

1. Although there is more money available by EC, the time frame is short – DRR is process

oriented and the same time line cannot be put to all countries. Will EC consider lengthening
the time line like Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) of the United Kingdom has done
for tsunami response funds?

EC has different instruments and sources. One agency applied for pure CBDRR for 3 years

and was funded. ECHO is humanitarian and short term funding for 15 months 20 months
projects. We encourage implementation in phases. Next year we might have more
money and time but depends how much money and how much money can be spent in 20
months.

2. Has the EU funded DRR programmes under country programming?

In Bangladesh under the Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP) it started

in phase 1 and has been implemented for 3 years. It is in the 2nd phase. In India DRR
programmes are being implemented by EU for the past 5 years.

ECHO is aware that 15 months is not enough for DRR activities but this is also why a great deal

of scrutiny and importance on the proposed strategy and how it will be mainstreamed.
ECHO does give funds and time to test methodologies and then mainstream it. So its not
a stand-alone approach and the expectation is that it contributes to a wider framework.
That’s why ECHO looks in to the experience of the organization, the networks it is part
of and partnerships established, when giving funds.

3. In Philippines the DRR bill is still with ﬁnance ofﬁcials who are trying to analyze the

beneﬁts of investing on DRR. Based on experience how do you deal with cost analysis and
how can we work with our legislators? Preparation is not pre funded. The bill is meant to
change the paradigm from response to preparedness. Government says investment is too
much. How should we strategize to convince our legislators to save lives and property?

Authorities and ofﬁcials are convinced through statistics, such as number of children
drowning before developing their skills and how many lives saved after they learnt to swim.
Giving practical facts and ﬁgures is very useful.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

5.IFRC Framework for
Community Safety & Resilience

Introduction to the Theme

Central to practitioners’ deliberations and discussions is that DRR strengthens the safety and
resilience of communities. Together we have been implementing DRR related projects and
programmes for years but with the world becoming increasingly unsafe as a result of changing
climate and eroding natural resource base coupled with an expanding population more needs
to be done. Therefore it is important to build on the foundations of previous work and do
more of what works and is effective. In 2003, the 28th International Conference of the Red
Cross and Red Crescent adopted the ﬁnal goal 3.1 of its Agenda for Humanitarian Action which
acknowledges the importance of DRR and undertakes measures to minimize the impact of
disasters on vulnerable populations. This session will demonstrate what the International Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement has been doing globally, regionally and locally to scale up
CBDRR activities aiming at building safer and more resilient communities, and focuses on
preparedness at different levels and how DRR links between each level.

5.1 Global Framework on Community Safety and Resilience

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Kaﬂey, IFRC

The presentation highlights the need for a community safety and resilience framework for the RCRC,
how it was developed, its core pillars, the key messages the framework tries to deliver and how the
framework can be applied to ensure community safety and resilience.

The RCRC Movement has been
involved in building safer and
resilient communities for more
than 15 years using different
approaches and components.
The Global Framework facilitates
the consolidation of RCRC
contributions with a focus on
disaster risk and reduction. The
Framework also helps to scale-
up RCRC approaches in building
community safety and resilience.

The Global Framework was
developed through a widespread
consultative process and
regional meetings were held in
Johannesburg, Katmandu, Penang,
Panama and Rabat, attended by
over 80 National Societies. Across the seven zones, a reference group was established to provide ongoing
feedback on the Framework reﬂecting National Society concerns. At the secretariat level the Framework
has been consistently under the scrutiny of a DRR advisory group with representatives from all sectoral
departments, while the disaster preparedness and risk reduction working group of the participating
National Societies has also been regularly consulted. Suggestions and recommendations from all these
groups have been incorporated into the Framework.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

The following are the core elements of the framework:

• Risk-informed humanitarian response (This helps to ensure that the provision of relief, while

focusing on the relevant immediate needs and recovery, also considers existing risks and the
minimizes future risks)

• Country–Speciﬁc mitigation, prevention and adaptation (This promotes the practices as well as

concepts of mitigation, prevention and adaptation of NS as per the speciﬁc hazards, capacities and
mandates of NS in country)

• Sector-based programming to build across the disaster management (This encourages each NS

to establish linkages among sectors such as Health and Nutrition, Water and sanitation, shelter,
etc. to integrate and mainstream DRR and climate change adaptation into sectoral programming
to build community safety and resilience)

• Core RCRC cross-cutting components include

- Risk assessment and identiﬁcation and establishment of community based early warning and

prediction.

-  Community-based disaster preparedness.
-  Advocacy, education and awareness-raising.
-  A strong auxiliary relationship with local and national governments.
-  Partnerships with international, governmental, nongovernmental and community based

organizations.

The key outputs of the framework are:

• It provides an umbrella under which all RCRC community safety and resilience programming can be

developed and implemented in a multi-sectoral integrated manner.

• It helps to consolidate and re-emphasize RCRC contributions in building community safety and

resilience and therefore facilitates a process to ensure further scaling up.

• It facilitates the integration of DRR components into recovery operations.
• It highlights the needs of wider (Local to global) and committed partnership to achieve its objectives

in building safer and resilience communities.

For further information contact: ifrcmm-g30@redcross.org.mm

5.2 Global Alliance on Disaster Risk Reduction

Mr. Daniel Kull, IFRC & Mr. Michael Annear, IFRC

This presentation provides the rationale for the Global Alliance, it’s objectives and modalities. It also
shares the key achievements of the Global Alliance.

For the successful building of community safety and resilience, partnerships are key both in countries
where the RCRC has enjoyed a long presence such as Nepal and Bangladesh, but also in countries where
DRR work has been new such as Syria and Morocco. Peer-to-peer learning between countries is also of
vital importance. Based on this recognition of the necessities of partnership and a growing need for
increasing and improving disaster risk reduction, the RCRC launched the Global Alliance for Disaster Risk
Reduction (GADRR) in 2008.

The GADRR aims therefore to scale up our efforts in reducing disaster risk among the most vulnerable
communities. Three programatic outputs will contribute to this:

• Increasing community-orientation in global and national DRR policies and strengthening national

and local DRR institutions.

• Expanding community-based programming to identify and tackle disaster risks.
• Integrating communtiy-centered DRR into comprehensive disaster risk management.

Within the GADRR the RCRC has global partners such as the UNISDR, WB-GFDRR, various donors (including
ECHO, DfID and Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs among others), and Zurich Financial Services.
Zurich Financial Services is providing technical “volunteering” to IFRC in terms of providing technology
support, and assisting in initiatives like the Cost Beneﬁt Analysis on DRR to be done in the Philippines and
Sudan. They also advise RCRC in managing the risks of currency ﬂuctuations.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

There were originall 20 focus countries in the GADRR: 5 in Asia Paciﬁc, 5 in the Americas, 6 in Africa, 2 in
the Middle East and North Africa, and 2 in Europe and Central Asia. Two more have now joined ofﬁcially
(India and Indonesia), and at least ten more have shown interest in joining. The existing focus country
National Societies in Asia Paciﬁc (Bangladesh, Cambodia, Cook Islands, Nepal and Tonga) are leading
globally in terms of implementing under the GADRR.

Within the GADRR, National Societies are developing longer-term (3-5 year) DRR strategic plans, based on
baseline assessments that include self-assessments of National Society experiences and capacities as well
as an understanding of the vulnerability and risk context of the countries and communities where they
work. Once established, the National Societies will work with partners to develop speciﬁc proposals for
activities within the strategic plans. We will all report on some base globally-agreed indicators to track
our global progress. Inherent in this concept is the sharing of knowledge and expertise between National
Societies and partners.

It must be highlighted that while global, national and local partners are involved, the ownership and
management of the DRR strategic process and implementation rests ﬁrmly with the National Society.

For further information contact:daniel.kull@ifrc.org

5.3 South-East Asia DRR Framework and linkages to national
framework

Ms. Bevita Dwi M, Indonesian Red Cross (PMI)

The presentation provides information on how the Southeast Asia DRR framework was developed and
how it links to the global framework. The framework is shown as a market place for National Societies
in SEA to consider various options when programming for DRR and shares how best National Societies can
disseminate this framework down to staff and volunteer levels and link it to national DRR frameworks
such as PMI framework. The framework is developed based on the exsting experience considering their
capacity and mandate.

The rationale to develop the framework was that Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters
(CRED) calculated that 2008 was the third costliest year in the last 20 years for disasters, with economic
damage worth over US$ 181 billion. It is recorded in 2008 that 321 disaster events occurred at country
level, with 20 in the Philippines, 16 in Indonesia, 10 in Viet Nam, 5 in Thailand and the deadly Cyclone
Nargis in Myanmar and there is a general increase in vulnerable to climate-related hazards such as
tropical cyclones, ﬂoods, landslides, droughts, and sea level rise etc.

Purpose of the Framework :

• To build on the foundations of previous work and do more of what works and is effective
• How RC can up-scale activities to ensure that the basic objectives of safety and resilience are

being addressed in Southeast Asia

The Framework has the following elements:

Element 1

– Risk informed humanitarian response such as Disaster Response teams, Branch development,

Transitional Homes, databases, logistics

Element 2

– Country speciﬁc mitigation, prevention and adaptation activities such as public awareness,

capacity building, VCA, Participatory planning, mitigation and youth development

Element 3

– Sector based programming to build across the disaster management Spectrum such as

Organizational Development, Health and Social Services, Livelihood, microﬁnance and food security

Element 4

– Cross cutting issues such as Risk Assessment and establishment of CBEWS Advocacy, education

and promotion, Partnership and Networking & Gender

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

The need for a Strategic Plan of the Indonesian Red Cross (Palang Merah Indonesia)

• To scale up PMI’s activities, projects and programs at all sectors (Disaster Management, Health,

Organizational Development etc) in reducing disaster risk to achieve community safety and
resilience in Indonesia

• Contribute to National, Regional, Global Commitment on DRR

The linkage between Global and National Frameworks

Phase 1

of developing the framework is to understand the importance of DRR. This is done by Advocacy and
Sensitization with the Board Members, DRR Orientation to National Societies’ staff and Volunteers and
to gain support and commitment from related stakeholders such as IFRC, ICRC, PNSs, Community, LGU
and others.

In Phase 2

baseline information is collected through primary and secondary data collection, utilization of Vulnerability
and Capacity Assessment (VCA), systematization, analyzing and interpreting the data, data validation,
identifying gaps and capacity and identifying priorities and indicators.

Phase 3

is when DRR is mainstreamed by ﬁrst appointing a DRR focal person and integrating DRR in to National
Societies strategic plans, standard operating procedures, guidelines and plans of actions, all training
curriculums of Disaster Management, Health and Organizational Development and respective modules,
strengthening Capacity to deliver and scale up programmes in DRR, maintaining partnership and
networking and ﬁnally monitoring and evaluation.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Plenary Discussion

1. What does IFRC mean by partnerships and networking?

In Myanmar partnerships are encouraged and as we are ,Federation, trying to coordinate
with all the partners. We share knowledge and have drawn up major indicators of resilience
proﬁle for ongoing nargis recovery operation. Same times we also explore the possibility of
the community sharing resources skills and knowledge. We look at what indigenous practices
are still being carried out in the communities by themselves. In Nepal, DPNet is functioning.
The main aim of DP net is to share the information as well as build capacity of members’
organization. Including Nepal Red Cross, more than 60 partners are the part of this network.

2. How can volunteers be accepted in this programme?

In RCRC the grassroot volunteer is the backbone and the heart the activities at the front line.
In School based DRR we train teachers and junior volunteers apart from school safety but
disseminate DRR safety messages. RCRC is one of largest humanitarian organization with more
than 100 million volunteers around the world. The volunteers are part of the community who are
nominated and selected by the community. Community is consulted about a DRR programmes.

3. There is already a Global Alliance of Civil Society Organizations, how
is this alliance different to the IFRC’s Global Alliance?

The RCRC GADRR was created in 2008 and is different from the Civil Society Organization
(CSO) alliance. While globally the IFRC support’s the conclusions of the CSO alliance, the
IFRC is not engaging directly in order to protect our neutrality. However National Societies
are free to engage with the CSO alliance as they please, with some already contributing. The
RCRC strongly supports the conclusions delivered in the Views from the Frontline study.

4. How do we engage young people and children in this Global Alliance?

In Indonesia, children in DRR are under the education system. BAPPENS is doing a DRR
programme on “How to integrate in DRR in education and each subject”. RC youth is
established for elementary and junior and senior schools children. We have done training for
RC youth on safer and resilient schools.

RC in Cook Islands is informed by a policy framework. 3 programatic outputs and increased
orientation in DRR policies and encourages community based DRR and strengthening of
national society capacity to deliver and sustain scaled yup programmes in DRR.

5. How can we apply Cost Beneﬁt Analysis (CBA) into future DRR
programming?

The RCRC is developing a methodology for this based on a case study last year in Nepal and
two more this year in the Philippines and Sudan. The lessons-learned in these case studies will
be combined to develop a common methodology for practitioners. While it is important to
show the economic worth of DRR, the process of CBA is even more important to gain insights
into what works best. On a related topic, in October it is expected that the World Bank
GFDRR will release a document on the economics of DRR but it is very technical. Part of our
recommendations to the GFDRR was to summarise the outcomes in appropriate language that
is applicable for ﬁeld practitioners.

Speciﬁc questions were directed to different panel member. Listed below are key outcomes
from this session.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Panel Discussion with Sanjeev, Daniel, Bevita and
5 Global Alliance National Societies (Cambodia,
Bangladesh, Tonga, Nepal and Cook Islands)

1. What process has your NS gone through as preparation to join the Global Alliance for DRR?

Tonga

Our landmass is almost like Singapore. In the paciﬁc there is no high mountain to run to so
you have to know how to swim. Water safety is a high priority. When water is scarce when sea
levels rise we have to depend on rain water. Tonga has completed the baseline assessment.

Bangladesh RC

Bangladesh RCs main priorities is the base line assessment in addition to this we had already
put in place several programmes.

We have scaled-up the Cyclone Preparedness Programme – Cyclones Sidr and Aila struck
outside of the areas covered in the CPP programme areas, we have a large scale earthquake
preparedness programme in Dhaka, ﬂood risk reduction programmes, knowledge management
system for the DRR community and national HQ and we have strengthening existing policies
while mainstreaming CCA. DRR is a holistic and comprehensive process without partnerships
it is beyond our capacity to implement.

The following activities have been undertaken by Nepal RC
• Institutional capacity development by developing a strategic framework for DRR for use

as tool to operationalise commitments

• Scaling up DRR programmes in 75 districts affected by ﬂoods, landslides, ﬁres and

earthquakes.

• Coordination and collaboration with other partners and how to harmonize, good practices

and partnerships

• Building community capacity is aligned with programmes, we have many community

based programmes and have mainstreamed DRR in them. Lack of safe drinking water and
delivering services of hygiene and sanitation and inserting DRR for a holistic and multi
hazard approach

• The earthquake preparedness programme had developed an earthquake contingency plan

and further strengthened this and developed human resources to update contingency plans

2. Key message to other National Societies to convince them to join the Global Alliance.

Cambodia RC advices that one must be in a 4A status Awareness, Advocacy, Adaptation and
Adoption to approach a wide range of partnerships.

Nepal RC says that NS should better plan and explore resources ﬁnancial and human resources
to have a real impact in the community.

Tonga RC states that this programme is for grassroot and community level and is a down up
process. Needs must be identiﬁed at the grassroot level.

Mangroves For the Future is of the view that long term commitment from community and
government can bring positive impacts.

For further information contact:

Michael Annear, Head of Disaster Management Unit for AP:

michael.annear@ifrc.org

Patrick Fox, Disaster Management Coordinator for SEA,

patrick.fox@ifrc.org

Hung Ha Nguyen, DRR Programme Manager for SEA,

hungha.nguyen@ifrc.org

Seng Samban, DM Programme Ofﬁcer for SEA,

seng.samban@ifrc.org

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

6. Partnerships for CBDRR

Introduction to the Theme

Partnerships are the key to the success of any development initiative as they play a key role in
the sustainability of projects and programmes. In CBDRR it is no different, especially to network
with a range of stakeholders at the local, sub-national and national levels. It is important to
identify the common objective and highlight the beneﬁt to each of the stakeholders in the
partnership to enable a mutually beneﬁcial engagement. A number of mutually beneﬁcial
partnerships have been set up in recent years in the countries of the region. In some cases
they have commenced with a handful of members and throughout the years grown in to large
networks proving their versatility and success in activities they undertake. Partnerships at
national level have strengthened the coordination of actors at the local and sub-national
levels in promoting CBDRR, among a range of other beneﬁts. In this session representatives
of national forums and networks in South and Southeast Asia share their experiences of
strengthened coordination at different levels and share the challenges they face in sustaining
partnerships especially in promoting CBDRR.

6.1 Disaster Preparedness Network (DP-Net), Nepal

Mr. Ajay Chandra Lal

The presentation shares the context of disasters in Nepal, the environment within which it was possible to
work in partnership, and how a CBDRR project implemented through a partnership of several stakeholders
became the starting point in setting up the Disaster Preparedness Network (DP-Net).

Nepal stands at the 30th most vulnerable to earthquakes, 11th most vulnerable to ﬂoods and landslides
and 5th most vulnerable to climate change according to a global vulnerability ranking. In this backdrop,
every Nepalese has to face atleast two disasters per year. This means life, property, infrastructure and
heritage are exposed to high disaster risks. In Nepal, the State cannot afford to invest in DRR and in
terms of response, reaching the disaster affected areas is impossible due to mountainous terrain and
remoteness. This makes it very important that communities arm themselves with DRR and mitigation
knowledge as they have to help themselves till help arrives to their village.

DP-Net aims to assist individuals and organisations to prepare for, respond to and manage disasters should
they strike and works closely with Government of Nepal through its agencies concerned with disaster
preparedness and management. DP-Net complements the efforts of these agencies to inform and prepare
organisations and communities to deal effectively with disasters. In Nepal the Government organizations,
INGO and NGOs are collaborating well with the local communities and clubs. Partnerships have been set
up to orient communities on local practices and traditions in disaster risk reduction.

A case study in particular demonstrates how well communities have worked with a coalition of NGOs in
Nepal and also the foundation for setting up DP-Net. ActionAid Nepal, CARE Nepal and Oxfam GB Nepal
jointly implemented a Disaster Preparedness Programme (DPP) in ﬂood prone Terai districts through
local NGO and CBO partnerships with funding support from DIPECHO. At the outset partners agreed to
share resources, identify and improve local/traditional knowledge and to consider DRR as a development
initiative and giving communities ownership and working with local authorities to ensure maintenance
of public infrastructure, ensure sustainability of the program and activities, ensure the longevity of the
traditional and new CBOs and document and disseminate best practices.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

The key Lessons learnt during the implementation of the project as follows:

• The project target should be practical and realistic
• The project should partner with local technical ofﬁces for technical support from the very

beginning

•  Planed activities should be sensitive towards local festivals, agricultural activities and seasons
•  Document the process undertaken for future reference and review
•  Consistency in use of terms such as (VDRRC/VDMC /CDRRC/CDMC, Safe Exit, Safe Shelter,

Evacuation Route and Evacuation Shelter etc)

• Ensure consistency in maintenance funds through income generation activities

The project also had its challenges such as poor sustainability as communities had other priorities. In
a poor and vulnerable community there was a high demand for technical and ﬁnancial support, many
social barriers were faced in the implementation with low levels of awareness among the community,
changing local governments and shifting priorities of government and their shifting commitment, limited
availability of information and documentation to be able to share with communities in a format they can
relate to and reluctance of the community to work with NGO and INGOs.

For further information contact:dr_mpbchhetri@hotmail.com

6.2 Partnership for Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction in
Cambodia

Mr. Reaksmey Hong, CWS & Mr. Piseth Pel, Concern Worldwide, CBDRR-Cambodia

Members of the CBDRR partnership in Cambodia, range from government agencies to Non government
organizations and are categorized as DIPECHO and non-DIPECHO project partners. The presentation looks
in to the elements of partnerships that helps to strengthen CBDRR at various levels in Cambodia and the
lessons leant through the partnership.

DRR practitioners in Cambodia:

The overall objective of the
partnership is to promote
sharing of information and DRR
experiences among members
and stakeholders and increase
ﬁeld level coordination amongst
Cambodian DRR practitioners.
The partners meet every 3 or 4
months in either Phnom Penh or
in the Provinces, and the chair
of the Network is appointed on
a rotating basis and the agenda
is based on particular issues of
interest and country dialogs. The
meetings are conducted in Khmer
and in English when necessary to
ensure participation of all. The
ﬁrst meeting of the network was
held on the 1st of August 2005
and 12 meetings have been taken
place to date.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Key outcomes of the partnership include:

• Improved coordination from community to national level (Gov’t, NGOs, donors)
• DRR mainstreamed into the local planning process and formal education system for children and

women

• Improved local capacity in adapting, mitigating and reducing disaster risks in line with the DM

structures in Nepal

• Development of Strategic National Action Plan on DRR and Provincial DRR Action Plan
• Climate change adaptation and mitigation measures included to some extent in the DRR

projects/ initiatives

• DRR mainstreamed in 635 villages at 119 communes in 17 provinces including capacity building

on DM, role and responsibility clariﬁcation, CBDRM, HVCA, project monitoring and evaluation,
leadership, facilitation and communication skills, planning and public awareness raising

• Setting up the Mekong ﬂood early warning system including awareness raising activities among

the communities

• Preparation of joint IEC materials-leaﬂet, booklets and posters on ﬂood, draught and multi-

hazard preparedness

• Setting up of the Humanitarian Accountability Network (HANet) with 23 CNGO/ INGOs

members

Several elements were identiﬁed by the partners as key to strong partnerships, with good

governance as a core value,

• Involving all partners from the beginning
• Good

communication

•  Clarifying roles and responsibilities
•  Mutual respect, understanding and ﬂexibility
•  Build on existing structures and initiatives
•  Promoting a DRR platform at local to national level for cross sharing and learning

For further information contact: reaksmey@cwscambodia.org

6.3 Joint Advocacy Network Initiative (JANI) Viet Nam

Mr. Marten Mylius, CARE International, Viet Nam

The following presentation on the Advocacy Network Initiative in Viet Nam provides a glimpse of its
nature, membership and how the partnership element operated within the group. It will also show how
important such partnerships are for the longevity of a network at the national level.

JANIs membership consists of several government, INGO and NGO partners working in the ﬁeld of DRR.
It’s vision is to work towards building safer communities against disasters; at national level, the CBDRM
approach gains more Government focus and commitment and at the local level; communities become
safer against disasters through the application of CBDRM approaches.

The network operates as a project with 5 agencies taking responsibility to implement project components.
Care International is a contract holder with DG ECHO and coordinates the initiative and implements
selected activities. The agencies draw on their respective strengths and relationships – e.g. Save the
Children works with the Ministry of Education using their long standing experience on children and DRR.
All fourteen partner agencies get involved in the process of consultation, participation, contribution and
application. JANI evolved from a solely ECHO partner focused network to an inclusive initiative where
interested stakeholders were invited to join. The number of partners increased from 8 to 14 and now
includes the mass organization “Viet Nam Women’s Union” which is a major mile stone. The partnership
has enabled a close working relationship with the Government Disaster Management Center and does
not compete with other general coordination bodies such as Disaster Management Working Group. JANI
complements the work of DMWG in Viet Nam.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

There are 3 key pillars that uphold and strengthen the work of the network.

1. Disaster management practitioners apply a more coherent approach to DRR through online

information repository, CBDRM framework development and joint testing of IEC materials.

2. Development plans integrated in to CBDRM through policy dialog and inclusion of DRR in school

curriculum and advocacy

3. The general public have an increased awareness about DRR through joint awareness raising

events and training of journalists.

Each aspect of the project is led by a member. Led by the Canadian Centre for International Studies and
Cooperation (CECI), JANI has developed a National CBDRM-standards and guidelines handbook, including
a national CBDRM Training Resources Inventory which includes trainer networks, materials, etc.

CARE leads in JANI’s policy dialogs in Viet Nam and an
array of legislation relating to disaster risk management,
however the system has gaps, remains dispersed and lacks
cohesiveness limiting the ability to carry out efﬁcient and
effective DRM. The National Strategy for Natural Disaster
Prevention, Response and Mitigation till 2020 has identiﬁed
a process to develop and promulgate a DRM Law by 2012
through the consolidation of existing laws, policies and
mechanisms. JANI uses this momentum to involve civil
society into bilateral and multilateral policy dialogues.

ADPC leads the advocacy programme to integrate CBDRM
into the socio-economic planning process by conducting
Learning Workshops and training which aims to enhance
knowledge and skills on designing and implementing
advocacy strategies to integrate CBDRM into policy,
planning and programming of national and local authorities
in Viet Nam.

The JANI media Campaign is led by ActionAid and
involves selected journalists who are taken to CBDRM
projects and exposed to risk reduction work, the output
is a competition, where a jury consisting of 7 members
including 1 representative from Vietnamnet, 1 from the
Ministry of Information and Communication, 1 from the Journalist Association of Viet Nam, 1 from DMC
and 3 from JANI rewards the best quality work. This motivates journalists and creates awareness about
appropriate reporting for DRR.

Awareness raising activities of JANI are led by Save the Children United Kingdom. The National Disaster
Reduction Day falls on 22

May each year in Viet Nam and the International Disaster Reduction Day falls

on 2nd Wednesday of October and joint exhibitions are conducted by JANI members on these days. This
year’s key messages were linked with the global theme of ‘Safer Hospitals” of the UNISDR and WHO for
the period 2008-2009.

JANI’s communication strategy is to ensure practitioners possess expertise, knowledge and experience
in reducing disaster risk and vulnerability through a community-based approach. JANI is committed to
strengthen the capacity of Government staff on all administrative levels, communities and local partner
organizations and collaborate closely with the Government of Viet Nam and other international and
national policy makers.

For further information contact: marten@care.org.vn

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Stakeholders,

partners and beneﬁciaries:

▶

Regional collaboration: link DM practices

in Indonesia with Southeast Asian initiatives

including Community-Based Disaster Risk Redution

(CBDRR), policy reforms, and the promotion of

humanitarian standards

▶

Information centre: establish an information centre

for certain disasters e.g. the Merapi volcanic

eruption and Yogyakarta earthquake

▶

Interagency cooperation: implement various DM

projects with international organisations including

OXFAM GB, Care International Indonesia, UNOCHA,

UNDP, IFRC, UNESCO, UNICEF, HIVOS, USAID,

CORDAID, World Vision Indonesia, Save

the Children, AusAID, etc.

▶

Experience exchange: conduct thematic

public events regarding various DM

aspects and themes

6.4 Indonesian Society for Disaster Management (MPBI), Indonesia

Mr. Faisal Djalal

The key elements of partnership in the Indonesian Society for Disaster Management, MPBI along with a
brief background and rationale will be presented in this presentation. It will also look at the objectives,
approaches and outputs of the Society, its stakeholders, beneﬁciaries, the progress it has achieved as
well as challenges faced by the members.

The Masyarakat Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia (MPBI), Indonesian Society for Disaster Management
was established on the 3rd of March 2003 and is a non-proﬁt organization, envisioned to be an association
of disaster management (DM) practitioners, scientists, and enthusiasts from government, international/
national organizations and other DM entities in Indonesia. As an Association and Network, MPBI delves
more at the upper stream of concepts, policies, strategies and capacity building rather than the
implementation in the ﬁeld.

The MPBIs vision is to become an Indonesian society attaining their well-being through, inter alia,
effective management of disaster risks. MPBI Mission is to act as a critical partner to all DM practitioners
and promote implementation of professional DM practices which are in harmony with the concepts and
is based on ethical considerations.

Progress and achievements of the MPBI
can be summarized in the following manner.

Legislation: mobilised CSOs to promote the
academic concept of the DM legislation
to the Parliament and Government,
monitored its deliberations and
negotiations and provided technical
references leading to the ratiﬁcation
of the DM Law No 27/2007 and
continues to be involved in the
formulation of derivative policies
and its implementation at the sector
and locality level.

Policies: introduced the concept of
“Living with Risk” to propel the National
Action Plan on DRR and continues to
be the driver of integrating DRR in to
development planning at national and
local levels.

National Platform: facilitated the formation of the
national platform particularly regarding CSOs’ participation.

Standards: Introduced and conducted training on the Humanitarian Charter and SPHERE Minimum
Standards

CBDRM: has conducted the annual national symposium on CBDRM since 2005. The next (5

) CBDRM

conference will be held in Makasar, Celebes Island early October 2009.

Awareness raising and capacity development: Hosts national events in conjunction with the International
Disaster Risk Reduction days and conducts various DM public campaigns since 2003.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Publishes various DM guidelines including for:

•  The World Campaign: Disaster Risk Reduction Starts at School, 2007
•  Guidelines for Management of the Displaced, 2005
•  Hyogo Framework for Action, 2005 - 2015
•  SPHERE, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards, 2004
•  Guidelines: Standardized Procedures for Disaster Management,
•  Living With Risk; Community-Based Disaster Management
•  Disaster Management Guidelines: a Model, 2004, Local DM Ordinances Model, 2006
•  Local DM Action Plan Models, 2007, Contingency Planning,

Conducts various training including: SPHERE Training of Trainers (ToT) and basic trainings, DM Basic
training and TOTs, DM Thematic training and provides expert consultancy and advisory services.

Publications in 2009:

• The Indonesian language version of Erica Harper’s IDLO: International Law and Standards

Applicable in Natural Disasters.

• Jonathan Lassa, Puji Pujiono, Djuni Pristiyanto,Eko teguh Paripurno, Amin Magatani and Hening

Parlan’s CBDRM: The convenient Approach for Disaster Risk Reduction.

Since 2004, the MPBI has facilitated an annual event for practitioners to exchange experiences,
instruments and frameworks of CBDRM to build a community of practice in this signiﬁcant subject in
Indonesia. A series of symposia since August 2004 have mapped out the practices of CBDRM initiatives
in Indonesia, formulated and codiﬁed its methodology, practices, and framework, and reviewed the
State’s accountability in view of CBDRM relevance in the context of Disaster Management Law No. 24/
year 2007.

The 2009 National CBDRM Conference is aimed at analyzing application of instruments and framework of
CBDRM in climate change adaptation.

Challenges:

Indonesia has a large population and is geographically disadvantaged in terms of vulnerability to various
disasters and DRR is always a challenge. Raising people’s awareness and education in DRR, coordination
and cooperation among relevant DRR actors from government, community and private sectors, especially
with limited resources such as trained human resources and the decentralized system of governance is
also seen as a challenge. The recent global economic crisis and climate change is seen as a challenge in
maintaining the quality and standards in practicing CBDRM.

For further information contact: faisal.djalal@gmail.com

6.5 Disaster Management Working Group, Viet Nam

Ms. Phan Thi Thu Ha

The Disaster Management Working Group (DMWG) in Viet Nam is an informal national forum sharing and
coordinating Disaster management information including DRR activities, CBDRM, emergency preparedness
& response and sharing experiences and lessons learnt.

The DMWG was founded in 1999 and meet on monthly basis or when an emergency occurs. Its membership
includes Government representatives, UN Agencies, INGOs, NGOs, donors, research institutes and
individuals who review its Terms of Reference on an annual basis.

The Working Group has 4 objectives which guides its work. To improve coordination among all agencies
working in disaster management through information sharing, experience exchange and joint initiatives,
build the capacity of relevant agencies and practitioners in disaster management, initiate and contribute
toward policy dialogues for improving disaster-related policies and practices of policy makers and
implementers and improve coordination and collaboration in emergency response, especially after large
scale disasters

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Some of its activities include coordinated emergency preparedness and response, joint training activities
and workshops as well as sharing of standards, accountability, best practices, research projects, and
guidelines

The decision making is done through consensus whenever possible and key decisions of the DMWG are
made through consultation with members and requires unanimous support from core group members. Key
decisions include, but are not limited to statements by the DMWG, advocacy/policy messages, DMWG Terms
of Reference revision, core membership and chairmanship and methodologies of joint assessments.
A core group of member organizations share the management and administration duties of the DMWG.
The current core members are Hanoi University of Public Health; UN PCG 10 (UN Agencies); International
Federation of Red Cross/ Netherlands Red Cross; Disaster Management Centre; DWF; Save the Children;
NGO Resource Centre; CARE; World Vision and Oxfam. An organisation assumes the role of Chair of
the DMWG for a period of 6 months and the Chair is selected by the core group members based on the
voluntary commitment and capacity of eligible organizations.

The Chair acts as a focal point and representative of the DMWG and facilitates communication among
members of the working group, while maintaining ongoing contact with the NGO Resource Centre and
attends Working Group Coordinators’ Meetings. It gives inputs for both WG annual report and INGOs
statement on behalf of DMWG.

The DMWG holds monthly meetings and utilizes the VUFO-NGO Resource Centre and maintains an e-mailing
list as a key channel of communication among DMWG members, for higher level when a disaster strikes
PACCOM (The People’s Aid Coordinating Committee) and CCFSC (Central Committee for Flood and Storm
Control) also conduct joint coordination for emergency response activities.
Ref websites include - www.vietpeace.org.vn and http://www.ccfsc.org.vn

The DMWG also provides contributions/statements to all
policy forums (including Central Government meetings,
NDMP-Inter Agency WG meetings and workshops. It also
conducts research projects on disaster management,
coordinates joint activities on national and international
disaster reduction days and gets involved in the education
sector in DRR (school curriculum etc)

Major achievements of the DMWG are:

•  Developed Commune/village/district/province DRR Action plans
•  DRR/CBDRM framework, including enhancing VCA
•  Household level capacity building and Early Warning Awareness
•  Rescue, evacuation and ﬁrst aid programmes
•  IEC campaigning and swimming training
•  DRR education for students and teachers
•  DRR for children, women and other vulnerable groups including children’s clubs
•  Small scale infrastructure development
•  DRR integrated in livelihoods and food security programmes
•  Formulating the joint assessment teams and conducting joint assessments post disaster

For further information contact: haphan@ngocentre.org.vn

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Plenary Discussion

Status of DRR Legislation:

Nepal has a national legal framework for DRR but we have been advocating for changes and
revision with a new Bill, it is now in Parliament.

In Indonesia, a Bill for Disaster Management and establishing a local and national level
agency for DM this is the next step.

Cambodia has a National action plan, SNAP which is in place and developed under guidance of
UNISDR and funding from DIPECHO. Consultation did take place with Government agencies and
NGOs for feedback. Provincial framework needs to be prepared for a provincial action plan.

The need for JANI, when the DMWG is already there in Viet Nam:

The DMWG is a coordination body with a much broader mandate than JANI. JANI is a project
based activity with and community based approach. DMWG is wider and developed over
time, coordination and introduction of a cluster approach that shares lessons and conducts
joint assessment and advocate with donors. JANI has less organizations as members and has
a ﬁxed timeframe and budget and focuses on particular issues.

Agencies have to be dedicated and contribute resources. DMWG is very dormant in the ﬁrst
part of the year then after the ﬁrst typhoon it balloons up and you see many members. JANI
continuously provides feedback to the DRR network and takes them on board in its work.

The DMWG is an extension of the NGO forum and has more sustainability as JANI works on
a limited timeframe and budget. DMWG shares information on activities of Government
without which there would be no space to interact with NGOs.

The role of the MPBI with existing UN country team and the UN disaster
management team in Indonesia:

The UN agencies in Indonesia, UNISDR in partnership with BAPPENAS as the national body,
local and regional authorities work in partnership with Ministry of Home Affairs. MPBI has
direct partnerships with BAPPENAS without MoUs. If MPBI engages in any activities with UN
funding we have to partner with National agencies to do so.

In terms of consortiums on education in DRR, as a free and independent association, MPBI has
set up a consortium with UN and other agencies doing children’s education and school safety
for capacity building and dealing with issues of developing education and curriculum.

Sustainability of networks:

In Viet Nam, the disaster season always brings about a need for coordination and donors are
pushing for this constantly. Most INGOs incorporate formation or joining a network in their
project proposals. They reﬂect the annual working plan of the working group so it is easier
for donors to see and fund. DPNet stressed that if the demand for the type and quality of
service the network provides exist then institution will exist. Flexibility to adapt, promoting
volunteerism, having internal resources through membership fee or fund raising activities is
essential. External help is required too to maintain and sustain.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

At MPBI it is honorary work however the staff at
the secretariat are paid a salary. A focal person
for a certain sector or subject or consortium is
appointed. Every issue that we work on is on an
activism basis where we make a plan and continue
meetings in a dynamic way.

How often do your network or volunteers
meet together to prepare for DRR:

DMWG and JANI meet monthly. DMWG gets early
warning we get information from the Meteorological
Ofﬁce and we monitor the situation every 4 hours for 72 hours. The group prepares for joint
assessments and mechanism to begin dialog with the Government. If the situation is needed
we approach Government to grant access to affected area within 24 hours.

How long does decision making and response time take during a disaster:

The DWMG Chairman calls an emergency meeting and everyone joins and will make decision
right away at the meeting. For the ﬁrst 6 months of the year we have joint assessment and
list of joint assessment members. The time period for the assessment varies, does not have
a separate budget and depends on Working Group members availability. We have to report
back in 72 hours. Discussions are held with UN and People Aid Coordinating Committee
(PACCOM) and a decision is taken to issue a national appeal or international appeal.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

7.Innovative approaches for
implementing CBDRR

Introduction to the Theme

Disasters have different impacts on different populations. Accordingly approaches for risk
reduction should also be socially inclusive and address the different needs of the communities
and especially cater to the most vulnerable in the community. Equally important is to address
the growing risk from climate change by adopting suitable measures for adaptation and
giving importance to ecosystem based approaches for natural resource management. This
session presents innovative approaches on implementing CBDRR which involves children,
elderly and the disabled in implementing community based natural resource management
programs. The session would consist of two sections, presentations on sharing experiences on
innovative approaches for implementing CBDRR and group discussions on providing speciﬁc
recommendations to address some of these issues.

7.1 Social Inclusion and CBDRR

Mr. Godfred Paul, HelpAge International, Thailand & Ms. Sae Kani, ASB, Indonesia

The presentation explores innovative approaches to involve
marginalized groups such as older people and persons with
disabilities in DRR activities and their capacity to contribute
to CBDRR at the local level.

“Older people contribute to their communities, their
decades of accumulated experience, knowledge and
understanding and this insight makes them an essential
resource and potential partner in developing emergency
preparedness and response programmes” the report; Older
People in Emergencies: Considerations for Action and
Policy Development, WHO, 2008.

Helpage International works with communities to:

•  Promote a developmental approach to emergencies and engage in long-term development
•  Reduce vulnerability to the impact of disasters and strengthen capacity
•  Reinforce the positive role that older people can play in planning and mitigation Older people can

get involved in CBDRR through:

• data collection exercises such as village mapping, historical trend lines, transect walks, ranking,

surveys

• sharing their wide range of (indigenous) knowledge & experiences including traditional healing and

crafts

•  motivating others to share their stories of personal courage in adversity
•  preservation and transmission of cultural heritage through stories and activities
•  Relief targeting and distribution
•  support in recovery and reconstruction
•  ﬁnancial support to their family

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Stakeholders include older people themselves, Government institutions, departments and ofﬁcials,
Donors and humanitarian organizations, Local NGOs and youth groups and clubs.

Some suggested good practices which would involve and mobilize older people include, facilitating
medical mobile units, federating older peoples associations so that they work in unison, small scale
livelihood support programmes to promote DRR, conducting surveys led by older peoples associations,
introducing insurance for poor households, engaging older people as community volunteers, conducting
age-friendy programmes and collaborating efforts between HelpAge and British Red Cross Society (BRCS)
conducting DRR training to partners, Older Peoples Associations and local government and broadcasting
radio programmes on age-friendly DRR.

Some of the key lessons learnt in involving older people in DRR programmes in the community were:

1. Speciﬁc inclusion of older people as a vulnerable group into general relief and rehabilitation

programmes prevents them from becoming marginalized

2. Including disaggregated data of older people particularly of their health, livelihoods and shelter

conditions in all surveys and analysis provides a more overall picture of the community

3. Support the establishment of older people’s associations as an effective tool for livelihood support

distribution and related initiatives

4. Delegate responsibilities to older people’s representatives so that they are included and part of

the process

5. Introduce the community-based homecare model as an effective way of befriending and reaching

out to older people

6. Service delivery points to older people should be made as accessible or adaptable as possible
7. Enhance DRR with emphasis on preparedness plans that include older people at household and

community levels

For further information contact: goddy@helpageasia.org

The presentation from Arbeiter Samariter Bund (ASB) Indonesia focuses on a project for children with
disabilities to increase their education and physical access to schools and involve them in CBDRR
programmes.

The objective of the project is to provide DRR education and widen access (Information and Physical
access) for children with disabilities in the community.

The targeted beneﬁciaries of the project were Teachers, education supervisors and children with
disabilities (CwD) in Special Needs Schools, Inclusive Schools. The programme also targeted CwDs who
are not in formal education systems.

The project conducted training and simulations on how to assist CwDs during evacuation. It was important
that teachers truly understood the needs of CwDs and in one particular simulation of an evacuation drill
a blindfolded teacher expressed the empathy and concern “I never realised that it was so scary to walk
outside if I cannot see where I was going…”

Teachers conduct inclusive DRR lessons in their classrooms and all children learn together how to prepare
for disasters and how can assist each other with no segregation or discrimination within the classroom.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Training for disabled children who are not in formal education
was done with their family members and neighbors who
were encouraged to participate in their education process.
Hazard identiﬁcation within their household by the other
family members and learn how to set their interior safe for
their disabled children. The project created a community
hazard map indicating the vulnerable populations and special
evacuation routes for CwDs and their families.

CwDs and their family
conduct simulation drill together with their neighbors. It
is important to involve the neighbors and discuss who will
assist CwDs if there is a disaster.

Disability is not always only physical and mobility issue. Deaf
and blind people who cannot access to
information can also be at risk. DRR preparedness education
and regular practice can help to them overcome their
limitation when a disaster happens.

The project team improved the access within the school
such as constructing paved pathways, ramps to enter the
school and signals indicating the correct pathway especially
for blind children and those in wheel chairs.

The project faced many challenges in their endeavor to ensure disabled children were included in CBDRR
activities in the village. They are as follows:

• General low awareness and “hidden” discrimination against people with disabilities among

practitioners and stakeholders

• Awareness raising should be done within CBOs and NGOs before mobilizing the wider community
• Some DRR practitioners assume special skills are required to work with disabled people and

therefore limit inclusion of disabled groups in overall activities, however it only requires listening
to disabled people and planning together

• Disabled children, adults and disabled peoples organizations should be involved in planning for

their own safety in order to address their needs and concerns

• It is important to change the perception of the community that disabled people are not “helpless”

are in fact resources in the CBDRR programmes.

• Donors should have stronger guidelines for disability inclusive DRR as they do for “Gender”.

Requesting that proposals cover “Vulnerable populations” is not enough to make people actively
engage with disability issues “disability” needs to be explicitly mentioned.

For more information contact: asb.saekani@gmail.com

7.2 Linking CBDRR, Environment and Natural Resource
Management

Mr. Anshuman Saikia, IUCN, Thailand & Mr. Bruce Ravesloot, Raks Thai Foundation, Bangkok

The presentation links CBDRR with the environment and natural resource management as an innovative
approach and shared the challenges of the approach.

In the backdrop of socio-economic trends such as poverty, potential loss, unplanned urban growth, lack
of awareness and institutional capacities and physical limitations such as poor land use planning, housing
and infrastructures located in hazard prone areas coupled with increasing environmental impacts such as
oil spills, coastal, watershed, forest and wetland degradation, increases natural hazards and vulnerability
day by day.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Recognizing that Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Environmental Management (EM) are closely linked
and that it is essential to systematically integrate environmental management into disaster risk reduction
framework and vice-versa, the Disaster Environment Working Group for Asia (DEWGA) consists of six
founding institutions from the Asia region, committed to increase the synergy between the two sectors
and promote effective integration of environmental management concerns into disaster risk reduction
programs and vice versa.

DRR is a sustainable development concern, and in order to reach the status of sustainable development
good environmental management procedures should be set up. Both DRR and environmental management
address vulnerability and insecurity, improves lives and livelihoods, assets and goods, builds resources
and investments and various products, services, vital infrastructure can be seen as output. DRR and
environmental management generates jobs and creates income, so does more than just alleviate
poverty.

Changing approach from disaster management to DRR for Sustainable Development

In this backdrop, the Disaster
Environment Working Group for
Asia (DEWGA) was established
in 2007 as a semi-formal,
open-ended, regional, action-
oriented and cross-sectoral
partnership framework. The
initial memberships included
3 environment organisations,
2 DRR-focused organisations,
1 humanitarian / development
organisation and 2 UN observers /
advisory organizations.

The objectives of DEWGA was to:
• Serve as collective body to advocate and promote linkage between DRR and environmental

management

•  Create space for partners to identify and undertake bilateral or joint programmes of work
•  Exchange information on new and upcoming initiatives
•  Actively promote integration of DRR and environmental sustainability into respective work

programmes

The value addition of such a group was that each of the member organizations had better informed
long-term (organizational) strategies, improved utilization and consolidation of technical approaches,
the partnership creating opportunity for comprehensive technical & “constructive” M&E of projects and
programs, project to program shift towards integrated development solutions: inﬂuencing national and
international development agendas such as climate change adaptation and improved improved donor
appeal especially for joint funding opportunities.

However as in many regional and national level networks DEWGA also faces challenges in engaging and
linking DRR to ecosystems management, such as:

• All member organizations have a full agenda and have limited time for interaction
• Balancing the sharing/networking role which needs substantive work has effects on the long-term

vision of the group

• Managing membership expansion requires more commitment
• Reaching national (member) organizations

For further information contact:anshuman@iucnt.org

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

7.3 DRR and Climate Change Adaptation

Mr. Febi Dwirahmadi, PMI & Ms. Marilou Talingting, PNRC

Experiences from both the Indonesian Red Cross (PMI) and the Philippines National Red Cross (PNRC)
highlights the relationship between DRR and CCA and how the work of National Societies of the RCRC link
DRR and CCA. IFRC’s climate change centre assists the National Societies to integrate climate change
and introduce adaptive measures into existing programs and an example of an adaptive project will be
shared in this segment. The experiences of both National Societies have also generated key messages on
the best ways to link DRR and CCA into existing activities.

The Indonesian RC has identiﬁed the following as similarities and differences between CCA and DRR:

Similarities

Differences

Same objectives

Disaster risk reduction engages with a broader range

disaster

Same beneﬁts

Backed globally by different institutions and

mechanisms

(UNFCCC

and

HFA)

promotes changes in policies, laws,

DRR more concerned with recent hazard,

training, and education

meanwhile CCA future hazard or new potential risks

Need involvement of all stakeholders

DRR more practical application,

CCA

theoretical

application.

Essentially climate change exacerbates the frequency and intensity of hydro meteorological disasters and
adds new disaster risks. So CC can be identiﬁed as yet another hazard in a long list of hazards which DRR
activities try to mitigate or minimise.

The following effects can be listed as impacts of climate change relative to the pre-industrial era, as per
2007 UNESCAP publication.

Impacts on food supplies such as increasing temperature causing crop yields to reduce in some areas
especially in developing regions and increase in some areas.

Impacts on water such as disappearing small mountain glaciers disappear, rising sea levels threatening
many major coastal cities and decrease in water availability in especially in the Mediterranean and
southern African region.

Impacts on eco systems such as extensive damage to coral reefs and an increasing number of species
facing extinction

Extreme weather events such as rising intensity of storms, forest ﬁres, droughts, ﬂooding and heat waves.

All these effects contribute to an increasing risk of dangerous
feedback and abrupt large scale shifts in climate system.

IFRCs Climate Change centre in the Netherlands has supported
National Societies to bridge CCA and DRR activities since
2002, which have been implementing programmes based on
the “Triple A” principle of Awareness, Action and Advocacy
+ Analyses. The centre also supported the preparation of a
RCRC Climate Guide in November 2007.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

PMI has linked DRR and CCA are by integrating CCA in PMI DM Policy, Strategic Plans, Standard Operating
Procedures, Guidelines and Plans of Action, all of DM Training curricular, IEC Material, institutilizing
CCA into DRM and PMI DM Organizational Structure and engaging in small scale community level climate
adaptaion activities.

They have also included risks of climate change in community based risk
mapping, i.e in PRA VCA activities, engaged in advocacy, education and
promotion of risk reduction awareness through:
Youth Larva Observer Vols, Biopori, waste management, traditional
art performance (lenong), water rescue training for community, ﬂood
early warning system, talk show in radio and national television and
microﬁnance activities.

In 2008, the RCRC Climate Change Center supported the Philippine National Red Cross in mainstreaming
Climate Change in the existing DRR program.

The following actions were undertaken by the Philippines Red Cross to integrate CCA in DRR.

• Conducting research and producing a paper on the effects of climate change in the Philippines
• Identiﬁcation of areas in the existing training modules of the PNRC DRR programme, where CCA

activities can be linked and integrated

• Integration and mainstreaming of climate change issues and adaptation measures into existing

community-based DM and health training modules

• Integration of CCA module in existing IEC materials of the PNRC

Key messages from the Philippines NRC on their experience in integrating CCA and DRR:
• DRR and CCA should not be treated as a stand-alone programs
• The present effects of climate change in the Philippines will increase to more severe disasters

brought by changing climate pattern as time goes by

• Always look for areas of integration of CCA in disaster response and preparedness
• Communities should understand that changing climate patterns will increase their vulnerability

to hydro-meteorological hazards

• The DRR activities that are being done currently can

be utilized to mitigate the effects of climate change;
such as hazard mapping, risk and resource mapping
and mitigation activities

• Mainstreaming CCA into DRR will ensure that the

community does not view CCA as products of scientist
study but rather part of the disaster preparedness,
response and mitigation approaches

For further information contact:febi.dwirahmadi@ifrc.org

7.4 Summary of Recommendations from Group Discussions

7.4.1 Child Focused CBDRR

Moderator: Mr. Avianto Amri, Plan International & Rapporteur: Mr. Sisira Kumara, ADPC

The group discussion began with some thoughts by Plan International on Children and young people
leading change in building local resilience.

The background to child focused DRR was the outcomes of the 2009 Global Platform where children were
seen as strong agents for change and should be involved in the decision-making process, especially when
the decisions affect their lives. Several goals were set at the Global Platform, such as conducting National
assessments of safety of existing education structures by 2011, DRR to be included in all school curricula
by 2015 and the continuous sharing of knowledge, including indigenous and traditional knowledge, and
ensuring easy, systematic access to best practice and tools of international standards.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Children of all ages play a signiﬁcant role within the home, especially taking care of livestock, collecting
drinking water from the rivers or water sources, collecting ﬁrewood, taking care of their younger siblings
and undertaking typical chores such as cleaning the home.
Some of the challenges faced in child focused DRR were that;

•  Disaster management has been dominated by top-down relief efforts targeted at adults.
•  Children is still seen as passive actors/ victims
•  Children are still the most vulnerable group as they have limited access to information and are not

included in DRR work.

The group looked in the current context of children in DRR where children as seen as “strong agents
of change” and young people are seen as effective drivers of change. Especially since approx. 30% of
population consists of children and at present children are better educated than their parents and it
would be an effective way to communicate massages right into almost every household.

There are different perception of risks among children and adults and children can be risk communicators,
through the use of generational knowledge transfer, use participatory tools, peer learning among children.
In post disaster situations, malnutrition is a driving factor to increase vulnerabilities of children and
therefore solutions should originate from children themselves as it is an effective way of reducing overall
risks within the community.

The group highlighted several aspects of child participation in DRR

• Child

manipulation

• Child

tokenism

•  Assigned but informed
•  Consulted and informed
•  Adult initiated DRR shared decisions with children
•  Child initiated and directed
•  Co-initiated, shared decisions with adults

It was recognized that generating knowledge and understanding among parents was still is a challenge
and in most cases decisions would be taken by the parents in the family context and most of the time
it was hard to sell this concept to Governments, teachers and parents due to the various way in which
children can be manipulated in the process.

The participation of children in DRR is a process and it cannot be done within one or two workshops.
Parents should be involved and informed on this concept from the start of a programme and children
should be at the heart of the process.

Recommendations to involve children in CBDRR:

• Conducting awareness programmes with the Govt on risk knowledge and vulnerabilities
• Establishing children’s organizations and ensure they are identiﬁed as a stakeholders in DRR

programmes

• Conduct training in such a way that children share their knowledge with younger brothers &

sisters

• Establish minimum standards for the involvement of children and encourage the volunteerism

spirit

• Involve children for VCAs in innovative ways and fun

ways

• Recognize the difference between Child focused and

Child centered CBDRR programmes

• Acknowledge that during emergency periods children

should be with parents and not segregated in to
orphanages or care homes.

• Post-disaster recovery phase should be child friendly

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

7.4.2 School Safety and CBDRR

Moderator: Ms. Ronilda Co, ADPC, presented by Mr. Eng Kimly, MOEYS, Cambodia,
& Mr. Tao Van Dang, IFRC and Rapporteur: Mr. Hussein Macarabon, ADPC

Experiences of School safety and mainstreaming CBDRR in the education sector was share through the
experience of a programme implemented by the Ministry of Education Youth and Sports in Cambodia.

The Department of Curriculum Development under the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports initiated
the ‘Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in the Education sector (MDRD-EDU)’ project since June 2007,
in partnership with the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) and the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) with support of the European Commission Humanitarian Aid department (ECHO). The
project is expected to conclude in December 2009.

The objective of the project:

1. Increase knowledge, awareness and formal education on disaster risk reduction at all levels to

control damage to school environments caused by disasters

2. Contribute to the reduction of school children’s vulnerabilities and loss of life
3. Develop guidelines for design of schools so the buildings can be used as emergency shelters

The approach used by the project was to check the existing curriculum in grades 4-6 and 7-8 for integrating
newly developed DRM module. In grade 4-6 two subjects; Practical Science and Social Studies and in
lower secondary; Geography and Earth Science were selected for integrating DRR modules. A working
group was set up with all key stakeholders who reviewed the curriculum in basic education and model
lessons were prepared for grades 4 and 8.

These activities were followed up with training teachers of pilot areas on the mainstreaming approach,
prioritizing the activities to follow-up the testing, review the feedback from the DRR modules which have
been pilot tested and select the participants for training of trainers for a National Workshop.

Stakeholder of the project include;

- National Committee for Disaster Management (NCDM)

- Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC)

- United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Cambodia

- Cambodia Education Sector Support Project (CESSP)

At present drafts of Student and Teacher modules along with 6 posters are ready and will be used as
teaching aid and learning materials and used in 6 pilot schools of pilot provinces Kandal, Prey Veng and
Takeo provinces.

The working group identiﬁed the following as challenges:

•  Limited time for teaching
•  DRR mainstreaming into the curriculum is not well detailed
•  It is difﬁcult to mainstream additional topics such as HIV&AIDS, Bird ﬂu etc
•  No incentives/encouragement for both teachers and students to implement DRR in schools.

The Cambodian school system has a good collaboration to process the work for the project School ofﬁcers
and students worked well with CCDM, DCDM and the trickle-down effect was seen as students shared
their understanding to others in the schools and villages, however there was a shortage of documents for
dissemination.

Based on the from lessons learnt experience from Cambodia 2 questions were presented to the group

1. How do we link schools with CBDRR and vice versa?
2. What are the innovative approaches to concretize and maximize this link?

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

The group agreed that there were several ways to approach school safety in CBDRR and listed down the
following:

• Awareness

generation

• Capacity

Building

• Direct implementation; mainstreaming into curriculum
• Demonstration

projects

• Policy

advocacy

• Networking and Partnerships at different levels and with other sectors (private, civil society, etc)

In Vietnam, an early warning system is being implemented by the government and schools are closed 24
hrs before natural disaster strikes. Teachers informally integrate DRR modules into school curricula and
several programme targeting of both teachers and schoolchildren.

Speciﬁc innovative approaches were identiﬁed:

•  Need/demand based approach in relation to risks
•  Develop material in local languages
•  Not only structural but non-structural mitigation measures are also very important to consider
•  One discussion platform to be set up for all concerned groups such as school administration,

teaching and non-teaching staff, parents and children

Some speciﬁc approaches in school safety, education and DRR:

Indonesia; Jogjakarta State University conducts training of teachers who deal with people of disabilities
and several activities in communities, providing incentives and village/teachers as members of CBOs,
conducting regular meetings and socio-economic proﬁling in the community to identify direct assistance
and support to speciﬁc families, involvement of youth through weekly RC activities and the use media
such as radio to promote community-based activities on DRR.

Philippines; is at present rethinking of policy on schools serving as evacuation centers during times of
disaster due to hindrances to continuation of education activities post disaster

Viet Nam; The use of schools as evacuation centres is not a priority but it also depends on how culture
affects people’s perception of schools being safe

Myanmar: school safety plans exist especially to address annual ﬂooding, however these have to be
evaluated with locality speciﬁc context and interventions

India; psychosocial support system is considered important in a post disaster situation; education on
potential disasters are seen as an opportunity to learn lessons from past issues on lack of preparedness

7.4.3 Gender and CBDRR

Moderator: Ms. Maria Fellizar Cagay, CDP the Philippines & Mr. Yang Xusheng, China Red Cross
Rapporteur: Ms. Lorna Victoria, CDP, the Philippines

Disasters highlight the particular vulnerability of women, however it also show that women’s involvement
in DRR, their ability to buffer the losses in the family, their role in psychosocial aspects is also an asset to
the family. It is important to build on their capacities to ensure they have a greater role in CBDRR.

Gender mainstreaming especially improving women’s participation in DRR and CBDRR training is reiterated
in many international level frameworks such as the MGD3 which support the promoting of gender equality
through building capacities of women and reducing their speciﬁc vulnerabilities to disaster risks.

The HFA states that “A gender perspective should be integrated into all disaster risk management
policies, plans and decision-making processes, including those related to risk assessment, early warning,
information management and education and training”

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Practitioners need to consider various contexts
such as cultural, religious, socio-political etc
when analyzing vulnerabilities of men and
women. It is also important to ensure that
the project activities are gender sensitive, in
terms of participation, contents and discussion
topics. Gender sensitive risk assessments can
be carried out within the community and VCA
can be customized to include gender aspects.
It is essential to identify the role of men and
women in disaster preparedness, mitigation and
recovery stages in a participatory manner in
order that men and women both acknowledge
and value each others contribution.

The Chinese Red Cross shared their experience of how gender has been mainstreamed in Community
Based Disaster Preparedness projects implemented in China, where the principal stakeholders are the
disaster-prone communities and vulnerable villagers, Village RC Volunteers and the Village Disaster
Committee, the Township leaders, RC branches respectively at provincial, prefecture and county levels,
the local government authorities and relevant departments and the funding agencies.

The overall objective of the project is to help the target communities to better prepare for and cope
with local disaster impacts and to improve the RC capacity in project management.

The sub-objectives of the project are to improve local RC capacity to facilitate the CBDP projects and
introduce the participatory approach, establish a DP core group in the community and build its capacity with
women taking the lead, improve villagers’ awareness and knowledge on disaster preparedness and relevant
skills, especially of the women and implement small-scale structural & non-structural mitigation measures.

The selection of villages are prioritized by choosing the villages that has been frequently affected by
severe natural disasters in recent years, the community’s average income level is lower than the provincial
average, level of collaboration and potential capacity of the RC branches concerned and RC volunteers/
villagers’ interest and willingness to participate in the project.

Some of the structural interventions under CBDR in the community, where women play a big role,
are road construction to facilitate income generation of local villages, evacuation roads to save lives in
times of ﬂooding, manual labour for river bank reinforcement, construction of ecosan toilets and drinking
water supply systems and improvements to irrigation systems.

The importance of women being involved in the project:

•  Women are the main workforce in rural communities as men work in cities
•  Large percentage of volunteers are women
•  Most of the facilitators are female
•  Women are better communicators especially during home visits
•  Wife or senior females has more say in the family

The group also shared lessons from disaster experiences where the support for women has been
highlighted.

1. In south asia swimming lessons; in Cambodia women headed households being given boats so they

can evacuate their families as part of disaster preparedness.

2. Indonesia - for sustainability: local government departments on gender gets involved in community

participatory risk assessments and action planning

3. China - appreciating women as communicators for disaster preparedness work with community and

families

4. Philippines - Recognizing women leaders in the community and the Government better facilitating

women’s role in DRR

5. Participant from Thailand highlighted that women have equal opportunities as men

(women can divorce men ! an equalizing factor!)

6. Participant from south paciﬁc led the group in appreciating that gender in DRR means being fair

and sharing in responsibilities (particular roles of men and women)

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

7.4.4 Strengthening role of community in end to end EWSs

Moderator: Mr. Kamal Niraula, IFRC, presented by Ms. Catherine Marie Martin, PNRC & Narmul Khan,
Bangladesh Red Crescent and Rapporteur: Mr. Seng Samban, IFRC

The discussion was initiated by the sharing of experiences from the Philippines National Red Cross.
‘Forewarned is forearmed’ is a popular adage that is taken very seriously at the Philippines Red Cross.
Central to any DRR efforts at the local level is the community which includes not only individuals,
families and people but existing structures, systems and institutions.

The approach to CBDRR is 2 pronged with families
and the community at the center.

1. Organize and train community volunteers

on disaster management, who will ensure
the knowledge, skills gained and changed
attitude is shared and cascades to the entire
community

2. Teach and help the community to develop

a disaster mitigation plans, community
disaster preparedness activities and disaster
contingency plans.

The key to any community early warning systems is to ensure it is linked to the national early warning
system. In the community it is important to appoint or identify a local focal person who can trigger the
warning system for the community. The community EWS should not be a stand-alone it should be linked
to existing systems and institutions both at the local and national level.

The PNRC role in the community EWS is to bridge the gap between the technical and EW institutions of
the government and the community through fostering a strong partnership with them.

The PNRC has an existing MOU with the Philippine Government through the National Disaster
Coordinating Council’s READY Project (a project done by the EW institutions in the country to produced
hazard maps of the most vulnerable cities, municipalities and provinces in the country). The role of
the PNRC is to translate the technical hazard maps to ensure they are understood and linked to the
localized hazard maps developed by the community. This in effect will ensure a back to back EWS in
the process. It is important to note that an effective EW is not a one-way process: it should not be a
top to bottom approach only but also it should be able to generate feedback from the community to
the EW institutions.

Successful CBDRR programmes can be implemented when the community acknowledges that they are
vulnerable to disasters and should understand and be aware of the hazards and risks speciﬁc to them.
The community early warning system should be linked to the national early warning system through
connectivity from top to bottom and bottom to top, regular simulation and drills should be done in the
community which ensures heightened awareness of its residents, the community disaster mitigation plan
should be integrated in the development plan of the local government unit, and the community should
accept ownership of the entire disaster risk reduction programme.

The group summarized their discussion with the following points:

• EWS is not just to spread out information to community but more importantly to have a plan with

community for them to take action and to set up a shelter that is well equipped to avoid secondary
disasters

• Balancing between the high-tech and existing information, knowledge & coping mechanism with

multi-disciplinary team and focusing on user- friendly communication tools

• EWS should not be just a stand alone in community but try to link it to other aspects of risk

reduction and the national system.

• Creating an enabling environment for persons and children with disabilities – message to reach

them, access to be available for evacuation and at shelters.

• Multi-hazard

EWS

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

7.4.5 Strengthening role of communities in end to end early warning systems

Moderator: Mr. Demosthenes Raynera, SAC, the Philippines
Rapporteur: Mr.Cesar Allan Vera, Christian Aid, the Philippines

The experience of setting up a community based early warning system along the Agos River in Infanta and
General Nakar, in Quezon, Philippines was shared by the moderator to commence the discussion.

In 2004 ﬂashﬂoods and storms in the area brought down 20,000 metric tons of mountain soil in to Real,
Infanta, Gen. Nakar (Quezon) and Dingalan (Aurora) along with 4 – 5 million cubic meters of logs and
uprooted trees, badly affecting 188,332 Ha out of the 255,501 Ha of land area in the valley causing havoc
killing 1,462 people and displacing over 135,000 individuals.

The objective of the planned CBDRR programme was to strengthen risk management capacity of the
barangays/communities by strengthening response units and developing contingency plans, installing
and operating an early warning system, coordinating efforts with the Municipal Disaster Management
Coordinating Council of the Municipality and other organizations and institutions to establish social support
networks on disaster risk reduction, link with scientiﬁc agencies like PAGASA*, Manila Observatory and UP
NIGS* to receive accurate and scientiﬁc data of climate forecasting and relay climate forecast information
to communities so they can better prepare for crop planting, harvesting and manage livestock.

The project was completed with the following being achieved.

• Installation and operation of weather and measuring

instruments, including water ﬂow in the Agos River

• Site selection and installation of radio base communication

and capacity building in radio communication

• Capacities of the BDCC built with various skills such as

disaster preparedness and contingency planning, Search
and Rescue and First Aid

• Reactivation of 16 Barangay Disaster Coordinating Council

in Infanta and General Nakar, Quezon and establishment
of a partnership with the MDCC of 2 municipalities

• Setting up of ﬂood watch points at Pagsangahan,

Cacawayan, Bungko and Pinaglapatan and manual Rain Gauges in Banugao and Cacawayan

The diagrammatic presentation of the end to end early warning system along the Agos River, Infanta and
General Nakar, in Quezon, the Philippines.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

In the course of the discussion the group underlined the following areas as innovations that came out
through the project.

1. Early warning system where information ﬂowed from the PAG-ASA to the ofﬁce of Civil Defense, the

media, the MDCC, the BDCC and ﬁnally the community which included technical data

2. Community involvement in information exchange and decision making
3. Bells are utilized to warn residents and code established; ‘bandillo’ people go around community

to prepare to evacuate and establishing strategic watch points

The following were identiﬁed as challenges:
•  Limited open dialogue due to political situation
•  Monitoring instruments are in place but residents not able to understand how to utilize
•  Working with LGUs, with limited trust to test the system, conduct community drills and turnover

of facilities to Barangays;

• Sustainability given the existing political structure and difﬁculty in reinforcing a sense of ownership

among the stakeholders

• Barangay ordinances need to institutionalize practice of EWS and improve technical facilities

The group also listed the key learning from the project and the discussions:
• Until 2004 the local authorities did not give attention to river ﬂooding since people were accustomed

to it

• The project has added value by training community members and undertaking contingency planning

and providing equipment to the community; participation of community in localized monitoring
activities, making people better prepared

• Working in partnership with LGU and inﬂuencing them to make DRR more participatory
• The key strategy is to partner local authorities and explain modalities clearly to encourage

complementing each other’s work and not competing

• NGOs set up in EWS which help LGUs make the EWS system more effective

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Plenary Discussion

Points raised by participants:

• A participant from HelpAge International stressed that a holistic approach must be taken

to build resilience. People work outside of their homes and in most cases care givers to
children are grandparents and not parents. Hence programmes should involve the older
people in order to reach children and create awareness and knowledge on DRR among
them.

• Practitioners need to be optimistic when linking DRR and climate change. Management and

maintenance of mangroves and dykes could be one way of linking DRR and CCA, however
linkages are not always obvious or direct.

Questions and comments to Panel members

1. Drug addiction is a major issue among youth, can it be considered a hazard and design

programmes that address such hazards in the community?

2. The School safety session did not cover safety of structures, especially school buildings.

There is a need to address what response and coping strategies to implement soon after a
disaster. School management and operational aspects in a post disaster situation also needs
to be addressed.

3. How do we link with the ongoing technological systems in early warning systems to the

community? What mechanisms and linkages need to be established with Meteorological
departments and communities? Should we give thought to long term forecasting systems?

4. What should we take in to account when trying to reduce stigmatization towards PWD and

older people? In the paciﬁc families hide their disabled children.

ASB categorizes PwDs in to 3 - visually impaired, hearing impaired and physically
impaired.

Stigmatization is mostly for the 3rd category. Sometimes it is not possible to involve them
directly but we can involve their family members and neighbors in consultations and training
programmes and ensure community knows they exist and are included in evacuation and
recovery plans.

The communities are an extension of our families, hence older people should be seen as
more than just recipients of relief, and should be involved as stakeholders involved in
discussions and consultations. They can add value and contribute to the process as they
have good insight and ideas.

5. ADPC conducted an early warning dialogue and a wealth of ideas about early warning

systems emerged. Participants suggested that ADPC have such a session once again. Some
communities do not believe the EW coming from their government!!

ADPC and the SEI dialogue will be held again with the same partners, components and
community inputs. It was part of a much larger agenda with buy-in from many other local
partners.

6. Climate change is a natural hazard with slow onset. Adaptation is resilience building to

climate change. Climate change adaptation is a DRR activity.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

8. Summary of Skills Building Sessions

Introduction to the Skills Building Sessions

Recognizing the effective implementation of CBDRR requires use of speciﬁc tools and skills, the
5th DRR Practitioners Workshop introduced skills building sessions in 2008. The sessions were found
to be useful in developing and sharpening various skills. Due to the popularity of the skills building
sessions in 2008, 3 skills building sessions were held at the 6th Practitioners Workshop. The purpose
of these session are that speciﬁc know-how and skills are shared among the participants and
sharing of experiences of using such tools in different geographical areas would help practitioners
implement their own programs on CBDRR in a successful and informed manner.

Brief summaries of 3 sessions are provided below.

8.1 Tools for Community Risk Assessment

Facilitated by Ms. Tran Tu Anh, the Netherlands Red Cross, Viet Nam

Tools for Community Risk Assessment; the use of Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment (VCA)

The IFRC provides the following explanation of what a VCA is. A VCA involves collecting, analysing and
systematising information on a given community’s vulnerability to hazards in a structured and meaningful
way. This information is then used to diagnose the key risks and existing capacities of the community,
ultimately leading to activities aimed at reducing people’s vulnerability to potential disasters and
increasing their capacity to survive them and resume their lives.

Further explanations discussed during the session are as follows:

• A gathering in which community members identify their issues/problems in a participatory manner

and urges the communities to transparently reﬂect conditions of their community, while an
appointed community facilitator/s direct and guide them.

• raises awareness through interactive discussions and analyzes the root causes to vulnerabilities
• Based on perception of risk, vulnerability and capacity are measured so that community members

can design coping mechanisms in times of disaster

• It demands change and accountability from the local authorities

It is a collective action of the community and hence increases the community ownership of the assessment.

Tools that can be used to conduct a VCA include:

•  Collecting community baseline data
•  Conducting semi-structured interviews
•  Conducting focus group discussions
• Direct

observation

• Mapping the village locating its main assets such as places of worship, schools, market places,

health clinics, local government ofﬁcers, natural resources etc

• Seasonal

Calendars

• Transect

Walks

• Historical Proﬁle or visualization
• Household/Neighbourhood

Vulnerability

Analysis

• Livelihood

Analysis

• Institutional and Social Network Analysis
• Listing local people’s organizations and assessing their capacities
• Venn

Diagrams

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

Some of the methods in which these tools can be used can be through brainstorming, ranking by assigning
numbers, displaying and sorting information on a wall or on the ﬂoor, using problem trees, community
meetings and discussions.

The selection of the speciﬁc tool and methodology most suited
for the type of information that needs to be collected must be
chosen carefully. Answering the following questions developed
by IFRC, the selection of the speciﬁc tool/s and methodology/
ies is made easier.

•  What information do you want to obtain?
•  Do you have the expertise to implement the tool?
•  How much will it cost?
•  What are the time requirements?
•  How many volunteers are available to take part?
•  Do branch volunteers possess the capacities to implement the tool correctly, collect accurate

information, analyse it and interpret it? If not, are there others, such as the VCA resource person,
who can help?

• What kind of training is needed?

Experience from ICBRR (Integrated Community based Risk Reduction) programme, of the Indonesian Red
Cross

Tools and processes used for data collection:

1. Participatory Rural Appraisal
2. Baseline and KAP (knowledge, attitude and practice) Survey
3. HVRC (Hazard, vulnerability, risk and capacity) mapping

a. Spot and transect mapping
b. CBAT (Community based action team)

Community Action Plans: DRR can be mainstreamed in to speciﬁc community activities such as well-
digging, break water building, tree planting, dikes, etc by conducting an VCA. It will better identify the
particular vulnerabilities of the community as well as the resources and capacity in order to develop a
practical action plan within the community’s involvement and ownership.

The process of VCA should not end merely in a summary of data in tables; the community must analyze
the data and plan speciﬁc actions to reduce the risks in the village or community.

For further information contact: tran.tuanh@nlrc.org.vn

8.2 Advocacy for CBDRR into local development planning process

Mr. Nguyen Dang Nhat, CECI, Viet Nam & Mr. Marten Mylius, CARE International, Viet Nam

The objective of the session was to develop common understanding of advocacy for CBDRM integration,
get an understanding of techniques and approaches that can be applied for advocating and sharing
lessons learnt and experiences from different country contexts.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

What is Advocacy?

It is the deliberate process of inﬂuencing those who make policy, and in the local planning process it
is important to understand the concept (what are you advocating for?), whome to target through an
analysis of the key personal, identify tools and create a forum with like minded groups/networks or
individuals to build consensus and push for a the required change.

Key words used by the group to describe advocacy

▶

Inﬂuence

▶

Convince

▶

Negotiation

▶

Support

▶

Promotion

▶

Push/Force

▶

Credibility and trust

▶

Campaign

Advocacy for What? Or What do we want to change, improve or eliminate?

▶

Change laws policy

▶

Improve situations

Advocate with Whome? Or Whome to target for advocacy programmes

▶

Policy makers

▶

Decision makers

Planning process for advocacy campaign or work

It is essential to clarify of concepts and common understanding of the issue at hand and set objectives
and plan a strategy. To do this it is required to conduct a stakeholder analysis and identify who we
want to inﬂuence or who the target group is. Once the target group is prioritized, the most suitable
tool or tools to communicate or inﬂuence - providing facts, numbers, pilot programmes etc needs to
be identiﬁed. The more innovative and creative the tool or means for getting the message across, the
more attention will be paid by the targeted group. The participation of different stakeholders should
also be promoted and through this a forum or network/group can be pulled together to push for the
required objective.

Group exercise:

1. How do we advocate? Which means can we use? (lobbying individually, jointly, on behalf, face to

face or through media, empower etc.)

2. Given the topic (CBDRM), what would be the key message (what?) Should lead to: whom do we

approach? (stakeholder analysis)

Summary of presentations:

• Conduct research which will produce facts in support of what you are advocating for
• Community members should participate in the local processes, including planning according to

community needs, resources/budget, sharing schedules and activities.

• We conduct fora to create awareness on the issue at hand and target inﬂuential people and

ensure meetings are held in public, easily accessible locations such as in town hall etc.

• Develop partnerships and establish working groups to consolidate lessons learnt and incorporate

in trainings, policy briefs

• Network with other organizations in the community working along the same lines or asking for

similar things.

•  Develop pamphlets and ﬂyers and engage ofﬁcials and key individuals in key discussions
•  Ensure involvement of media such as news paper, radio and TV
•  Direct advocacy work towards partners at national level who have the ﬁnal say in policy

making.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

A comprehensive analysis of the problem, target group, means of communication and the activities and
budget need to be carefully planned. Participants acknowledged working in partnerships at all levels was
essential for a successful advocacy campaign. The campaign must be made attention-worthy and hence
packaging and framing it is the biggest task.

For further information contact: nhat-dm@ceci.org.vn or marten@care.org.vn

8.3 CBDRR in Urban context

Ms. Gabrielle Iglesias, ADPC

The session will encourage participants to anticipate the challenges of CBDRR in urban areas. The
characteristics of urban areas, their impacts on risks, and the characteristics of urban poor communities
will be raised for examination by the participants. Workshops will focus on developing possible CBDRR
strategies for meeting typical urban disaster risk reduction challenges.

The session began with participants stating their expectations from the session, which ranged from
general expectations to speciﬁc expectations; How to respond to earthquakes, How do you mobilize and
bring stakeholders together, How can CBDRR be useful in an urban setting, How can we focus on urban
vulnerability in our CBDRR programmes

Key points to consider when implementing CBDRR programmes in urban areas:

1. Cities are centers of power and prestige and are crucial to economic productivity. Almost half of

the gross domestic product (GDP) of many countries is generated in cities and as cities concentrate
production and population, it gives them an obvious advantage over rural settlements or dispersed
populations.

2. In the absence of ‘good governance’, cities can be unhealthy and dangerous places to live and

work.
a. Many cities have been built over wetlands and ﬂoodplains making way for homes and industries.

Flood risks increase due to limited surface areas for soaking rain water and the impermeability
of concrete and other construction materials increases surface runoff of rainwater. Storm
sewers become clogged with solid waste due to inadequate maintenance and causes inefﬁcient
drainage.

b. The temperature of a city is often warmer than that of surrounding rural areas, due to the

combustion of fossil fuels for industry, transportation and heating, which dissipates extra heat
in to the atmosphere. Cities are often referred to as urban heat islands that adversely affects
climate.

c. The location of dangerous industries within cities produce health and environmental risks and

this includes industries using explosive or poisonous chemicals and the transport of people and
goods. The dense arrangement and unplanned construction also increases the risk associated
with ﬁre.

d. Air pollution is a major problem found in most urban areas, and is associated with problems such

as photochemical smog, acid rain, ozone layer depletion, and an enhanced greenhouse effect.
Sources of air pollution include industrial and vehicle emissions and energy production.

3. In the absence of a planning framework, city expansion can take place haphazardly and often

with urban sprawl over the best quality farmland. Hundreds of millions of low income households
live in illegal or informal settlements developed on land already associated with hazards such
as ﬂoods and landslides, usually because these are the only land sites they can afford, or where
their illegal occupation will not be challenged because the land site is too dangerous for any
commercial use.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Summary of group discussions:

The group discussed the following points with respect to their chosen hazard.

Earthquakes:

1.  Safe and disaster resilient construction training to be provided to construction workers.
2.  Awareness to communities and local authorities on safety
3.  Training on retroﬁtting to ensure buildings are disaster proof

Fire:

1. Map out areas which are prone to ﬁres, in terms of congested settlements, agricultural areas, etc
2. Conduct dialogues with land owners

Floods and Typhoons

1.  Community should identify and map out safe areas and evacuation shelter areas
2.  Generate information and share with community for safety and protection
3.  Prepare stocks of dry food, safe drinking water etc and store in safe accessible places.

Issues to consider in urban contexts:

•  Poor urban families have no access to insurance
•  Consider building regulations in reconstruction processes
•  Most poor families living in urban settlements have no ownership of their land and hence involvement

in CBDRR is difﬁcult. Many get left out as they are not in ofﬁcial housing or property lists.

• Many urban issues like limited solid waste disposal and water supply mechanisms

For further information contact: iglesias@adpc.net

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

9. Participants Feedback and

Workshop Closing Ceremony

The evaluation of the workshop was carried out in a participatory manner led by Patrick Fox of IFRC and
Loy Rego of ADPC. The feedback from participants can be categorized as follows:

Value added from this workshop

•  Mainstream DRR in to development sectors and issues by developing action plans at community level
•  Linkages between climate change adaptation and DRR at the local level
•  Engaging Government in a more formal and long term basis
•  EWS activities at the community level
•  Capacity to cope and share skills and knowledge amidst different cultural perspectives
•  Work of Red Cross National Societies in various geographical regions
•  Important partnership elements required for successful CBDRR
•  Social inclusion with disability, gender, transgender and differently-abled people all included and

participating in local level DRR planning and programmes. The relationships between climate
change adaptation and DRR

• What is advocacy and how to engage in effective advocacy
• Understanding that DRR is the business of everybody and all organizations at all levels need to join

hands.

• DRR is the business of the community and the community must build their capacity to help

themselves

• We learnt where Tonga, Fiji and Cook Islands were geographically and how they are also affected

by disasters.

Important topics in the road map of building safer and resilient communities

•  Monitoring and evaluation methods for CBDRR projects
•  Climate change adaptation techniques
•  DRR in relief and recovery activities ensuring resilience in the face of subsequent disasters
•  Rights of populations affected by disasters, including social and political rights
•  Case studies where practitioners have gone wrong, failed projects for learning purposes
•  Representatives from community or local Governments who have completed CBDRR projects atleast

5 years ago sharing their experiences of sustainability

•  Showcase more low cost CBDRM projects and CBA methodologies
•  Participation of media to share knowledge and seek their view their role in DRR
•  Risk transfer, micro insurance and successful case studies on how this is possible
•  Private sector involvement and how to channel it, especially the involvement of the insurance

industry and thereby enhancing resilience

• Resolved or dealing with challenges faced by

practitioners

• Government and private sector view on DRR,

livelihood and food security

• Increasing population has an effect on climate

change and the number of people affected by
disasters, hence include population control as a
cross cutting issue

• Participants from almost 36 nationalities have

gathered, it would have been a ﬁne opportunity to
issue a statement to the Copenhagen Conference on
Climate Change

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

Areas for further improvement

• Limit presentations with more group discussions and practical activities such as sharing what

practitioners are implementing in the ﬁeld in a more pragmatic way

•  Local government committee representatives, commune people and the media to be invited
•  Red Cross volunteers to be involved in the sessions
•  Increased representation from the paciﬁc
• Human

induced

disasters/Conﬂict

• Develop a list of resource people working in speciﬁc sectors and activities, such as risk assessment,

hazards vulnerability capacity assessment (HVCA) for reference

• Longer duration of skills building sessions
• Have more sessions for socializing and networking which is a major purpose of this workshop

Closing Remarks by ADPC, ECHO and IFRC

A panel of participants representing practitioners from Asia, the Paciﬁc and donors made
closing remarks before the workshops was ofﬁcially concluded.

Lorna Victoria – The Philippines

“I have learnt a lot in terms of coverage and rich experiences from practitioners representing
26 countries. I see how the workshops have moved from basics knowledge on DRR to
‘how–to’ engage in DRR, institutionalization and sustainability. The biggest component
of sustainability is ownership which will internally propel the project to move forward,
up-scaling in more and more communities. The scope of the workshops is widening and
as practitioners our geographical coverage is expanding. We have now taken up gender
concerns in our efforts to make CBDRR more inclusive. This series of DMP Workshops
are in effect a partnership where we are bound together to make CBDRM work with or
without a project. Many cases have been shared and new tools especially on climate change
adaptation, have been discussed. There are many things to take back home but at the heart
is the perseverance of the people who have shared their stories with us.”

Vuli Guana - Fiji

“Partnerships and networking is the key to helping people and saving lives, we in the Paciﬁc
appreciate the common idea of Red Cross which is – ‘existing to help others’. At times it has
been a painful yet meaningful sharing of ideas and experiences. During disaster relief there is
a short time frame to decide on the actions, however in DRR you are not under this pressure
so if you make a wrong decision using donor money and other people lives and time, we must
remember the effect we have on people. We have to compete with so many other issues that
are demanding our attention.”

Thearat Touch – European Commission for Humanitarian Aid (ECHO)

“This is my 4th DMP Workshops, and I thank IFRC, ADPC and the Thai Red Cross for the
great support to make this workshop a success. It has promoted exchange of information and
experiences, strengthened networks and built partnerships.

We have seen that DRR frameworks are also important for various aspects of implementation.

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

fer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

“Building saf

ore resilient communities in Asia and the

ent communities in As

In 2009 ECHO has reafﬁrmed commitment to support DRR issues through the DRR strategy of
European Commission from 2005-2015. Many Asian and Paciﬁc Governments have developed
Strategic National Action Plans, strategies and laws following the adoption of HFA in 2005.
However we all know that having plans alone does not make communities safe. Many of the
challenges shared by participants over the past 3 days has helped to reﬁne the EU action plans in
SEARO. The outcomes will seek to address the key DRR components of regional bodies especially
in line with AADMER and KLAP. Further understanding by Line Ministries, national Governments
and internally among colleagues is necessary to further mainstream DRR in different sectors in
effective and efﬁcient ways. We as a group of practitioners should also access various sources
of information, i.e Lessons learnt, case studies and post project evaluation reports have been
upload in the Prevention Web hosted by UNISDR for easy reference and it is free of charge to
access. CBA is not only cost of investments but also the value of returns. We have all learnt that
a coordinated approach can reach greater outputs. The messages from our paciﬁc participants
have been well noted, and the need to include vulnerable groups have also been noted. As a
donor, we have also noted the call to be more proactive and inclusive. We should involve local
leaders and ofﬁcials from more local authorities at the next forum.”

“Building safer and more resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc”

g safer and more resilient communities

more resilient com

AGENDA

Practitioners’ Workshop on DRR in Asia and the Paciﬁc

15-17 September 2009, Club Andaman Beach Resort, Phuket, Thailand

Day 1: Tuesday, 15 September 2009

07:30-08:30

Registration in front of Andaman Ballroom, Ground Floor of Club
Andaman Beach Resort

Opening Remarks

08:30-08:40

Welcome by Dr. Bhichit Rattakul, ADPC

08:40:08:50

Welcome by Mr. Alan Bradbury, IFRC

08:50-09:00

Opening Remarks by Ms. Cecile Pichon, ECHO

09:00-09:10

Opening Remarks by Deputy Secretary General,TRCS

09:10-09:20

Inaugural Address by Mr. Wichai Phraisa-ngob, Governor of
Phuket

Opening Session

09:20-09:50

DM Practitioners Workshops: Memories from the Past and
Orientation to the Workshop theme “Building safer and more
resilient communities in Asia and the Paciﬁc by Mr. Aloysius J.
Rego, ADPC

09:50-10:00
10:00-10:30

Group Photo @ the Hotel Garden
Tea Break

10.30 – 12.15
Session 1: Strengthening linkage between CBDRR and Development

Session Moderator: Mr. Patrick Fox, IFRC
Session Rapporteur: Mr. Pieter-Jan van Eggermont, IFRC

S1P1

10:30-10:45

Linking CBDRR in Development Planning and Programs; An
overview from the region
Presentation by Mr. Michael Annear, IFRC

S1P2

10:45-11:05

CBDRR in National and Sub-National Development Policy
Experience from Indonesia, Presentation by Mr. Moris Nuaimi,
BAPPENAS, Indonesia
Experience from The Philippines, Presentation by Ms. Imelda M.
Acosta, NDCC Philippines

S1P3

11:05-11:20

Decentralized CBDRM
Experience from South Asia, Presentation by Mr. Buddika
Hapuarachchi, Duryog Nivaran

11:20-12:00

Plenary Discussion

12.00-12.15

Brieﬁng on Field Visit
by Ms. Suvapa Hongsiriwon, Thai Red Cross Society

12:15-13:30: Lunch Break

13:30-16:30

Field Visit
Facilitated/coordinated by IFRC and TRCS; 4 buses marked Bus 1,
Bus 2, Bus 3 and Bus 4 in each of the identiﬁed communities in
Phang-nga

Welcome Dinner Reception, 7pm at the Hotel Garden of the Club Andaman Beach Resort