Share this story!            

VIEW: Coping with catastrophe —Syed Mohammad Ali

An analysis of the broader political, social and economic context within which relief efforts are being introduced is also needed to ensure that relief does not inadvertently reinforce tension or conflict within or between communities, as is the fear in Aceh after the recent tsunami disaster

As if the lack of development and the existing deprivations were not causing enough problems in the world, we are faced with the added threat of natural and man-made disasters, which can strike any part of the world and cause massive destruction in their wake. Yet the resilience of human beings does not allow us to resign to fatalism and relegate the destruction to the realm of inevitability. Instead, effort is being made around the world to understand the dynamics of disasters, so as to prevent, or else better cope with the damage they cause.

Natural disasters wreck communities, they destroy forests and crops, kill livestock and destroy infrastructure. The World Bank and other sources estimate that during the 1990s, economic losses from natural disasters amounted to over $600 billion. Worldwide disasters in the past year alone have resulted in economic losses of over $55 billion. The human cost is similarly staggering. According to Red Cross and Red Crescent, the numbers of people affected by large-scales disasters were 254 million. The Bam earthquake in Iran alone killed some 30,000 people and injured another 30,000. The devastating tidal waves that hit South and South East Asia the Sunday before last, have left over 140,000 people dead, hundreds of thousands injured, and millions displaced due to the ensuing devastation.

While not much can be done to prevent natural disasters, predicting their occurrence and minimising damage caused by them is still possible. Man-made disasters can theoretically be avoided altogether if proper safeguards are in place. It is failure at contingency planning and adequate attention to potential threats that allows risks to become catastrophes. The Bhopal gas leak, the Exxon oil spill and the nuclear disaster in Chernobyl were all man-made disasters that have been no less unforgiving in terms of human suffering and damage to the environment than the massive floods that devastate rural Bangladesh and the Philippines. Increasing food insecurity leading to famines and recurrent threats of drought and epidemics are also categorised as disasters that result in massive suffering around the world.

Emergency and relief services make laudable efforts to reach out and help people affected by disasters and to ensure timely provision of water, food and medicines to them. Yet there are some major barriers that prevent appropriate assistance from reaching those most in need. Relief workers frequently report frustration at being unable to enter a country due to procedural difficulties like visa requirements. Relief goods are delayed by customs inspections. Relief workers also have to cope with poor infrastructures and lack of access to telecommunication networks which affect the speed and effectiveness of relief and rescue activities. It is felt that many more lives and resources could be saved if only a fraction of the funds going into relief from major disasters were spent on disaster risk reduction measures.

But while securing funds for post-disaster relief and reconstruction is relatively easy, far fewer resources are available for disaster risk reduction, as it seems a much less tangible goal. According to the World Bank, however, economic losses worldwide from natural disasters could be reduced by as much as $280 billion by investing around one-seventh of that sum in risk reduction measures. Risk of disasters can be reduced by putting in place effective warning and evacuation systems, building protection walls against sea waves, and implementing water and sanitation projects to ensure safe drinking water during floods. Getting across the message of disaster reduction directly to poor people can help vulnerable communities become more resilient. Children are among the most vulnerable in an emergency. Development agencies like the UNICEF are therefore always willing to help. Efforts from within the donor community are required to help balance spending on relief for humanitarian crises with increased emphasis on risk reduction.

It is also important to realise that the perceptions of disaster do differ between those at risk and those trying to help them. Often, the lingering threats to livelihood are of greater concern to most poor communities than ‘one-off’ disasters. Yet when these one-off disasters do occur, they have devastating results, particularly in developing countries and on the vulnerable communities within them, which have little means to cope with the resulting destruction. There is an evident linkage between vulnerability to disaster and poverty since those without adequate resources are more likely to be compelled to living in disaster-prone areas.

To help lessen their vulnerability and to ensure more consistent provision of social services to these marginalised people, an integrated approach to planning and programming of relief is required. Relief and rehabilitation of those effected by disasters can even be used to enhance local capacities and to help reduce poverty in the long term. Moreover, conventional development programmes can themselves be used to reduce vulnerability to disaster by ensuring that poor people are provided access to better opportunities away from disaster-prone locations.

However, a more developmental approach to creating resilience against disasters needs to put communities in charge of defining their own needs and in crafting the right solutions. Development and relief agencies also have to build upon existing coping mechanisms, and try to use local material and resources if they are to ensure that their efforts can simultaneously regenerate livelihoods and local economies. Simultaneously, an analysis of the broader political, social and economic context within which relief efforts are being introduced is also needed to ensure that relief does not inadvertently reinforce tension or conflict within or between communities, as is the fear in Aceh after the tsunami disaster. The UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction will take place in Kobe, Japan, within the next few weeks. It will provide the world community a good opportunity to see how disaster reduction efforts can be improved to become more meaningful and effective.

The writer is a researcher with diverse experience in the development sector. He can be reached at syedmohdali555@yahoo.com

Home | Editorial

Share this story!