Sustaining growth through better natural disaster management

By Vinod Thomas and Bert Hofman

Natural disasters are striking more often today than at any time in recent memory. Yet, in most places natural disasters are treated as an interruption to development rather than a growing risk to it. As a result, emergency aid following the calamity gets attention: but political leaders need to also focus efforts on disaster prevention and preparedness.

The need for actions is all the more evident because the recent escalation of damages from disasters is linked to man-made causes rather than natural ones — especially land use patterns, environmental degradation, and climate change. This trend puts a high premium on including mitigation and preventive measures among the means to reducing the destruction.

Natural disasters are more frequent, powerful, and destructive than before. During 1980-84, some 800 natural disasters were reported worldwide, affecting 400 million people.

Twenty years later during 2000-04, the number reached more than 2,300, affecting some 1.4 billion people. This also reflects the rise in population, the fact that more people live in harm’s way because of lack of available land, and because land is increasingly fragile from environmental degradation. The direct cost of calamities in the past decade may have been a trillion US dollars, 20 times more than five decades earlier.

Some countries are particularly vulnerable. In the Philippines – as well as Thailand, Vietnam or Bangladesh — the concern is not only the frequency of disasters but their geographical coverage and their impact on the economy.

By one estimate, Vietnam ranks fifth in the world in potential impact with 90 percent of its economy at risk, and the Philippines tenth with 85 percent. In the past two decades, the Philippines incurred an estimated damage of nearly PHP 20 billion (real 2005 prices), or some 0.5% of GDP per year.

The poor are in harm’s way
These facts have a special significance for the poor, who are most likely to locate in harm’s way without adequate protection. The urban population in the Philippines stands at around 52% and is projected to rise to 60% by 2010. At least 40% of the urban population lives in unsafe informal settlements. Across the country, eight of the 10 poorest provinces are exposed to multiple hazards.

In every region of the world, the rising number of natural disasters is notable in hydro-meteorological events, such as floods and storms, but not in geophysical phenomena, such as earthquakes and volcanoes. This difference provides a link to the role of human actions in making things worse — and to the impact of climate change.

Wetlands have been providing a buffer against disasters. But worldwide, 50% of wetlands have been lost over the past century due to their draining for agriculture, channelizing rivers, and turning floodplains into aquaculture zones.

Forests, a key source of protection against flash flooding and landslides, are shrinking, because of their conversion into agricultural land, expansion of human habitat, and illegal logging.

Reducing risk
Actions can make a difference. During typhoon Wukong in 2000, some Vietnamese communities that had replanted mangroves remained relatively unharmed while neighboring provinces suffered significant loss of life and property.

A similar effect of mangrove forests was also reported for a cyclone in Andhra Pradesh, India, in 2002. Restoration of degraded environment in vulnerable areas can be critical.

Furthermore, disasters frequently recur in the same countries. The exact time and place of the disasters may not be known, but it is possible to foresee their occurrence, making the case for proactive measures. Yet, most of the effort typically goes to immediate reconstruction efforts, with little attention devoted to planning for long term recovery or risk reduction.

The payoffs to risk reduction, by some estimates, are $4-$12 of return to a dollar invested. But such investments fall short as they don’t carry the same visibility and political appeal as immediate post disaster reconstruction.

One priority in risk reduction is investment in early warning systems that are crucially needed. Another is better land-use planning and building standards—people should live in places less likely to be hit, and in houses that can withstand natural disasters.

Yet another is the development of risk transfer mechanisms, including insurance schemes, which help pay for the clean-up, but if well designed also gives incentives to take precaution beforehand.

Better coordination
Each country faces institutional concerns that need to be addressed. Better linkage between planning and budgeting for disaster management is a frequently observed issue.

Also important is coordination across government units and levels of government, as well as with the non-government actors and the communities themselves. Local government units—who often have the primary task of tackling problems on the ground—need management capacity, financial resources and information. Calamity funds are usually inadequate to address all phases of a natural disaster, in particular prevention.

Countries have typically thought of dealing with the damage caused by natural disasters as and when they happened. Efforts beyond that have been viewed as a deviation of resources from the growth agenda. But as it turns out, the situation is quite the reverse: unless preventive measures are taken to reduce the risk of disasters, sustained growth will not be possible for many.

Vinod Thomas is the director-general of the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) at the World Bank. Recently, Thomas presented the highlights of the IEG report entitled “Hazards of Nature, Risks to Development: An IEG Evaluation of World Bank Assistance for Natural Disasters” to government agencies, media and civil society groups in Manila. Bert Hofman is the Country Director of the World Bank in the Philippines. [View Source]